The charges are primarily focused on events which occurred between the 2010-11 to 2015-16 seasons.

The alleged rule breaches concern agents, intermediaries and third-party investments in players.

Chelsea have until 19 September to respond.

There are a wide range of options available to sanction Chelsea, including a fine, transfer embargo and points deduction. However, the Blues’ high level of co-operation will be factored in.

Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich was in control of the club from 2003 to 2022. He sold Chelsea to a consortium led by American investor Todd Boehly and private equity firm Clearlake Capital.

“During a thorough due diligence process prior to completion of the purchase, the ownership group became aware of potentially incomplete financial reporting concerning historical transactions and other potential breaches of FA rules,” Chelsea said.

“Immediately upon the completion of the purchase, the club self-reported these matters to all relevant regulators, including the FA.

“The club has demonstrated unprecedented transparency during this process, including by giving comprehensive access to the club’s files and historical data.”

In July 2023, Chelsea were fined £8.6m by Uefa for breaking Financial Fair Play rules as a result of “submitting incomplete financial information” between 2012 and 2019.

Those breaches were reported by the new Stamford Bridge ownership following the club’s sale in May 2022.

As reported by BBC Sport in October 2023, transfers involving Samuel Eto’o and Willian were part of a Premier League investigation into potential financial rule breaches by Chelsea.

Both players moved to the club when Abramovich was in charge, joining from Russian side Anzhi Makhachkala in 2013.

Forest are hugely disappointed that supporters were permitted to bring the banner into Selhurst Park, according to well-placed sources.

Crystal Palace have been approached for comment by the BBC.

Palace and Forest played out a 1-1 draw at Selhurst Park on Sunday, but the clash was overshadowed by the banner which, in addition to the portrayal of Marinakis pointing a gun towards Gibbs-White, read: “Mr Marinakis is not involved in blackmail, match-fixing, drug trafficking or corruption!”

Marinakis has consistently denied any wrongdoing in relation to such allegations.

The FA is probing the banner and will decide whether Palace face punishment.

There are strict rules regarding messaging contained in such banners regarding foul language and defamatory, political and offensive slogans.

The banner will serve to heighten tensions between the two clubs following a controversial summer that saw Palace relegated into the Europa Conference League with Forest taking their place in the Europa League after the London club contravened Uefa’s multi-club ownership rules.

Last month, Palace chairman Steve Parish said the decision to remove Crystal Palace from the Europa League was “the biggest injustice in the history of football”.

However, there is now major frustration at the City Ground that more was not done to prevent the banner from being displayed.

The banner is viewed at Forest as being inflammatory and xenophobic. They are privately questioning why Palace and the club’s ownership group consisting of Woody Johnson, Parish, Josh Harris and David Blitzer have not publicly criticised the banner.

Gibbs-White came close to leaving Forest for Tottenham earlier this summer after the London club appeared to trigger the England international’s £60m release clause.

But the midfielder ended up staying at the City Ground, signing a new deal, and speaking about his decision to stay in an interview alongside Marinakis.

Coote, who was sacked by the Premier League in December 2024, has been further sanctioned by the FA for an “aggravated breach” of rule E3.2, because of the reference he made to Klopp’s nationality in the video.

The clip, which was filmed around July 2020, was leaked online in November 2024.

Coote admitted the charge.

The FA’s written reasons for the verdict said Coote expressed “deep remorse” and acknowledged his comments were “crass and inappropriate”.

As well as his suspension, Coote must undergo a mandatory face-to-face education programme.

The 42-year-old was initially suspended in November 2024 when the online clip showed him making derogatory comments about Klopp and Liverpool.

He was sacked a month later by Premier League referees’ body the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) following an investigation into his conduct.

Coote was also banned in February by Uefa from officiating in European competition until 30 June 2026.

A video – separate to the one in which he made reference to Klopp’s nationality – emerged in November of Coote sniffing a white powder when he was on duty at Euro 2024, which is organised by Uefa.

He revealed in January that he was gay, and had hidden his sexuality during his professional career through fear of abuse.

Coote, who did not attend the hearing, said he thought he was speaking in a “private” setting when he made the comments about Klopp and Liverpool.

In June, Coote was cleared of any gambling misconduct following claims that he discussed issuing a yellow card to a player prior to a match.

However, Coote accepted that the video in which he made remarks about Klopp, which was filmed after the UK emerged from the first Covid-19 lockdown in 2020, was “likely to cause hurt and reputational damage” once it entered the public domain.

