Thread by @JacobsBen

So much noise about the relationship between PIF and Clearlake in light of multiple Chelsea moves to Saudi. Of course scrutiny and transparency is always needed...

But remember, #CFC really wanted to keep Kante and lost him on a free. And they have sold Koulibaly and Ziyech for pretty modest fees and at a loss. Mendy turned down a new deal last year so was always likely to leave.

Perhaps the optics paint a conflict of interest or at least provoke important questions, and that’s right and fair. The connections can’t be ignored. But Chelsea have really just hit the outgoings jackpot here.

They obviously benefit because the outgoings reduce their squad size, bring in needed income and slash the wage bill. And they have happened quickly because PIF have swooped in for multiple deals at once.

But no one has forced the players to pick Saudi (Lukaku shows this) and none of the fees to Chelsea are anywhere close to the €55m Al-Hilal paid for Neves. Yet less clamour about that one…

PIF are a Clearlake investor (although denials all around that any Saudi money funded the takeover) and worked with Boehly’s Cain to invest in a hotel chain. But why exactly would #NUFC’s majority owner want to pay more than they have to in fees for players Chelsea want gone?

More generally, the Saudi Pro League, of which PIF controls four clubs, are ‘overpaying’ for star names, especially on wages, to try and grow the league. So it’s not really a #CFC-specific move. It’s just that Chelsea have a bunch of available names.

So understanding and scrutinising the league’s broader plans, and who is behind it, is vital. And that’s not a Chelsea-specific thing.

But I don’t see any particularly inflated fees on Chelsea’s Saudi deals to date to suggest PIF are somehow ‘helping’ Chelsea. It looks like they have got decent deals. In fact, arguably the best fee #CFC have received is for Havertz.