Les-TA-Jon

1 minute ago, Lesterlad said:

Why do we get the only manager in history of football where we have no new manager bounce. 

New manager bounces only happen about 50% of the time. 
 

look at Spurs and West Brom this season 

https://www.premierleague.com/en/video/4353677/leicester-city-v-liverpool-2015-16-full-match-replay 

1hr 10mins for that awesome tika-taka. Still no reverse angel replay of the non-penalty though - 2nd goal scored from same passage of play eventually. 

4 hours ago, SK3Blue said:

 

“We probably don’t really have a squad who are designed for a relegation battle”

 

There’s a lack of decisiveness in that comment alone, is he 100% saying they haven’t got the balls for the fight, or is he saying these players are too good and shouldn’t be anywhere near a relegation battle?!  
 

He’s given up that’s for sure. 

All season the players have underperformed but the occasional bit of quality from James, Fatawu or someone else got us some wins here and there. The squad's imbalances and the toxicity of the players/everything at the club meant that if we were ever dragged into a relegation battle, we wouldn't have the stomach or mentality for the fight itself. 

And the deduction put us in a relegation battle we otherwise wouldn't have been in. 

I think this is what Rowett means. 1.3 ppg before deduction / 0.75 ppg since deduction. 

12 hours ago, The whole world smiles said:

Jesus Christ I am all for Rudkin bashing but do me a favour. Smithies was at the club for 2 years played not one single game and left with over 3 million quid. 

 

What's he want a cuddle? These modern footballers don't live in the real world. I don't know about you lot but I would rather be asked how much Rather than are you ok, Any day of the week except I don't work in an industry that pays me out if I get injured and can't work.

 

Football is a cut throat, mercenary business but you are handsomely rewarded even if your shit like Alex smithies was. 

Was he really on £30,000 a week as 3rd choice keeper!? 

16 minutes ago, wurmer said:

You are spot on with the EFL rulebook formula, but you’re it's not as simple: i.e. allowance vs actual cash-in-the-bank/cashflow.

 

Yes, that is exactly how the SCMP limit is calculated. But having a high spending limit doesn't matter if our bank accounts are empty. Here is the brutal reality of how those three pillars actually look for us right now:

 

1. 75% of Turnover (The Parachute Trap) Because we get a Year 2 Parachute Payment, our "turnover" on paper looks okay. But we’ve already spent it. We took out massive commercial loans (like the ones from Macquarie Bank) to survive the Championship, and those loans are secured against our future parachute payments. So yes, the EFL might say "your turnover gives you a £30m wage allowance," but the actual cash from that parachute payment goes straight to the bank to service our debt, not to paying League One wages. You can’t pay a striker with an SCMP allowance; you need cash.

 

2. ‘Allowable’ Equity Injection You’re assuming Top can and will just pump in "whatever equity" to boost the budget. That ignores what’s happening in the real world. King Power’s duty-free empire has been battered post-pandemic, and they’ve been going through a massive restructure in Thailand. The days of Top writing £50m-£100m blank cheques to bail us out are most likely over. Even if he wanted to, the EFL recently tightened the rules (2024) on how much owner equity can actually be counted to stop financial doping.

 

3. Player Trading Income (The Fire Sale) You are right that selling players boosts our allowance. But to get that "player sale profit," we have to absolutely gut the squad. We will have to fire-sale Hermansen, Fatawu, Ndidi, and anyone else with a pulse just to legally balance the books.

 

TLDR: The SCMP formula doesn't save us. It just outlines the exact mathematical parameters of the fire sale we are about to endure. The EFL gives us a credit limit, but Macquarie Bank has already taken the credit card.

I didn't assume that. I said "Whatever equity income we have" Whatever can include zero. 

And yes - EFL did change it - that's the 60% of equity injection I mention. 

I don't think SCMP save us at all - I said "how well we do that who knows"

All I was ever saying was SCMP isn't just "75% of turnover" 

6 minutes ago, wurmer said:

There is no chance we will meet that.