He said the pandemic and the years since had significantly impacted his mental health.

The FA started their investigation in August 2023 and the Brazil international was charged in May last year for allegedly getting booked deliberately “for the improper purpose of affecting the betting market”.

Paqueta was facing the prospect of a lifetime ban if the 27-year-old was found guilty.

The four charges against him related to a Premier League game against Leicester City on 12 November 2022, as well as 2023 fixtures against Aston Villa on 12 March, Leeds United on 21 May and Bournemouth on 12 August.

The regulatory commission found these four charges to be “not proven” following the hearing.

Paqueta was also charged with two counts of failing to co-operate with the investigation after breaching “FA Rule F3 in respect of alleged failures to comply pursuant to FA Rule F2”, which relates to providing information and documents.

He also denied these charges, but the regulatory commission found them to be proven and will “decide an appropriate sanction for these breaches at the earliest opportunity”.

“Since the first day of this investigation, I have maintained my innocence against these extremely serious accusations,” said Paqueta.

“I can’t say anything more at this time, but I would like to express how grateful I am to God and how eager I am to return to playing football with a smile on my face.

“To my wife who never let go of my hand, to West Ham United, to the fans who always cheered me on, and to my family, friends and the legal team who have supported me – thank you for everything.”

Paqueta has been under investigation since August 2023 and was charged by the FA in May 2024 for allegedly getting booked deliberately “for the improper purpose of affecting the betting market”.

BBC Sport understands that the player and club have now been informed of the governing body’s ruling in relation to those accusations, which related to matches during the 2022-23 and 23-24 Premier League seasons.

Paqueta’s hearing over the charges finished towards the end of April this year.

One source with knowledge of the situation has told BBC Sport that the final ruling is largely in Paqueta’s favour and that the Brazil international is effectively “in the clear”.

The FA has been seeking a lifetime ban for Paqueta but indications are that scenario has been avoided.

It remains to be seen, however, if there is any level of punishment for Paqueta.

BBC Sport has contacted West Ham, the FA and Paqueta’s legal team but all have declined to comment.

The four charges against him relate to a Premier League game against Leicester City on 12 November 2022, as well as 2023 fixtures against Aston Villa on 12 March, Leeds United on 21 May and Bournemouth on 12 August.

He was also charged with two counts of failing to cooperate with the FA’s investigation after breaching “FA Rule F3 in respect of alleged failures to comply pursuant to FA Rule F2”, which relates to providing information and documents.

The 27-year-old scored four goals in 33 Premier League appearances for West Ham during in 24-25.

He was in tears after being booked against Tottenham in May, with his wife Maria Fournier saying in an Instagram post the same evening that they had “been living this nightmare for two years”.

After being charged by the FA last year, Paqueta had said he was “extremely surprised and upset” by the charges.

“For nine months, I have co-operated with every step of their investigation and provided all the information I can. I deny all the charges in their entirety and will fight with every breath to clear my name,” he said.

Paqueta joined the Hammers from Lyon for an initial £36.5m in August 2022 and helped the club win the Europa Conference League during his debut season.

Since 2014, FA rules have stated that anyone associated with a club in the top eight tiers of English football cannot bet on any aspect of the sport worldwide.

​​​​​​​The games in question

West Ham 0-2 Leicester – 12 November 2022

Paqueta booked for a ‘lunge’ on Leicester midfielder Boubakary Soumare in the 60th minute.

He is booked at 1-0 and the match finishes 2-0 to Leicester.

West Ham 1-1 Aston Villa – 12 March 2023

Paqueta booked for what is described as a ‘lunging challenge’ on John McGinn in the 70th minute, with the score at 1-1.

West Ham 3-1 Leeds United – 21 May 2023

Paqueta is booked for pulling back Leeds winger Crysencio Summerville on the counter-attack in the 65th minute.

It happens at 1-1, with West Ham going on to win 3-1.

West Ham 1-1 Bournemouth – 12 August 2023

In the opening game of this season, Paqueta is booked for handball in the 94th minute, with the match finishing 1-1.

Last year, Cerys Vaughan, then aged 17, was sanctioned by an FA disciplinary commission for improper conduct after she asked the rival player if they were a man during a friendly match.

Having been told the player was transgender, Vaughan says she then raised the matter with the referee over concerns she had about fairness and safety.

