Inside Newcastle Q&A: Transfer latest, SCR position, are PIF calling the shots?

Genuine excitement at a fresh start under new head coach Matthias Jaissle, or real concern with the lack of experience within the Newcastle United XI?

There appears to be a split among the fanbase regarding how everyone is feeling ahead of the new season, with some at the extreme ends of the spectrum, and others balancing their optimism and fear in equal measure.

That was evident during The Athletic’s “Inside Newcastle” live Q&A with Chris Waugh on Thursday. We have pulled together some of the best bits below, with some of the questions and answers edited for brevity.

---

Are the club working on multiple deals, especially for experienced players? We look lost. — Paul H

Waugh: Newcastle are pursuing multiple deals, and the expectation is that between two and four more players will be signed before the window closes on September 1.

Experience and Premier League know-how are definitely on the agenda. These were not necessarily a priority while Eddie Howe was still in charge, or at the very least before Bruno Guimaraes’ exit became increasingly inevitable, but there is an acknowledgement internally that an exception or two to the summer blueprint of largely acquiring young players is required.

Of Newcastle’s five summer signings, four are aged 20 or under, and none has played in the Premier League before.

Marseille’s Pierre-Emile Hojbjerg (31 years old; 254 Premier League appearances for Southampton and Tottenham) and Joao Palhinha of Bayern Munich (also 31; 101 Premier League games for Fulham and Tottenham) are among around half-a-dozen midfielders under consideration, though a deal for the former is proving far from straightforward and Newcastle are behind other clubs in the race for the latter.

Whether multiple ‘experienced players’ will be acquired is unclear. It may depend upon the identity of the first midfielder Newcastle manage to bring in. Hojbjerg, for example, has eight Premier League seasons under his belt and is regarded as a leader.

Jaissle acknowledges there is a leadership “vacuum” that requires filling, either by current players stepping up or new signings arriving — and ideally through a combination of both.

---

Can you please clarify our SCR position? My understanding was selling Anthony Gordon made us compliant, selling Sandro Tonali let us significantly reinvest, so selling Guimaraes should really unshackle our spending, but it doesn’t feel that way from the names of our targets! — Philip M

Waugh: Without being privy to Newcastle’s exact squad-cost rules (SCR) position, it is difficult to provide a definitive answer.

The message is that they do not presently have an issue meeting the Premier League’s regulations, which permit 85 per cent of revenue to be committed to footballing expenditure, but UEFA’s rules are far more restrictive (with a 70 per cent expenditure threshold and a three-year rolling loss limit).

The explanation previously offered was that Gordon’s sale ensured Newcastle were compliant for the financial year, covering the drop-off in revenue of around £40million to £60m ($54m-$82m) from missing out on European football in the coming season. The sale of Tonali then gave them room to reinvest across the squad (but was not required for compliance in itself).

Guimaraes leaving has increased that headroom further, especially given three high earners have now dropped off the books (as well as Kieran Trippier, who left as a free agent) — albeit the salary budget needed to be lowered significantly, with Newcastle spending at the levels of a Champions League side when they are not in any European competition, as their chief ewecutive David Hopkinson explained during his recent interview with The Athletic.

Theoretically, Newcastle have reasonable room for manoeuvre now and should be able to make signings. Yet the proceeds of the Tonali and Guimaraes sales are actually averaged out over a three-year rolling basis, so it is not as if they suddenly have the best part of £150million to spend.

Newcastle have adjusted their trading model and are looking to sign younger players on lower wages, with exceptions to prove the rule (as an experienced midfield addition would be), and do not intend to massively deviate from that in the short-to-medium term.

Some fans may understandably criticise this policy, but that is the blueprint they are implementing and which they believe is necessary if they are going to be “credibly and consistently challenging”, as Hopkinson puts it.

---

Do the club realise how urgently Jaissle needs more backing? We’ve made one signing that improves the first XI. — Nathan H

Waugh: Those inside the club insist they are fully aware Jaissle requires backing, although whether that will lead to the type of investment and profile/volume of additions some fans would like to see, I’m unsure.

Jaissle joined with full knowledge that he would largely be overseeing a youthful side who can grow together with time, but he also wants and needs reinforcements to bolster those areas which are lacking in depth and quality.

Your point about only one signing who improves the XI is a pertinent one.

Some inside Newcastle may push back against that, but beyond goalkeeper, where the hope is that Lukas Hornicek provides a fresh dimension, there is no guarantee that any of the other four summer additions will be in the team for the first game of the season against Liverpool a week on Sunday, even if there is genuine excitement around each of them.

---

With the pitch being re-laid, have we finally got rid of the slope? Always felt a bit amateurish. — Henry S

Waugh: Sorry to disappoint, but the slope at St James’ Park remains — albeit in a less pronounced form.

Previously, the incline was about 3ft (91cm) from the Leazes down to the Gallowgate, but that is believed to have dropped by around a third after the installation of a state-of-the-art drainage system and improved foundations.