That's not the limit. 

The rule is 'player costs' can't exceed the total of:

• Player trading income
• ‘Allowable’ Equity injection income
• 75% of turnover

So we've got 75% of turnover + 60% of whatever equity injection + player sale profit to play with. 

Obviously, how well we do that who knows, but its not as simple as the 75% of turnover rule. 

3 minutes ago, Qwerty said:

My understanding of finance in League 1 is that only 60% of revenue can be spent on wages, players etc, but that  "revenue" doesn't necessarily have to be generated by the club.  It can be put into the club by the owner, which is how then likes of Wrexham have done so well recently.  So essentially, a club can generate very little income on ticket sales etc, but if it has a rich owner, it can spend plenty of money.

As you say, it'll all depend on how much Top is prepared to put in himself.

From his point of view, it's a gamble.  Does he put money in, in the hope of having a decent season and getting promoted, but risking losing his money if we do badly.  Or does he not put money in, but then risk administration/bankruptcy, and risk walking away with nothing.  Or does he try and sell straight away....

2 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

For those talking about League One spending rules...

 

But also note that Leicester would be under PSR upon promotion - so the club effectively have to work to both sets of rules simultaneously, for when/if we get promoted back to Championship. 

My breakdown of League 1 spending rules here - it's 75% for the first year, for newly relegated clubs. Equity injection income is counted, but only 'allowable' levels - You can use 100% of the first £500,000; 75% of the next £250,000; 60% of the next £250,000 and 60% of anything else

So for example, Top wants to inject £10,000,000 into the club, we can only count £6,237,500 of it as allowable income.

2 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

Entertaining hypotheticals you'd have to include Blackburn and Portsmouth because we play both. As much as they require fewer points both games represent an opportunity for a swing in our favour.

 

We won't take the opportunity of course, but if you're looking at hypothetical scenarios I wouldn't discount either.

I think my point is that they can achieve the 6 point swing they need, in any 'matchweek' or in the game versus us. Which is what makes it so likely they both finish above us. 

6 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

I *think* the last time we won 3 games in a row was April 20th -> April 29th 2024 for that final push to win the championship.

 

We've done 2 games i think twice since.

 

This lot dont know how to win games.

5 occasions we won 3 in a row (or more) in 23/24 under Maresca. None since. 

One instance of back to back wins in 24/25 under Cooper. Two instances this season under Cifuentes. 

17 wins total out of last 80 league matches...

18 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Yeah this was my thinking as well.

 

If Oxford and West Brom are in the discussion then there's no reason Blackburn shouldn't be.

 

And as you rightly say, realistically, nobody else is in the discussion

 

Unless.... 

It's because Portsmouth and Blackburn have 2-4 points more than Oxford and West Brom and they play us. Portsmouth and Blackburn only need a 6 point swing vs Leicester to finish above us. 

If Leicester somehow stay up, it'll very likely only be because we've finished above West Brom and Oxford. 

8 hours ago, Dan said:

I do agree with you. Think as early as the 2nd game though I did think there was an outside bet of it because it was clear, already, that the manager had placated the same players who needed gutting from the team. The performances in the first half of the season were mostly rubbish.

 

Even despite everything there is no way they should be going down. That's three seasons out of four that you can rank at 1/10 without even exaggerating. The level of consistently staggering underperformance is nothing I've ever witnessed before.

I think 2023 and 2026 are quite a bit worse than 2025 - even accounting for that terrible, goalless losing run under RVN. 

Competing in the PL is hard. It's not in the Championship. Not if you're sensible. Never mind the money/wages we've thrown around. 

The worse thing about 2025 was that it should have been a year of banking PL money and building for the future; instead we did a halfway house - an expensive, piss poor attempt at staying up which was never likely to work and also lumbered us with the next tranche of dross players, further hamstringing us in the Championship...

