urban.spaceman

The irony here is that he’s literally more of a ****ing criminal than Ábrego García. THERE’S your ****ing two tier justice.

Laurence Fox turning up to court to plead not guilty to sharing upskirting photos of a woman without her consent, which he literally ****ing did: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-04-25/laurence-fox-denies-sharing-upskirting-photo-of-tv-star Billie turned the kids against him apparently.

Completely agree. The anger is totally justified. There HAS to be a change of personnel at the top THIS SUMMER. A fresh perspective, a new pair of eyes with new ideas to develop a new strategy within the confines of what’s happened to us. Top, Rudkin and Susan have been chasing their tails trying to put our the fire at the end of it and have managed to put us in a deeply, deeply troubling position. We are in serious existential trouble because of this. I want accountability as much as everyone else but for me that extents beyond the capability of the club too - there are blatant structural problems within this sport that have harmed us by design, implemented by a league that holds other clubs to far lower standards, has acted irrationally and maliciously towards us and have repeatedly broken their own rules while manage to prove we broke none of theirs - and they’ve literally just changed the rules AGAIN to make sure they can punish us even further. This is one of those very rare articles in which a British sports journalist actually tells the truth about our situation, written 6 months before we beat the Premier League in court last September. Well worth a read: https://archive.ph/PLO3k That’s why, for me, there’s no point in changing owners despite Top’s culpability. We’ll still have the same problems we have now and we’ll still be operating under the same insane rules. As Samuel says - Leicester City are not in any financial difficulty whatsoever. We’re owned by people with a CLEAR track record of investing their own money into the squad, into the club’s infrastructure, and into the local community. And they have a clear track record of achieving sustainable success. This is part of the statement the club put out last March, 6 months before they beat the Premier League in an independent panel: LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent success that the Club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition. As we continue to represent the Club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement. They’re standing up for the club against a hostile league that has forgotten what fair competition is. I’m furious with our failures but that statement (and our win in September) at least gives me that little bit of faith that things can be turned around. Cos this isn’t over, not by a long way.

It was more than just “sell a player a year” - we would sell one big asset every year in order to fund the growth and improvement of the squad. The rules at the time - short term cost control (STCC) - meant that a club couldn’t spend more than 7% on transfers and wages than the previous season. So despite being the actual reigning Premier League champions in 2016, we couldn’t attract better players that would have instantly improved the squad because we had to spend as if we were still a newly promoted club who’d finished 14th. STCC was between 2013-2019, which is why Newcastle were able to go and spent so wildly from 2019 onwards despite being recently promoted and struggling pretty regularly. So we had to develop the team over several seasons by player trading. Selling Drinkwater to buy Iborra, Iheanacho and Silva Selling Mahrez to fund Maddison, Evans, Soyuncu, Ricardo, Benkovic, Ghezzal and Ward Selling Slabhead to fund Justin, Tielemans, Perez and Praet Selling Chillwell to fund Castagne and Fofana Every single one of those players, except for the crossed out ones who proved to be utter disasters, added something to the squad that we were missing at the time, and were signed on wages the club felt reflected their value as part of a squad attempting to progress from mid table to challenging at the top of the table. And it succeeded. Rodgers took the squad Puel and Macia had built and within his first season, set an English football record for biggest ever away win in the top flight, reached the FA Cup quarters and the League Cup semis (and might have reached the final if the ref had spotted that handball), spent most of the season in the Top 3 before failing on the final day during COVID. The next season - FA Cup winners, and again most of the season in the Top 3 before failing and qualifying for the Europa League* on the final day of the season. Again. Then the Super League debacle happened (four years ago last Friday to be exact). The big clubs (plus Tottenham) were attempting to protect their spot at the top of the pyramid by making sure no other club could ever achieve financial stability or ever compete with them again. It would have been a complete closed shop. The Premier League bent over for them instead of actually punishing them (they still haven’t paid that £3.6m fine) and adopted far, far tighter PSR rules that meant a club’s spending had to be within a certain percentage of their income. And worse, after spending a decade ignoring Man City’s blatant crimes and at this point 3 full years investigating them, they decided to actually start implementing those rules far stronger than they had before (7 of Man City’s 130 charges are PSR rule breaks). 4 years later and that case STILL ISN’T OVER. As we’d been spending so much money in trying to reach the Champions League, within the already unfair system that had prohibited us from progressing as Champions, the new rules meant that we would drastically have to reduce spending on players transfers and wages due to the reduced income of playing in the Europa instead of the Champions League**. Players on high wages had to be shifted. By the man who had put them on the same high wages and also had a clear track record of failing to shift players from the squad. That self sustaining model that we’d built - while imperfect and involving a lot of shocking waste - was now our kryptonite, under new rules that literally punished the clubs trying to play by the pervious rules; to satisfy the clubs that didn’t. We couldn’t sign high profile/quality players and we couldn’t replace players who left (Kasper, Fofana) with like-for-like players of the same quality. Shifting players on high wages was even more impossible because nobody else could now afford the wages those players were on. TL;DR version, courtesy of TwatGPT: We had a smart, self-sustaining model—sell one key player a year to build a stronger squad. STCC rules stopped us from spending like a top club even after we won the league. Then PSR rules tightened post-Super League, hitting us just as we dropped out of the CL spots. Now the Premier League’s punishing us for following the rules that kept us competitive. *Reminder: we finished 5th in the two seasons Manchester City should have been serving their UEFA ban so would have qualified for the Champions League if CAS hadn’t overturned their ban. Literally none of this would have happened to us otherwise. **Basic participation prize money in the Europa League is roughly 80% lower than the Champions League; income from broadcasting, sponsorships and merchandising would have been much higher in the CL too.

