Terraloon

Sorry but this simply not the case. One IC at appeal agreed with Everton’s arguments that it was perverse to receive a points deduction in excess of the number deductible from entering an insolvency event. That is a reasonable argument but the rules as written give ICs the ability to deduct any amount of points. It’s unlikely that they will go in excess of 8 points but it wasn’t illegal it’s simply that the second IC thought the sanction was disproportionate indeed as we know the starting point in a first charge seems to be 6 points that number in theory was reduced by 2 points in the Forest case and stayed the same in the Everton case. The PL argued in the Everton case that there were aggravating factors . In terms of co operation the mitigation is for how the club have conducted itself through but mainly the IC will take into account how a club has engaged with the authorities. There is an expectation that a club will as a minimum adhere to the requirements detailed in the rule book so there is no Brownie Points awarded for doing what the rules require namely acting in good faith

See the rule E79 This rule seems to allow the PL, with the agreement of the EFL to take over a dispute that exists between clubs that were in the EFL and get promoted to the PL.In this instance of course that is Leicester In effect the 23/24 PSR ( FFP) dispute that Leicester have with the EFL can it seems be dealt with by the PL

Bearing in mind the fact that the playoff final was played on 26 /5 ( after the 3rd Saturday in May)no one would have known all teams that would or wouldn’t be playing in the 24/25 PL

Chelsea haven’t bought out the last two years of his contract they have paid compensation for him to be released from his contract. Add to that it’s likely that there is a sum in that number re other members of staff that will follow

I actually don’t think the EFL rules have the same provision in terms of taking a case over from the PL but they do have a rule that clubs promoted from or relegated from the EFL remain under their disciplinary procedures hence why the 2013/14 breech was dealt with by the EFL and likewise why the EFL dealt with the Sheffield Utd charge. Also it’s why Trevor Birch had to backtrack re the EFL implementing any sanction if handed down by the PL in 23/24 to Leicester it simply isn’t allowed at the present I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the EFL rules are changed idk to enable them to take over cases in respect of cases relegated from the PL and started under that jurisdiction

My guess would be that it would first be the subject of a charge(s) , then possibly arbitration all under the PL jurisdiction. That said it’s possible that arbitration would be prior to any 24/25 charge. The Man City case at the High Court if nothing else has led us to the confirmation that the PL is considered competent to hear arbitration/ disciplinary matters so challenging that aspect would be churlish. The route to take any dispute out of the league would and could only be on a point of law and again I would imagine that would again prove fruitless. So the process in all likelihood would be 1)charge/ arbitration, 2)IC appointed 3) Directions etc 4) Hearing 5) Appeal There is no process to challenge any appeal save on a point of law. As I pointed out months ago I was always concerned that Leicesters tactics earlier in the year could backfire and if two charges follow promotion without any reduction ( akin to Forest) for assisting the league in progressing the case then sorry that is a massive miscalculation on behalf of the board.

From my reading of the rules the club doesn’t have a say in the matter being passed to the PL. I mentioned the point yesterday because many had assumed any EFL breach would be held in limbo as it were but as the article confirms the 22/23 period will be dealt with by the PL in 24/25 as we already knew but as now know it’s likely the 23/24 case will also be in the 24/25 by the PL.

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