5 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

Few people have said it so I'm obviously missing something obvious but why are Blackburn being discounted. I mean, they would need to lose their 2 next games and if we won 2 of our next 3 we would be 1 point behind them going into the final day? If we miraculously won all 3 we'd be ahead of them...(if they lose their games, but I don't think it's impossible) 

 

Lot's of ifs and buts I know  

1 minute ago, AKCJ said:

If we did, we'd be on 53 points.

 

Oxford's remaining fixtures are Derby (A), Wrexham (H), Sheff W (H) and Milwall (A). They'd need 9 points to get to 53. I'd say that's unlikely.

 

WBA's remaining fixtures are PNE (A), Watford (H), Ipswich (H) and Sheff W (A). They'd need 7 points to get to 53. I'd say that's somewhat unlikely.

 

Blackburn's remaining fixtures are Coventry (H), Sheff U (A) and Leicester (H). They need 5 points to get to 53. I'd say that's very unlikely.

 

Portsmouth's remaining fixtures are Leicester (H), Coventry (A), Stoke (A) and Birmingham (H). They need 5 points to get to 53. I'd say it's quite unlikely.

 

Charlton's remaining fixtures are Sheff W (A), Ipswich (H), Hull (H) and Swansea (A). They need 4 points to get to 53. I'd say that's extremely likely.

 

Yes it is possible we get relegated on 53 points but we'd be very unlucky.

This is exactly what this is for

We're down!

3 minutes ago, RowlattsFox said:

Few people have said it so I'm obviously missing something obvious but why are Blackburn being discounted. I mean, they would need to lose their 2 next games and if we won 2 of our next 3 we would be 1 point behind them going into the final day? If we miraculously won all 3 we'd be ahead of them...(if they lose their games, but I don't think it's impossible) 

 

Lot's of ifs and buts I know  

Blackburn and Portsmouth are only a 6 point swing away from being guaranteed to finish above us. They means if they win a single game, we cannot lose a single game - otherwise they finish above us. And they both play us so they can potentially get their 6 point swing in the fixture against us too. 

If Blackburn win a single game, and we draw a single game - that's a 5 point swing - and we could only finish above them with maximum points for us, 0 points for them and on goal difference...

10 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

Blackburn are irrelevant.

 

We're now in a straight points race with Oxford and West Brom.

 

We need to get 3 more points than Oxford and 5 more points than West Brom with 12 to play for.  West Brom are unbeaten in their last 6 and Oxford have only lost once in that time, winning two. Oh and both have got Wednesday left.

 

We probably, realistically, need to win all four games to stay up.

 

Essentially, Ipswich just relegated us.

 

Yep. Basically impossible for us to stay up now - and if we do, it'll only be because we somehow finish above West Brom and Oxford 

Looking at the Points Swing situation, Blackburn and Portsmouth are almost guaranteed to finish above us, since they need only a 6 point swing. I.e they finish above us if we lose a single game and they win a single game. 

2 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

I know Rodgers is hated but stop putting our FA Cup win down to "luck". Again, we're probably the only fanbase that does this. We all wanted to win the FA Cup and we did it, regardless of how it's won. If it was so easy to win it then any of our previous great managers would have won it.

 

Nobody puts Man City down to "luck" after beating third and fourth division clubs every season to win it.

Somewhat lucky - i.e there was some element of luck to the win. I'm not belittling the win at all. It was fully deserved, a great moment for us and great to finally win it. A worldie goal from Youri worthy of winning any cup. My Dad and Uncle who have been going since the 1960s had seen all the lost finals, the FA cup is a big deal for their generation and sharing that victory with them along with other family - not long after lockdown - is a cherished memory. 

There was an element of luck to the run and the final win - is all I'm saying. 

48 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

It just concerns me that people seem to think everything was absolutely perfect before Aiyawatt when there is evidence to the contrary.

 

It also gets forgotten that we were a bit of a disaster following the title win. Relegation battles the season after, getting rid of Ranieri and Shakey. Puel was unliked. There was 14 seconds late gate in there as well. There were rumblings of discontent with the direction at that point. 
 

