HankMarvin

It’s only taken the club to be on its arse, a possible embargo and a points deduction

just from your article the 3 bottom teams on the list, equates to more than 15m for example Swansea 5m West Brom 7.8m Wrexham 4.1m https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/championship/transfers/wettbewerb/GB2 On transfer market in euros Arrivals: 207 Transfer expenses: €131,946,000 Expenditures per club: €5,497,750 Expenditures per player: €637,420

Most of his game time has been in the Prem, where he was encouraged to punt it long. What was Mads stats last season? Edit just seen not a huge difference 56%pass 27% long ball

more like 120m

Last time we were in the championship Mads had the second lowest percentage of launched passes. Depends how the manager decides to play I guess

Great for a club with an endless pot of money, not such a great negotiating chip for a club with a lack of funds. If you are telling the selling club, you’re in the market for 5 more players it doesn’t exactly allow for much manoeuvrability with negotiation

I don’t think anyone can say he didn’t have a purple patch but he also had a shit patch and when you break down the numbers in 10 of the 15 games he started in, he failed to score. He is very fortunate if he ends up leading the line this year, due to our financial situation. If he does have to play and there is no alternative, I hope he scores and does well. But it won’t paper over the cracks that he has been a terrible signing for the money and wages he has earned. It’s his fourth season, and now with no Vardy in front on him, and under his 6th different manager there can be no excuses if he fails to deliver in the league below what he was signed for.

Trafford to Man City for 27m Burnley will need a new keeper and Newcastle on the look out

He started 15 games and scored 4 goals from open play, plus 3 penalties, for a team that spent most of the season at the top of the table. Breaking it down further, across those 15 matches, in which he averaged over 71 minutes per game — he scored from open play in just 4 games. This was in a league winning team averaging 2 goals per game. The stats, all things considered, were far from “impressive”. A goal return in 33% of the matches he started and 26.7% from open play.

Butland took to Instagram (23 July) to share his happiness with the result, writing: “It’s good to be back home.” Rangers-linked defender Coady liked the post, along with Vaclav Cerny, who starred last season on loan with the Gers.

Slimani and Silva have some good highlight reels, prior to moving here

Last time we spent £40m we brought in over double. Plus 2 of those sales were significantly pure profit. Plus PSR is reduced for the season.

“There are transfer priorities, though they will not be easy to realise, with Leicester targeting a striker, a left-sided midfielder and a No6, as well as a goalkeeper if Mads Hermansen departs”

I don’t think anyone compares him to Vardy again an excuse that rolled out just like how know one said it about Nacho, even Ayew has come in last year and got more goals from playing out wide. Kasey Mcateer had similar numbers playing out wide in the Championship in less minutes. Lots of excuses season after season. Vardy has left now, as that was one rolled out regularly saying that playing second fiddle to a legend must be hard. I’d rather see Evan’s used and grow in experience and technical ability than a bloke with the biggest blooper reel the club has ever produced.

For a start I was responding to someone that said it’s worse now. The point which you seem to be choosing to ignore, is just like if attention was brought to the situation above. it could’ve drastically changed what followed, we went on to get promoted won the league etc etc and the ironic thing is in the years that followed, our fans and general fans of football thought we had the best owners ownership model in football despite what went on in the past. Does success matter more than ethics? These reports were dismissed by many at the time. It’s not just a logo on a shirt. It’s Sleeve sponsors LED boards pitchside Stadium naming rights App partnerships Pop-up odds during broadcasts Official betting partners” offering match previews Ads before, during, and after every game Removing gambling from the front of the shirt is just symbolic it won’t change the business model. It’s like removing cigarette machines from pubs in the 90s, while leaving tobacco leaflets on every table. Last season, over 50% of Premier League clubs had some form of gambling sponsorship on the front of their shirts. This isn’t a side gig anymore — it’s embedded and provides inflated sponsorship deals. As I said given the choice of facing PSR issues or having zero funds, MY personal preference is that I don’t care what’s on the shirts. If you feel like that’s trampling over your thread, maybe set up a WhatsApp group and don’t have an open debate in a public forum.