Following a complaint, she was charged with a breach of FA rules, and after a hearing she was handed a six-match ban, four of which were suspended.

The case sparked a protest by women’s rights campaigners outside Wembley, and scrutiny of the FA’s gender eligibility policy.

However, it can now be revealed that in February, an FA appeal board found that Vaughan had received an “unfair” hearing, quashed the original ruling, and ordered a new process to take place.

The case has since been dropped after the complainant withdrew from the process.

Vaughan, now 18, has chosen to reveal her identity and in her first broadcast interview told BBC Sport: “It was stressful. It’s definitely impacted my normal life a lot.

“In the end it was pointless, and there was no reason for the FA to put me through all this.

“They said I wasn’t guilty anymore and they dropped my charges and cleared my record.”

In a statement, the FA said: “We can confirm that this disciplinary case has now been closed, as the complainant has chosen to withdraw from the process due to personal reasons.

“All relevant parties have been informed of this outcome and no further action will be taken.

“To protect the players involved, and to respect the confidential details included, we are not in a position to publish further details about this case.”

What is the background?

The case began in July 2024 when Vaughan was playing a pre-season friendly for her local women’s team in Lancashire.

She said: “Just before the game kicked off I saw that one of the players [was] what I thought was a man, so I went and I asked, ‘Are you a man?”

She says her opponent clarified they were transgender and asked to speak about it at the end of the match, but Vaughan then asked the referee about it.

“I assumed it would be a women’s game, and that’s why I was confused because I thought they’d brought a mixed team with them,” said Vaughan.

“I said, ‘Is this player allowed to play in the match today?’

“The ref said, ‘I’m not sure, but because it’s a friendly I’m going to let it slide’.

“Their captain must have heard me ask, because she came up and she told me it wasn’t an appropriate question, it wasn’t a nice thing to say, and I needed to keep my transphobia off the pitch. I didn’t understand why she was saying that.”

Vaughan says she is currently being assessed for possible autism, and that this may explain why she “wasn’t afraid to ask the question”.

For several years, the FA has allowed transgender women to play in women’s matches if they reduce their testosterone level, insisting they have a responsibility to make the game as accessible and inclusive as possible.

However, earlier this month the FA announced it was introducing a ban from 1 June in the wake of a UK Supreme Court ruling that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex.

‘Shocked’ about being reported

Image caption: The incident occurred during a pre-season friendly involving local women’s teams in Lancashire

Vaughan said days after the match she was informed by her club that she needed to provide a statement because she had been reported by a member of the opposition club, via football anti-discrimination body Kick It Out, to her local county FA.

“I was confused because I didn’t think I’d done anything wrong,” she said.

“I was shocked that they would report me but at that point I wasn’t worried because I thought the FA would have some common sense and not go through with [it].”

But Vaughan was then charged by Lancashire FA with “using abusive and/or indecent and/or insulting words or behaviour”.

It was further alleged it was an aggravated breach of FA rules because it included a reference to gender reassignment. According to documents seen by the BBC, Vaughan was alleged to have said, “that’s a man”, “are you a man” and “don’t come here again”, or similar.

Vaughan denied the charges, insisting that she did not intend to be offensive to her opponent or to challenge their chosen identity, but wanted to understand if the rules were being followed.

However, after a hearing, the disciplinary commission upheld both charges, finding that by raising the issue with the referee, Vaughan had showed a “continual action which indicated more than a casual question of curiosity.”

She was banned from all football for six matches, four of which were suspended for a period of one year, and was ordered to complete an online equality and diversity course.

“I was really upset,” said Vaughan. “It got put on my record that I’d been accused of misconduct, and I didn’t want that to stay there, and I knew I wasn’t guilty so I appealed it.”

In November, with her identity remaining a secret, the matter was raised in parliament by former FA chairman Lord Triesman. He criticised the governing body’s handling of the case, saying Vaughan “seems to me to have been treated in a shabby way”, and her appeal was supported by campaign group the Free Speech Union.

The controversy also led to a protest by women’s rights campaigners outside Wembley before an England men’s fixture.

“It was really nice to see other people weren’t afraid to speak up,” said Vaughan.

Appeal board found hearing ‘unfair’

The BBC has learned that in February an FA appeal board stated it was “concerned about fundamental aspects” of the case, noting that Vaughan became upset while being questioned during the original hearing.