If anything, it feels like history was rewritten following the awful events of October 2018. Anything that was beginning to become a concern disappeared and any criticism was no longer allowed….

In general, KP have always been an inconsistent mess - that's been occasionally counter-acted by various managerial appointments

• Pearson - reset culture, squad, sports science, promotion and great escape
• Ranieri - accidentally appointed the man for a perfect storm of positivity
• Puel - rebuild squad for Rodgers
• Rodgers - top manager who could get some good finishes and (somewhat) lucked his way to the FA cup before he could dismantle everything
• Maresca - club's mentality was in the toilet, accidentally found someone with strength of character and philosophy to (temporarily) overturn it  

47 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

I forgot about that one!

 

There was a lot of debate about which way round it was. I feel given current events, you’d believe it to be the way round you have said. 
 

It does further show that getting promoted was not something KP should be given all this credit for as if that sacking is not reversed, promotion doesn’t happen.

 

It just concerns me that people seem to think everything was absolutely perfect before Aiyawatt when there is evidence to the contrary.

 

It also gets forgotten that we were a bit of a disaster following the title win. Relegation battles the season after, getting rid of Ranieri and Shakey. Puel was unliked. There was 14 seconds late gate in there as well. There were rumblings of discontent with the direction at that point. 
 

If anything, it feels like history was rewritten following the awful events of October 2018. Anything that was beginning to become a concern disappeared and any criticism was no longer allowed….

The non-sacking happened in the great escape season.

For those talking about League One spending rules...

But also note that Leicester would be under PSR upon promotion - so the club effectively have to work to both sets of rules simultaneously, for when/if we get promoted back to Championship. 

9 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

I want them to go down but I don’t want it to happen on Saturday. Has to be a home game to see if the retards in the fanbase clap them. 

We can’t get relegated before Hull (H) on Tuesday 21st

Just now, Pliskin said:

@mr k  League one has SCMP…

 

Clubs can only spend a percentage of their turnover on player costs In League One, that limit is 60% of total……

 

Wages are exactly the reason we’re in the shit, so, no, we can’t spent what we want, and we won’t because our wage bill will probably be more than the 60%. Even with players leaving. 

 

75% for first year, for sides relegated from Championship 

15 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Preseason I was one of them. 

 

Even at the time we got the points deduction I thought we'd finish like 10th or something at worst. 

 

People can be smug all they want about predicting we'd get relegated this year but I'm sorry the collapse in the second half of the season has been extremely out of the ordinary and frankly disgusting for the level of players we have. As much as we've grown to loathe them and expect nothing from them, the 11 we put out on paper every week shouldn't be 23rd in this league. 

 

We were on for a massively poor mid-table/bottom half finish. Problem was the points deduction put us into a relegation battle, which in turn upped the pressure on each game and the players/their contractual situation have no stomach for such a fight. 

22 minutes ago, Stavros81 said:

The way this season has gone I’m fully expecting a 90th minute winner again from Pompey. Then the misery will be almost over.

You've got to wait until Tues 21st at the earliest for official relegation

24 minutes ago, Joe90 said:

It will be this season 

5 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

"If found guilty, West Brom face a points deduction which, according to the EFL's sanctioning guidelines, would be applied this season and potentially mean they drop into the relegation zone."

They can say that, sure - but how will all of the following be achieved in the next 18 days? 

• EFL establish an independent commission
• IC hears arguments and submissions from all parties
• IC deliberates and comes to final recommendation
• Parties have window to form an appeal
• IC hears arguments and submissions of appeal
• IC deliberates on appeal and makes final decision

Note that Leicester were charged by the PL/EFL 20th May 2025 and got the final decision 5th Feb 2026 (261 days later) and then appealed, which added another 62 days to the overall process

10 minutes ago, slymunn said:

Once he's signed a professional contact, then you can.

Right and he can only do that in 15 months time