---

We’re constantly told the owners are still 100 per cent supportive. If so, why did the club get milked for nigh-on £10million to buy Jaissle out of his Al Ahli contract? Buy-out clauses for breaking a contract are always negotiable. It was a perfect chance to support the club by shaving millions off, yet the owners chose not to. Why? — Martyn JW

Waugh: PIF’s lack of ‘favours’ for Newcastle in this regard is something supporters have had to get accustomed to, and it certainly does not fit with the assumptions made when the takeover first happened nearly five years ago.

Without getting into the legalities around breaking contracts, Newcastle were negotiating with an autonomous entity in Saudi club Al Ahli. I realise many will struggle to grasp that, or may cynically suggest that is a disingenuous representation of how things work, but that is what multiple sources at St James’, PIF (Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund) and associates of the club’s majority owners insist.

Newcastle and Al Ahli may both be part-owned by PIF, but different figures within that organisation are on the boards of the two clubs. They are treated independently and so, although they are a higher-profile club in the Premier League, PIF will not ask Al Ahli to merely acquiesce to Newcastle’s demands. PIF, as a sovereign wealth fund, is on the boards of both clubs, but it leaves the footballing staff in charge to run things.

The same explanation has been offered as to why Riyadh Air, or another PIF company, does not just pour money into Newcastle through sponsorship deals. They are independent businesses within PIF’s portfolio, and so, according to those with inside knowledge, a clear business case must be provided as to what Riyadh Air would gain from such a partnership. They are not there merely to subsidise Newcastle, but to thrive as a business in their own right.

With Jaissle, Al Ahli did not want to lose the 38-year-old, who has led them to back-to-back Asian Champions League titles, and that is why they demanded that Newcastle meet his release clause, which was reportedly around €11million (£9.4m; $12.7m). Al Ahli also did not want them to confirm Jaissle until they were advancing in their efforts to replace him, which led to a four-day delay in announcing the German as Howe’s successor.

PIF did not step in and tell Al Ahli to merely release Jaissle for free, because that is not how the individual clubs and companies under its control operate — they are treated as separate entities, rather than made to do favours for other PIF-owned assets.

The sceptics among the fanbase will point to this as another example of PIF being disengaged and losing interest, though the message from those at Newcastle and those close to ownership is that this is not the case.

---

Should we be alarmed at the way the Guimaraes saga played out? It sounded like the deal was being negotiated with PIF. That was followed by a manager from a PIF-run club being hired. Are Ross Wilson and Hopkinson being bypassed on big decisions? — Dave C

Waugh: Without knowing the full ins and outs of exactly how either the Guimaraes or Jaissle deals were negotiated, the CEO and sporting director Wilson were heavily involved, if not leading, both.

When Howe told the club he wanted to leave, just before pre-season began, only around five people actually knew initially, two of whom were Hopkinson and Wilson, alongside a couple of PIF officials and co-owner Jamie Reuben, before the circle of trust gradually expanded slightly.

It was Hopkinson and Wilson who sifted through names of potential replacements, with the latter’s input the most important given the footballing significance of such an appointment, and the pair travelled across Europe negotiating with Jaissle, the German’s representatives and Al Ahli once they decided he was the one they wanted as Howe’s successor.

With the Guimaraes deal, just as with other player sales and purchases, PIF and Reuben were looped in on discussions and may have even been the point of contact at specific stages. But, again, the suggestion is Wilson and Hopkinson eventually sanctioned the sale once the Brazilian reiterated to the sporting director at the training camp in La Manga that he wanted to leave, and only once Arsenal had offering a sum which Newcastle found acceptable (admittedly, the club’s rhetoric leading up until the point of agreeing to a £75million fee was that they wanted a higher figure).

Hopkinson and Wilson are very much leading this operation, with autonomy across many areas, even if there is oversight and input from boardroom and ownership levels.

---

Who starts the season as our right-back? — Peter H

Waugh: Should a right-back be acquired over the next week, he would be the clear favourite to be in the team to face Liverpool. Newcastle are working on a deal for Benfica’s Amar Dedic, who has worked with Jaissle before at both FC Liefering and Red Bull Salzburg in Austria. The 23-year-old can play down both defensive flanks, but is primarily a right-back.

Whether a deal can be struck with Benfica remains to be seen. Dedic has a release clause of €50million (£42.7m; $57.6m) in Lisbon, although there is an expectation that a compromise fee of significantly less than that can be agreed upon. Newcastle have other options too, though Jaissle knows the Bosnia and Herzegovina international, and he can play down both sides, so his versatility is attractive.

Tino Livramento is due to return to full training within a week or two following calf surgery in June but is unlikely to be fit for the visit of Liverpool and Lewis Miley is in a race to be match-sharp for that first competitive fixture of the season after his leg fracture in May.

Leo Shahar, the 19-year-old who has started three pre-season friendlies, and Mason Miley, the 17-year-old younger brother of Lewis, are academy-level options, but a new signing, provided they can be acquired in time, appears most likely to start the season as Newcastle’s right-back.