Arsenal have been named among the Premier League teams "reviewing their position" regarding a proposed salary cap that could be introduced to the competition and has been scheduled for a vote this week. But circumstances have changed for the Gunners after an executive at the Emirates Stadium who was in favour of the idea has left the club.The idea behind the salary cap in the Premier League is "anchoring" what clubs are permitted to spend on player wages to the prize money and broadcast revenue of the team that finishes bottom of the table, thereby denying the bigger sides the power to spend freely and potentially keeping things fairer and more competitive.The proposed limit is five times what the last-place makes in the aforementioned revenue streams and The Timesgives the example of Sheffield United, 20th in 2023-24, earning £109.5 million ($144m). Therefore, the salary cap imposed on the following season would have been £550m ($723m). As it goes, Premier League clubs are not yet spending that amount on salaries, with Manchester City becoming the first break the £400m ($526m) in 2202-23 and Liverpool’s most recent set of published accounts for 2023-24 showing a wage bill rise to just shy of £373m ($490m). But the very idea threatens to take control away from the clubs themselves.The reason that Arsenal are specifically considered a "threat" to the plans to vote on introducing a salary cap is a potential change in stance. The same report from The Times explains that the Gunners are reconsidering, having previously been "staunch supporters" of the idea. A key change is the departure of former executive vice-chairman Tim Lewis, who was a particular advocate. But he is no longer with the club, departing the Emirates Stadium in September, and views on the proposed salary cap have since softened, to the point where Arsenal could now oppose it instead.Looking for smarter football bets? Get expert previews, data-driven predictions & winning insights with GOAL Tips on Telegram. Join our growing community now!Arsenal are just the latest club who could turn against the proposed salary cap, with others having been more vocally opposed for longer. Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe suggested last year that it would see Premier League clubs restricted in comparison to European giants."[Anchoring would] inhibit the top clubs in the Premier League, and the last thing you want is for the top clubs in the Premier League not to be able to compete with Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich, Paris Saint-Germain - that's absurd," Ratcliffe said.The PFA, the union representing players in England, has attacked the idea from a legal point of view."We have a tendency in football to think that we're above the law, but football is not above the law, and unfortunately the reality is you cannot artificially cap someone's ability to make a living," PFA chief executive Maheta Molango told BBC Radio 4's Today programme earlier this month."The league knows themselves that even before the PFA does it, there will be clubs within their own room that would also legally challenge that measure, and the only ones who'll end up winning are the lawyers. There are ways to agree on things around financial sustainability, but this cannot be imposed unilaterally. This needs to be negotiated with the right people and there are some mechanisms that need to be respected."A vote on the Premier League salary cap is intended for Friday's shareholders' meeting, but with support waning there is no guarantee that ballot will even go ahead.Premier League rule changes require 14 clubs to vote in favour, and while 16 showed support for the idea last year when it was beginning to be explored, the number of teams beyond just Arsenal having second thoughts could swing it well below the required threshold.