It said that “maybe for the best of intentions, it led the Commission to truncate her evidence,” adding: “That appears to have prevented her from completing her account.”

It said that the commission should have considered measures to enable Vaughan “to her give best account in this important case. This appears not to have been done or offered. That was unfair to Cerys”.

The appeal body also said it was “also concerned about core aspect of the commission’s reasoning,” disagreeing that Vaughan had admitted the aggravated breach, and concluding “there appears to have been no consideration of her explanation”.

It added that this was “sufficient for us to allow the appeal and quash the commission’s decision, which we do”.

It said: “Since Cerys did not receive a fair hearing, the correct approach is to remit this case to a differently constituted commission… there should be a resolution of this important case on the merits after a fair hearing.”

Vaughan seeking FA apology

Vaughan says she is “happy” that the case has now been dropped, and welcomed the FA’s ban on transgender women from playing in women’s football, falling in line with several other sports.

“They’ve basically admitted that I was right in what I did,” she said. “If the new ruling was in place when I asked the original question I never would have been punished for anything.

“I’d like the FA to apologise for the way that they treated me… it was a very long, drawn-out case and there was no reason for it to be.”

The FA’s U-turn in policy pleased those concerned about transgender women retaining physiological advantages from male puberty and the risks to fairness and safety.

But it has also drawn criticism from those who fear it will exclude the 28 registered transgender women in English football from the sport, and marginalise the trans community. There are currently no transgender women playing in professional football.

Natalie Washington, campaign lead for Football v Transphobia, told BBC Sport that the FA rule change is because of “a lot of attention on a very small number of people who aren’t causing a problem, and are just going about their lives. It is a de facto ban for transgender women from football more generally, realistically, particularly people who have been playing in women’s football for decades.”

When asked if she has sympathy for transgender women who may now not play, Vaughan said: “No… I also have a love for the game. I compete with other women. I love football, and if biological males get involved that makes the experience worse for everyone else because then it’s not an even game… I don’t think the women’s game has to be inclusive. It should be women only.”

Asked what she would say to those who believe transgender women should still be able to play in women’s football if they reduce their testosterone, Vaughan said: “With the height advantage, the difference in bone density, that’s there from the beginning, and I think it’s unfair.

“I’m at a greater risk of injury, and if you’ve gone through male puberty you’ll always have the biological advantage.”

Last week, the FA chief executive Mark Bullingham said the amendment of the FA’s rules had been a “difficult decision” based on legal advice, and that it understands “how difficult this decision will be for people who want to play football in the gender by which they identify, and we are aware of the significant impact this will have on them”.

It amended its rules on 11 April, applying stricter eligibility criteria for transgender women to continue playing in women’s football at all levels.

However, following the UK Supreme Court’s ruling on 15 April that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex, the FA has scrapped that policy and says only those born biologically female will be permitted to play.

“This is a complex subject, and our position has always been that if there was a material change in law, science, or the operation of the policy in grassroots football then we would review it and change it if necessary,” the FA said.

“We understand that this will be difficult for people who simply want to play the game they love in the gender by which they identify, and we are contacting the registered transgender women currently playing to explain the changes and how they can continue to stay involved in the game.”

Sources have told BBC Sport that the Scottish FA is set to follow the English FA’s ruling by banning transgender women from women’s football in Scotland.

What was the FA’s previous policy?

Under amended rules announced on 11 April, the FA said transgender women could continue to participate in women’s football provided they met certain criteria.

They would have to prove via medical records that their testosterone levels had been below prescribed levels for at least the past 12 months, and provide a record of hormone therapy and an annual review of treatment.

A new formal process, which would involve a “match observation” by an FA official, would give the FA “ultimate discretion” on a case-by-case basis.

What has the reaction been?

Fiona McAnena, director of campaigns for human rights charity Sex Matters, said the ruling was “overdue” and that the previous policy was “nonsensical”.

ALSO READ:

• $742k FIFA grant funds Upper East pitch — GFA

• SuperSport secures FIFA Club World Cup broadcast rights

The Blues captain, 24, will miss the first three matches of next season after he was sent off for violent conduct when he fouled Brighton striker Joao Pedro last month.

James was banned for four matches in all, including Chelsea’s final-day win over Bournemouth, with the additional one-game ban imposed as a result of it being his second red card of the season.

Chelsea’s appeal claimed James was “disoriented” after being fouled from behind and that Pedro “made contact” first as he ran past, adding: “It had not been his intention to harm Mr Pedro, he was simply pushing him away with his foot.”

