The President of the Russian Premier Liga answered questions from journalists after the General Meeting of the league.

On the results of the RPL General Meeting

We approved the results of the 2020/21 RPL season, and relegated the clubs that left the league on sporting performance. We reviewed the applications of the FNL clubs that earned the right to participate in the RPL at the end of the season, and accepted them. A lot of attention was paid to the consideration of all manner of regulations – basic, sanitary, commercial and technical ones.

Then we considered the issue of making changes to the tournament regulations for the Russian Super Cup, and made a number of additions at the initiative of the clubs. We nominated a delegate to the next RFU conference. We considered a number of RFU proposals related to the financing of refereeing and inspection, and examined the clubs' requests to change the distribution of funds received from the sale of commercial and broadcast rights. Two people were additionally selected to the RPL board to promptly discuss current issues: Vladimir Leonchenko, General Director of Lokomotiv, and Akhmat's General Director, Akhmed Aidamirov.

We heard information from the Hypercube study conducted by the RFU on issues related to the football management system. We also agreed with our colleagues from Spartak and Lokomotiv on the dates to award silver and bronze medals to the teams. We asked our colleagues to coordinate this issue with the management of the clubs within three or four days, so that the awards would be handed out before the international matches.

About the venue of the Russian Super Cup

We try to ensure that significant events – national team matches, the Russian Cup final, the Super Cup – are present in different regions. Together with the RFU, we studied the issues related to the holding of future national team matches. The arenas that were proposed – the Luzhniki, and the stadiums in Volgograd and Saransk – will be occupied. In Kaliningrad, there will be no other matches except the Super Cup at this time. 

There is good infrastructure, the clubs also paid attention to the comfortable weather, so they preferred the application of Kaliningrad. Now we will send our proposal to the RFU. The decision on the venue is made jointly, and it must be approved.

About the situation with Orenburg and Alania

Everything was carried out in accordance with the regulations. Both regions sent us appeals, although they are not members of the RPL, but asked for our opinion. Taking into account the experience of a number of clubs in non-fulfillment of their obligations, the participants of the meeting unanimously spoke about compliance with the regulatory standards required for certification. A tough decision was made, not a very pleasant one for the players who gave their best, but at the same time it obliges the clubs that aim to join the RPL to think not only about the sporting results, but also about the training ground, the youth team, the office, and medical matters. There are no further questions.

I spoke with the owner of Alania, everyone understands that it is necessary to complete the reconstruction of the stadium. For Orenburg, we had a whole note ready, and the RFU provided it to us. Since 2018, the club has reported every time that it will meet the necessary standards and change the situation. The comments to Orenburg are not only related to the capacity of the stadium. The commission went there, and the clubs themselves raised the issue at the General Meeting: the dressing rooms do not correspond to the level of the RPL, there is no place to fit massage tables, they were put in the corridors. During Orenburg’s period in the RPL, we made some efforts to create a mixed zone, but it is necessary to match the level of the league. I think everyone has drawn the appropriate conclusions.

Possible reforms on the relegation playoff

We have done a lot of research on the tournament, reform, and management, but we never give up on getting more information that our colleagues from the Netherlands or other leagues will give us. Let's see what best practices advise us. The reform is not related to this study [the Hypercube study].

The clubs supported the proposal that as soon as there is a conclusion from the analysts on the remaining leagues and all professional football, we will approve two points. The first is related to the exchange of participants between the RPL and the FNL, while the second relates to the squad size for the season. A number of clubs sent an appeal to increase it. 

After consultations and the work of our joint teams with the RFU, we will consider these points. There is quite a serious discussion: the clubs have sent their vision for the exchange, we have studied them, but for now we will refrain from commenting and wait for proposals from the FNL.

On referee reform

Colleagues from the Referee Committee want to announce the information to the media themselves and have asked that the data be kept confidential. In general, the figures that were shown to us – such as the costs of VAR, training, accommodation, and flights - are very serious. Therefore, the clubs almost unanimously asked to involve a working group from among the representatives of the clubs, in particular the financial directors. 

On the RPL side, it will be headed by the league's financial director Aleksey Kotenko, and on the RFU side by Arseniy Zamyatin. They must meet and make final proposals on the ideas of the Referee Committee and the Referee Department by 20 June. This reform is quite global and costly, so the clubs considered it right to consider it again and see where all the funds go and how they are spent.

About the Hypercube study

As far as I know, this was the proposal of Aleksandr Alaev, the FNL and the PFL. Then our colleagues from the RFU joined us, and together with this company they want to improve the management system. A number of studies are being conducted on the basis of which proposals for possible reforms will be considered, and our colleagues have asked us to provide assistance. 

We commissioned research twice when we were writing the development strategy and rebranding, and we have a large archive on these issues. Some things can be updated. I don't think there will be anything new for us, the RPL, but every study brings up something, and we will be happy to help our colleagues.

About the new income distribution scheme

There was a heated discussion. Akhmat came forward to reconsider this issue, and a number of clubs supported it. Very big difficulties have arisen not only in sports federations, but also in other areas where the budgets are being reduced. The practice of income distribution has existed for a long time; it is taken from the experience of foreign leagues. Previously, the income was distributed on a 40/60 basis: 40 percent was divided equally, the remaining 60 based on sporting results.

Even before the pandemic, we changed the ratio to 32/68. We introduced a marketing criterion, and the clubs worked on attendance and attracting fans, but because of covid, they returned to the previous system. A number of clubs have come out in favour of changing the scheme for next season – given that our contracts end in 2022 – and supporting small clubs that receive small funds. Sixty percent of the revenue will be distributed equally, with 40 percent on a sporting basis.

About the situation regarding the matchday 30 kickoff times

This is our area of responsibility, we have had this practice for a long time, but this is our oversight. Previously, a number of clubs played under a big time difference, such as SKA-Khabarovsk. We raised this issue at the meeting: in the 2021/22 season, all matches on the last matchday will definitely start after 19:00 MSK.

On the minimum stadium capacity to meet RPL criteria

When Orenburg were promoted for the 2018/19 season, we came out with a request to reduce the minimum capacity in those cities where there is an opportunity and compliance with other criteria. While we have not found this understanding; we will once again talk with our colleagues from the RFU. Perhaps the Executive Committee will decide to lower the bar, if the remaining indicators – overall there are 24 – will be met. When we discussed the situation of these two clubs (Orenburg and Alania), the question of lowering the minimum capacity was not asked. The regions are different, but the teams should strive for development, although in the western leagues there are stadiums with a small capacity. This question was left open.

About changing the RPL format

The position of the RPL is clear: we want a smooth championship, with all clubs supporting it, given the density of the international and European calendar and our weather conditions. There have been offers from a number of our leading clubs about the play-offs, but we can't fit it in it, given the reform of the Champions League - we have no windows where it can be inserted. When there is additional information about some steps, we will definitely inform you about them.