Terraloon

That number I take with a massive pinch of salt. That would make him the 7th highest paid manager in English football which I doubt, with only the likes of City, Arsenal, Liverpool , Utd and Chelsea getting more. . It’s said that even Howe at Newcastle and the Aussie at Spurs don’t get more. Having said all that if he got close to that number then the club deserves gets everything that’s coming to it. Looking at the numbers I would very much doubt he was paid even half of that number

Chelsea recalling Casadei always surprised me. It seemed unusual to call a player back from what appeared to be a loan that had started slowly but was improving. Yes there was a collapse in the Coventry game from a winning position but the point being made I guess is that he had what was probably the case of a player that was debatably a starter stripped away and the club couldn’t/ wouldn’t facilitate a replacement Looking on transfer market it seems that Chelsea weren’t charging a loan fee

The reports suggest that it was Chelsea made the decision on that one not Mc Kenna https://www.football365.com/news/chelsea-final-decision-mckenna-ipswich-maresca-frank-pochettino

Bit of a myth that but you can see why it’s believed At CAS each party gets to nominate one at as is allowed that the third is agreed mutually and in this case City suggested a name and UEFA agreed. The head of the “Independent Panel” Rosen KC has sole responsibility to appoint

I think individual bonuses are scheduled in the individual contract and indeed be paid in that way and almost certainly some will be getting a pay rise in 24/25 but ( and this is from memory ) team bonus or a schedule of them can be lodged at the FA but these are in a season by season basis ( well that was certainly the case in non league football). The irony and tragic part is that agents etc will almost certainly be paid a bounds as well. The whole issue of bonuses was a major contributor in Forests 22/23 calculations and charge.

Because it is payable to the players contracted in 23/24, will be included in the contract year 23/24 season those contracts end on 30/6 /24 and some players possibly won’t be at Leicester post 30/6/24 . So yes will be in the 30/6/24 accounts

No it would be paid in the 23/24 accounting year so will impact in the EFL calculations for 30/6/24. Irrespective it wouldn’t be amortised the same way as a transfer fee or associated costs are

https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/03/04/0910e1b3-f94a-41a5-9818-6e1b5c961a9a/PL_Handbook_2023-24_DIGITAL_26.02.24-v3.pdf I like most believed that the embargo will be lifted later this week but have started to see the PL E79 ( Page 141) being mentioned Have no idea if the issue with the EFL is covered under this rule but knowing Leicester nothing would surprise me.

That’s why a full pre season is so important but Enzo not going to the Olympics was from what I read made weeks ago and certainly from what I read about Chelsea’s off field structure won’t have been Poch or indeed any potential HCs decision

The strange thing for me is that so many claim they hated his style, despised his approach and felt there was no plan b yet seem to be so bitter he seems to be moving on. Strange really shouldn’t they be celebrating? Someone started a thread the other day along the lines that there is no loyalty in football nowadays. Other than the odd player, the very very odd HC or manager there really hasn’t ever been. Most in truth want the biggest buck they can earn or want to play or manage/ coach at the highest level their abilities allow. Will he succeed at Chelsea? None of us have a clue ? Will he play the in the same style ? Time will tell but the players he is inheriting are by and large younger, certainly faster and many technically superior that will make a difference Time to simply move on accepting that money talks and simply accept that if Chelsea go after a player a manager the chances are they will get him just like if Leicester want a player a HC they, Leicester, won’t think twice about the impact of that persons current club the focus is fully on what’s good for Leicester.

You have to look wider than just the transfer fees to be amortised during the players who appeared in the squad.The number I was up to in terms of just the 23/24 players was £45-£50 million. Add to that in the main agents fees are capitalised and amortised over the period of the contract. Agents fees are circa £9 million p.a.at Leicester . Even the likes of Jamie’s V one year contract extension probably cost circa £300k in agents fees. We will have to wait and see the final numbers but maybe £65 million is too high but it will be more than is affordable

I have assumed it’s more like £150 million and amortisation of £65 million.

