ClaphamFox

I think you're right. The way it's phrased leaves open the possibility that the club blocked the move because it wanted a certain fee, but like you I get the sense it was Ward refusing a pay cut

Posting here as the Danny Ward thread is locked. Apparently he didn't leave us because of 'politics'... https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/manager-blames-politics-leicester-city-9172092

I am aware of the rules 😂 However that will teach me to rely on Radio 5Live as a source - they were insistent it was all about double jeopardy whereas in fact it sounds like Doyle’s foul would have been a red irrespective…

Because the ref initially thought it was in the box and gave a penalty, which meant it wasn’t a red card because of the double jeopardy rule. Once it was corrected to a free kick, the double jeopardy rule no longer applied so it was a red.

Controversial.

This thought occurred to me too. I wonder....

It's not clear, but the way it was phrased above made me think the question from the journalist was, "Will the international break change your approach to rotating for the FA Cup?" and Maresca replied, "No, I don't think so" - meaning that he doesn't intend to rotate less. But the phrasing is ambiguous, so it could mean anything really...

So presumably a heavily-rotated team as in previous rounds...?

Getting injured in the line of fire in a league game is an acceptable risk. The FA Cup, not so much.

He would also have to want the move. Maresca said that when the Brighton rumours were circulating in January, KDH went to him and said he didn't want to leave. We won't be able to flog him at all if no offer comes in that he fancies.

Quite possibly, yes. However, having seen the Everton ruling I'm more convinced that I was that our relegation will be a significant consideration if/when they determine the sanction - even if it doesn't get us off the hook entirely.

Double post.

I just saw this for the first time. It's the full text of the ruling of the panel that reduced Everton's deduction from ten to six points. What's interesting about it is that it places great emphasis on sporting advantage - ie, the extent to which Everton benefited from breaching the PSR limit over the period. It seems to be a major factor in the way they determine the appropriate punishment. If our case is judged in the same way, the fact that we got relegated might actually save us from a points deduction for the 2020-2023 period. Obviously if we get promoted this season having breached, it will be a different matter altogether. https://resources.premierleague.com/premierleague/document/2024/02/26/b1c920ab-c053-4414-913a-c529efd27d18/Everton-FC-and-Premier-League-appeal-decision-260224.pdf

It seems that Forest fans are anticipating a judgment in their case tomorrow. That might give us another small clue as to how things may pan out for us.

Would you care to provide any evidence that Dr Bell is on the far right? Or is that merely a tautological assumption based upon your view that anybody who raises questions about this stuff must be on the far right? Dr Kaltiala is a professor of adolescent psychiatry with extensive experience of working with young people presenting with gender dysphoria. Is it not possible that her opposition to puberty blockers is based on her lengthy experience of them? And what about Hannah Barnes's book on the Tavistock, which was based on extensive interviews with former clinicians who worked there and patients who were treated there? Have you read it? It's deeply disturbing. Here is an excerpt from the Guardian's review of the book, which I think is particularly prescient in the current discussion: "Such a book cannot easily be dismissed. To do so, a person would not only have to be wilfully ignorant, they would also – to use the popular language of the day – need to be appallingly unkind. This is the story of the hurt caused to potentially hundreds of children since 2011, and perhaps before that. To shrug in the face of that story – to refuse to listen to the young transgender people whose treatment caused, among other things, severe depression, sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis and stunted growth, and whose many other problems were simply ignored – requires a callousness that would be far beyond my imagination were it not for the fact that, thanks to social media, I already know such stony-heartedness to be out there." It must be fun to be able to respond to anything which contradicts your worldview by closing your eyes, sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "La la la la...right wing conspiracy...la la la". Indeed, to be fair, this tactic has proven to be highly effective over the past decade. I sense, however, that this strange period in which activists have succeeding in shutting down debate on important issues by screaming 'right-wing bigot' at those with different views is coming to a close. If you want to continue advocating for puberty blockers etc while medical services around the world pull back from prescribing them, you're going to have to become a lot better at arguing your case.