Don’t know but this one was also newly formed 🤔 “Trestellar, the company which produced this immediate increase in sponsorship and commercial income – vast for a Championship club – was a newly formed company. It was set up on a Sheffield trading estate by the son and daughter of Sir Dave Richards, a former Premier League chairman. Richards had close links to Leicester’s Thai owners (his Thai football contacts also include having become acquainted with the country’s ousted prime minister, Thaksin Shinawatra”

Depends how hard you look I guess, It was pretty murky then and none of it was in the public domain prior to this investigation The investigation centres on a deal Leicester say they did in January 2014 with a company called Trestellar Ltd, to market the club in the UK and south-east Asia. That deal immediately produced an apparent £11m increase in Leicester’s sponsorship and commercial income, reducing the club’s loss from £34m the previous year. In the club’s most recent accounts, for 2014-15, Leicester say Trestellar sold the club’s main sponsorships – the name on the players’ shirts and the stadium – to King Power, the club’s owners. The Thai owners were already sponsoring the shirt and stadium before the Trestellar deal; in 2012-13 Leicester’s sponsorship and other commercial income was £5.2m. After the Trestellar deal, with King Power still holding the same main sponsorships, the income immediately jumped to £16m. That substantially reduced Leicester’s loss, which was otherwise likely to have resulted in a large fine under the Football League’s then new financial fair play rules by which all clubs agreed to cap losses at £8m to try to reduce excessive spending on players’ wages. Losses under FFP rules are not reduced by a club owner paying money to the club, or by doing so via sponsorship, if the amount paid is clearly inflated beyond market value. Leicester still say Trestellar paid the club for the rights to market their brand, then sold the sponsorships to the owners. The resulting smaller loss – £21m in 2013-14, including expenses clubs are allowed to offset – meant Leicester argue they complied with FFP rules and no sanction should be applied. Some other clubs are furious, arguing they reduced spending on players to comply with the rules while Leicester overspent on players’ wages, achieved promotion and have since resisted any sanctions. Leicester’s 2013-14 accounts state they spent £36m on players’ wages, £5m more than the club’s entire income

Touchy subject clearly

But even when it’s moved off the front it’s still going to be on clubs sleeves, do those offended turn the telly off when betting adverts are on during watching sporting events because it triggers them? Or choose to ignore it

Not benefiting from it is subjective, we had the joint 9th highest shirt sponsorship deal in the Prem last year. Not capitalising on it, is more fitting because how poorly the club is ran.

With a name like gamble you should be a fan or maybe that’s the issue? No you missed the point, the knock of effect of not taking the most money they can get would results in potentially no transfers or further PSR issues, so shutting one door to stop outcry opens the next. I’d rather see less chance of those two things happening, over worrying about a shirt sponsor “gambling firms are currently propping up the Premier League sponsorship market, with The Sponsor’s fair market value today significantly inflated by fees from betting brands”

I personally couldn’t give a shit about the sponsors, fans will be in uproar about the next thing if not this. no transfers, failing PSR. It just moves on to the next thing. Clearly it’s a club in free fall, with failing after failing. How do you know it’s not worth the extra? You don’t know what they have paid in the Championship, this is a club that couldn’t sack the manager till the next financial year and are rumoured to have baulked on a release figure for Rohl. In an ideal world we wouldn’t have to go this route, but it’s not like we don’t have form. As I previously said nobody questioned the ethics back in 2013/14 when we were getting promoted due to dodgy sponsorship deals. it all faded into the background with the success that followed.

Well that’s a load of bollocks when there were 9 teams on less deals last season in the prem

Or maybe they are doing all they can to avoid failing PSR or allow market manoeuvrability in the championship on top of what might be a points deduction

Helping the club is helping themselves they are the owners. They don’t want to have spent all this time to see their investment go to shit. So will leverage what ever they can from these deals, much like they were doing under Vichai