It’s the promotion bonus that I think pushes it significantly back up

Forest quantified their promotion bonuses to players alone at £20 million. Their Championship promotion team was in all likelihood paid less and whilst no more than a guess I would imagine Leicesters would as a minimum be that sum and almost certainly a few millions on top. By my back of a fag packet calculations the PSR EXCESS in 23/4 will be circa the same levels as 21/22 & 22/23 £50 million ish each year and that’s with a wage bill reducing by some 30% in 23/24 and amortisation by about £10 million but to counter that Broadcast Income down by £50 million, Player trading profit down £30 million, other income down £5 million but of course the allowance last year was £22 million less

Ok the two years 19/20+20/21 averaged have dropped out of the 3 year cycle but the 21/22+22/23 numbers don’t bode well and almost certainly the 23/24 numbers will be way over the £13 million or £81 million over 3 years. There is very little room to manoeuvre Irrespective the league table doesn’t lie.

I suspect the 23/24 number's will be horrendous by that I mean significantly way above the £13+£35x 2. In other words the EFL upper threshold will be shattered. I can’t be arsed to go back to the 22/23 accounts but I think the sale of the likes of Maddison have ready been accounted for meaning little to no player trading profit in 23/24

Please try reading what I said. “They are a far better team than the one that got promoted.”

Sorry but have to disagree with your assessment. Forest are a far better team compared with the team that got promoted. As are Bournemouth. Brentford have probably peaked as have Brighton but they are both well set up to bring in players as are Fulham. Ipswich are of course candidates to be relegated and I would think that applies to Southampton but in terms of Leicester the squad isn’t close to what some think in terms of PL and it’s not just about a points deduction it’s about who can be recruited and that without any wiggle room in PSR terms is major concern

Following the ruling by the EFL panel in effect no more than delaying the submission of future financial information by what 13 or so weeks that information was I would imagine submitted on or before the 31/3 /24 deadline. All we know at this point much but we do know one thing that is that the club in its submissions have confirmed that they will be in excess , for the 3 year monitoring period ending 23/24 of the EFL upper threshold which is £83 million . 2 PL years of £35 million and 1 EFL year of £13 million The concern is that the EFL in accord with their rules charge Leicester . We know that the EFL are tweaking their rules around FFP following Leicesters challenging the rules which potentially enable clubs promoted to the PL to have any sanction follow into the PL. At this point in time Leicester haven’t been charged with exceeding the 22/23 monitoring period which would have been £105 million or the 23/24 period which will only allow £83 million . I think it’s safe to assume that there is a PL charge incoming post after 6 June I know some won’t agree but I do wonder if , Leicester had just complied with the EFL requirement to submit a business plan by 31/12 and the 22/23 accounts to the PL , then the 22/23 case may or may not have resulted in a PL points deduction known already and idc a points deduction stranded in EFL with out even the possibility of it following to the PL

Don’t think you want to know the answer to that. All I can say is that putting 13 players behind the ball was a cunning yet destined to fail tactic

Sorry yes

Compensation would be amortised over the contract period but that doesn’t mean that the cash itself isn’t paid far earlier even potentially in one instalment

That’s right.

The PL changed the rules in June 24 as to how they would deal with cases for 23/24 trading years so yes they could change the rules at the two ( EFL& PL) AGMs

Sorry but I think you miss understand the establishment of precedent is established or indeed the principle of “ let it stand” The whole concept of precedent is where a decision is made by a higher court which then applies to similar cases being heard lower down the court process. it stands until, well , another precedent is set. The ICs are at the same level so one commissions ruling may well be referred to but they simply aren’t duty bound to apply the same sanction even if the cases are broadly similar. Bearing in mind what I have just said re precedent to date both PL cases have followed the conclusion in ( I think ) the Sheffield Wednesday case that by default club exceeding the spending limit has gained a sport advantage. As for the delayed Regulator their responsibilities as outlined in the now suspended bill don’t cover discipline matters in accord with league rules and trying to bring in a a club that is already subject to an IC and a club who are subject to an investigation wouldn’t in all likelihood have any bearing on matters