The FA rejected the appeal – having not found the account of the defender “persuasive” – and did not accept that he was disoriented as he caught the Brazilian just below his knee, describing the action as “unnecessary” and rejecting the claim that he was simply “pushing” Pedro away.

There will be no further right to appeal for James, who missed out on selection for Gareth Southgate’s Euro 2024 England training squad.

Chelsea received more cautions than any club in Premier League history last season, which former boss Mauricio Pochettino put down to ill-discipline, with Enzo Maresca having been named his successor for the upcoming campaign.

Rubiales has refused to resign after kissing forward Hermoso on the lips following Spain’s Women’s World Cup final win over England in Sydney.

Hermoso said on Friday she did not consent, but the federation has questioned her version of events.

“The evidence is conclusive,” it said. “Mr President has not lied.”

In a statement by players’ union Futpro, which is representing 33-year-old Hermoso, she is quoted as saying “in no case did I seek to raise (lift) the president” while they embraced on the podium.

The Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) said: “The RFEF and Mr President will demonstrate each of the lies that are spread either by someone on behalf of the player or, if applicable, by the player herself.

“The RFEF and the President, given the seriousness of the content of the press release from the Futpro union, will initiate the corresponding legal actions.”

The federation also said that, if selected, players have “an obligation” to play for the national team, after 81 female players said they will not represent Spain until Rubiales is removed from his post.

Real Betis striker Borja Iglesias has also said he will not play for the men’s national team again while Rubiales is in charge.

In its statement, the RFEF provided four images of Hermoso’s embrace with Rubiales, with an analysis of each, which it claims demonstrates that she applied the force to lift Rubiales’ feet off the ground.

The federation says it has tried to contact Hermoso, who is Spain’s leading women’s goalscorer with 51 from 101 appearances, but have “been unsuccessful at all times”.

And since then, potential candidates continue to show up. Former Ghana FA Vice President Fred Pappoe has said “I’ts fairly possible (he would contest)”.
But Randy Abbey, a former communications director of the FA has ruled himself out as a candidate for the Presidency.
However, Herbert Mensah says he is interested in the top job, but questions if the systems are really ready to deal with someone of radical thoughts?
‘’I have a track record in terms of managing people, in terms of dealing with global capital and seeking change without compromising certain value systems, the answer is not always yes.’’
Herbert Mensah has a wealth of experience in football administration, having served as Board Chairman of Asante Kotoko and rival club Ashanti Gold.
He is credited with making a major contribution to changing the face of Ghanaian football, establishing the SOS (Strategic Outsourcing Solutions) network which provided management services to football and continues to be a link between grass-roots sport and the professional world.
Source: joy sports

The Confederation of Africa Football (CAF) confirmed the appointment of Afriyie on Wednesday when he was invited to the body’s headquarters in Egypt.

He was sworn into office at the CAF headquarters in Cairo by the committee’s president Amaju Pinnick of Nigeria.

Afriyie will serve a four-year term in office as he will contribute to the planning and execution of the continent’s flagship football competition.

He will work with some of the highly respected football administrators on the continent as South Africa FA chief Danny Jordaan is the first vice president of the committee and Zimbabwe FA boss Phillip Chiyangwa working second vice-president.

Afriyie is the first Ghanaian to gain a major CAF appointment following the rise of Ahmad Ahmad as the president of the organisation assisted by Ghana’s Kwesi Nyantakyi.

More Ghanaians are expected to work on various committees under the new CAF leadership as there are efforts to bring top administrators on board to steer the affairs of the body in the right direction over the next four years.

Africa’s football governing body is undergoing major reforms following the election of Mr Ahmad earlier this year.

The Porcupine Warriors will host the lower-division side at the Babayara Sports Stadium

Hearts of Oak on the other hand will player division one side Accra Young Wise with Berekum Chelsea hosting Bechem United.

In other matches two-time winners Medeama SC will play host to Elmina Sharks at the Takwa T&A Park.

FULL PAIRING

Brekum Chelsea – Bechem United

Nea Salamina – Steadfast

FC Sarmatex – WA All Stars

Kumasi Asante Kotoko – Wassaman United

Medeama SC – Elmina Sharks FC

Accra Young Wise FC – Accra Hearts of Oak

Amidaus professionals – WAFA

Danbort FC – Liberty Professionals