Richard Masters

You might change your mind in 12 years time (which according to ChatGPT is the modern average)

How often do you get to see a dead Pope though? Apart from fairly regularly.

Patson Daka

START THE PETITIONNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

The new Kevin and Claudia from the Canada series!

I grew up watching ER with my mum. It was a phenomenal show for years. I’m also a massive fan of 24 (at least the first 5 seasons) so hopefully I’ll love it.

HOW DARE YOU

Completely and totally agree. Recruitment over the last 6 years - especially since Rodgers arrived with Congleton - has been mostly appalling. Even the signings that were a success for a while became a millstone around our neck because of the absurd wages. But again, that is what it took to compete at the time, and was a successful strategy under the previous rules. What’s happened in the last 3 years is a combination of two major factors. 1. Terrible recruitment in terms of players and their contracts (wages/length), both in successful times pre-COVID and awful times afterwards and 2. Appallingly written rule changes that made our previously successful strategy our biggest weakness; by a demonstrably corrupt league that not only doesn’t hold other clubs to the same standard, that STILL hasn’t punished the Super League clubs for a far, far greater crime, that has repeatedly broken their own rules while failing abjectly to prove we broke any of theirs. Everyone on here is rightly angry about the former. So am I. But it baffles me that people seem so reticent about the latter. For me it’s the biggest cause of where we are now and it’s not even close. People should be ****ing incandescent about it.

Has anyone here watched The Pitt?

You’re in for a ****ing treat.

Art of the Deal bro

“You’re not taking the horse in the lift are ye?” ”Course I am ya eejit. The stairs would ****ing kill him”

Don’t tempt me Frodo.

Apparently we can’t sack him because of PSR so would have to wait until July 1st. Presumably they’ll announce it at the Open Top Bus parade to celebrate Ward’s contract renewal.

Found some: From September: The Premier League first referred the Club to an independent Commission in March 2024 for an alleged PSR breach relating to the assessment period ending 30 June 2023. The Commission dismissed the Club’s initial challenge to its jurisdiction to hear the case, but the Club’s challenge has now been upheld by an independent Appeal Board, which reversed the Commission’s finding. The full decision has been published at . Leicester City welcomes the Appeal Board’s comprehensive decision, which supports our consistently stated position that any action against the Club should be pursued in accordance with the applicable rules. To avoid any misunderstandings which may arise in light of the statement which has been issued by the Premier League in response to the appeal decision, Leicester City wishes to emphasise the finding of the Appeal Panel that, when considering the wording which is actually used in the Premier League rules (in accordance with established principles of English law) the Club did not breach the Premier League PSRs for the assessment period ending 30 June 2023. In its decision, the Appeal Board (which was made of up a panel of three experienced, senior lawyers, two of whom are former Court of Appeal judges) identifies flaws in the drafting of the Premier League’s rules. In challenging the Premier League’s attempts to charge Leicester City, the Club has simply sought to ensure (in the interests of providing consistency and certainty for all clubs) that the rules are applied based on how they are actually written. And last March: LCFC today releases the following statement. LCFC notes the publication today of the decision of the League Arbitration Panel (LAP). As the LAP decision records, the EFL wrote to the Premier League on 20 March 2024 (the day before the PL brought its PSR complaint against LCFC), stating that the EFL would ensure that any sanction imposed by a Premier League Disciplinary Commission against LCFC would take effect while LCFC was in the Championship, whilst also noting that any points deduction sought by the Premier League would need to be applied before 4 May 2024. However, after the Club challenged the EFL’s intention to act outside of its rules, the EFL subsequently unconditionally accepted that it does not in fact have any power, from any source, to impose a points deduction in the EFL which has been ordered by a Premier League Disciplinary Commission in relation to PSR. LCFC continues to try and co-operate constructively with both the Premier League and the EFL to reach a lawful resolution of any issues relating to PSR, in accordance with our consistent commitment that any charges against the Club should be properly and proportionately determined, in accordance with the applicable rules, by the right bodies, and at the right time. And the day before: Leicester City is surprised at the actions the Premier League has taken today. The Club is extremely disappointed that the Premier League has chosen to charge LCFC now, despite the Club’s efforts to engage constructively with the Premier League in relation to the matters that are the subject of this charge, even though LCFC is not currently a Premier League club. LCFC remains willing and eager to engage constructively with the Premier League and the EFL to seek the proper resolution of any potential charges, by the right bodies, and at the right time. The Club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year. LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent success that the Club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition. As we continue to represent the Club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement. The Club thanks its supporters for their understanding in this matter and for their continued support for our team, whose success on the pitch during the final weeks of the season remains our primary focus. ——————— Expressed in a club statement in legal speak but still, they were calling out both leagues about their fairness of their competition and the implementation of the rules AND were proven right at every time.