You have a habit of dismissing anybody who does not share your views on this issue as being on the far right. This is, of course, a well-worn cliché beloved by certain trans rights activists, particularly those based in the US. The problem is, it's a complete lie. There are many people across the political spectrum who have no problem with others presenting as the opposite sex if they wish, but have concerns about the idea that a human being can become the opposite sex simply by wishing it so. This is not an unreasonable position because no human being has ever become a member of the opposite sex. The argument that a person may have a 'gender' that is different to their sex depends is highly subjective and depends on whether you believe in gender or not. There are many people who regard it as nothing more than a quasi-theological concept with no more weight than any other theological belief. Whistleblowers working in gender identity settings have been raising serious concerns for years about the rush to medically transition children. Countries that have previously prescribed puberty blockers to children (including France, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands) have since started to pull back from prescribing them as they're seeing the outcomes. Are they all part of a right-wing conspiracy or is it just possible that their concerns are valid and borne of experience? It's not surprising that the US is still far behind on this issue as it remains in the grip of a toxic mix of extreme activism and pharmaceutical capitalism. Healthy girls in their early teens have had double mastectomies in the US - that tells you everything you need to know about how insane that country is. Dr Hilary Cass's report into the Tavistock Clinic stated that puberty blockers could “permanently disrupt” brain development, reduce bone density and lock children into a regime of cross-sex hormones requiring life-long patienthood. She noted that clinicians at the Tavistock were under enormous pressure to 'affirm' a child's new gender identity even if there were clearly other issues that needed exploring, including autism, mental health problems, trauma from abuse, etc. And we know that Cass's report was true in this regard because Dr David Bell, who worked at the Tavistock for more than 20 years, has confirmed it. According to Bell, the large majority of young people who presented at the clinic would desist within a few years if left to their own devices. Here is an interview he gave to Channel Four a few years ago where he goes into more detail about the absolutely horrific treatment that children received at the Tavistock: https://www.channel4.com/news/children-have-been-very-seriously-damaged-by-nhs-gender-clinic-says-former-tavistock-staff-governor Are Cass and Bell just far right extremists with an axe to grind, too?

I can’t see a situation in which the big English clubs are allowed to compete in a European closed shop competition while also being permitted to continue participating in the domestic league system. They will therefore have to choose between them, and they won’t choose to give up domestic football because their fans would not stand for it. It is common to hear people say that the European Super League is ‘inevitable’, but it really isn’t. In fact, I’d say it’s extremely unlikely as long as the UK government sticks to its policy that participation in a European closed shop is incompatible with continued membership of the domestic league.

Walking his dog on Sandbanks Beach.

True, but he also made it clear that we're still in uncharted water with all of this and nobody really knows what's going to happen. He also said that Leicester's case is not 'vanilla' because we got relegated. The PL might indeed want to make an example of us, but it isn't up to them. If we breach our case will be decided on by an independent three-person panel of judges/lawyers. The PL can make its submissions and we can make ours. The PL does not decide the outcome.

If/when it becomes clear that we breached in the period ending June 2023, presumably our defence will be twofold: 1) That we didn't gain a sporting advantage because we were relegated at the end of the period, unlike Everton and Forest, who survived; and 2) That we made more of an effort in 2022/23 to comply by significantly restricting our transfer spending while Everton and Forest spent more than us. Therefore it could be argued that we effectively relegated ourselves by imposing strict spending limits on ourselves in the summer of 2022 while our rivals were splashing the cash. Receiving the same punishment as Everton under those circumstances may strike some as perverse - what's the point of trying to comply if your actions lead to relegation and you then get clobbered with the same punishment as a club that survived anyway? When Rob Tanner was on the podcast the other week, he said the club is 'quietly confident' that we have a strong case to make. I'm less optimistic, but we shall see...

🍿

Local news website sent strong message by furious online forum member.

"BURN the Leicester witches! Satan told them not to submit a business plan and lo, they obeyed him!"

Just listened to the BSLB podcast on my commute. I enjoyed hearing Stefan Borson discuss the situation regarding our finances, although a lot of it wasn't exactly good news. My main takeaway from what he said was that nobody, including the key people involved, really has a clue about how this is going to pan out. The rules aren't crystal clear and are therefore subject to a great deal of interpretation. As I see it, this lack of clarity has two main implications: 1) If we breach for 2023/24, EFL has the scope to really go after us if it wants, which it seems that it does; and 2) If the EFL DOES decide to make an example of us, we will have scope to legally them if we feel they've acted unfairly. As Borson put it, if we breach this year, our case won't be a 'vanilla' one. I can see it dragging out for months or even years in the courts. If - as seems likely - we're in breach for the period ending June 2023, we'll likely have to just suck up the points deduction. I found it tantalizing that Borson said that he could make a 'good guess' at how much we've breached for that period but didn't reveal what it was. I do hope it's no worse than Everton's. I strongly agreed with what one of the regulars (Jordan?) was saying about the EFL's decision to go public about our refusal to submit to a business plan even though the panel found in our favour. They did not have to do that, and their decision to do so has severely damaged our negotiating position if we have to sell any players before June 30, which of course will make it harder for us to stay within the rules. It's hard to interpret their motives as anything other than pure vindictiveness because they're angry that we dared to challenge them on the business plan issue. They basically had a strop and decided to inflict as much damage on us as they possibly could, which gives us an indication of how they'll behave towards us if we fail to get promoted and find ourselves in breach for the period ending this June.

Mazel tov, my friend. I’m in awe.