Our revenue was down because of COVID (which happened to everyone else) and our failure to qualify for the Champions League. Before the rule change, it wouldn’t have mattered, No. Not only am I saying that the rules are unfair on EVERY non “big six” club, others are saying it too. The PREMIER LEAGUE themselves admitted their rules were poorly written. Both the Premier League and the EFL REPEATEDLY broke their own rules in pursuing us while failing pretty publicly to prove that we’d broken any of theirs. We’re talking about a league that stated in the last legal case we won against them that clubs should be held accountable as close to the season the alleged breaches occurred in as possible. The same league that took 10 years to even START investigating Manchester City, 5 years before finally bringing charges, and 2 years after that still haven’t concluded proceedings. Failures over a decade and a half that have had a direct impact on us. The same league that gives PSR advantages and allowances to Manchester United and Chelsea that aren’t privy to anyone else then try to claim with a straight face that Leicester tried to gain an unfair advantage in a season in which they were relegated. The rules are explicitly unfair and have been for decades, and no other club has been restricted in by them as much as us. No. It’s not. See above. That’s what it took to be ambitious and challenge at the top of the table at the time and which proved to be successful until the rules were tightened. I agree. Partly. Everything to do with rules that some clubs have to follow being implemented in different ways to different clubs. I have not said that. The following was in a club statement in March 2024 after we won one of the panels against the EFL. “We reaffirm the Club’s position that we will continue to fight for the right of Leicester City and all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement.” That’s pretty much my belief. PSR, they claimed, is designed to prevent irresponsible owners loading clubs with debt then leaving them. We have a clear history of sustained sporting achievement under an ownership with a proven track record of investment in the club, its infrastructure and the community. If a club not only can’t progress after fairly winning the league, an FA Cup, challenging in Europe AND building a world class training facility at the same time, because of rules “designed” to prevent clubs going under from owners that do the opposite, then there’s something wrong with those rules. I agree that he’s on an outrageous amount. I’ve said repeatedly the club have made appalling signings and wage decisions. All I’ve ever wanted is the right to fair competition. We have not had that.

I’m off down the bookies.

Completely agree. Rudkin and Whelan still being in their posts is utterly reprehensible. PSR destroyed us, they failed to deal with it and have been chasing their tails ever since. Unfortunately there is a complete lack of awareness or even reticence to this fact. Nobody cares if it’s not happening to their club, What should be happening, if there’s going to be any change in the sport, is people like @Foxes_Trust and national fan groups campaigning on and spreading awareness of the broadcasting landscape; how it is ripping off consumers by forcing them to subscribe to three separate broadcasters, making us pay three times the amount our peers abroad do for access to only 52% of the product. It’s literally what upholds the current system - and possibly breaks competition law. Remove the “my club” tribal aspect and inform people about the this absurd extortion.

There’s still 5 years of the 20s left - there’s still time for them to do it again

We’d spent money - within the rules - to reach the Champions League. When the rules changed and the financial equation shifted - at the same time as a global pandemic and our failure to reach the Champions League - our revenue plummeted, which wouldn’t have mattered under the previous rules. This whole hot mess is the perfect storm of specific and unique circumstances happening at the same time. It could ONLY happen to us.