Leicester 'could face points deduction next season'

[stu]

3 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Leeds account still not published......

Didn’t one of our charges relate to not meeting deadlines for submitting accounts?

What’s the difference between us and Leeds on that regard?

[KFS]

13 minutes ago, stu said:

Didn’t one of our charges relate to not meeting deadlines for submitting accounts?

What’s the difference between us and Leeds on that regard?

Leeds would’ve taken more

[Guest Basildon Fox]

The more I think about it, I can see why we are opting to fight any case and for Transparency for the potential charges for both Man City and Chelsea.  They will have to come out and say what the potential charges are for and the years they relate to.

 

When we finished 5th twice we were not breaching at that point. if there is a whiff that either of those 2 had massive breaches of the rules in those seasons, then quite rightly we can blame the corrupt system that led us to breach in the first place as nothing was done to prevent cheating.  This could get very messy.  I am not sure who comes out on top.

[st albans fox]

33 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

Interesting they holding off publically announcing the headline figures 

Haven’t seen that before.

if they’ve done it because of public interest then why not just scan them in with a priority - who is going to know??  They must have filed them. 

 

24 minutes ago, stu said:

Didn’t one of our charges relate to not meeting deadlines for submitting accounts?

What’s the difference between us and Leeds on that regard?

I don’t think we have a charge for late filing. In any case, this is filing with govt rather than with the league.  The league require sight of accounts way earlier than this. 
 

Leeds would have shown the efl their management accounts last oct end.  They would have shown them the full finalised accounts by March 1st. 

[Ric Flair]

4 hours ago, Vlad the Fox said:

 

I’d heard that it would cost us £50m to get rid but couldn’t quite believe it, with the rumours that he accepted a reduced compensation deal to get out and assuming the £35m is correct it was quite possibly and staggeringly true after all. 
 

 

He denied he was on as much as £10m per annum, but let's say he was. The maximum his entire contract was worth when he signed an extension back in November 2019 was £55m (5.5 years). We sacked him with just over 2 years remaining. 

 

I have said it would be staggering if a) We signed off on a contract that required him to be paid off the remainder of his contract at any given point and b) that it was in full in the year of sacking. If we did then we deserve everything that's coming to us as its outrageous and was a £50-60m liability at any given time. But that said, it would only have been around £20m on Rodgers + his staff which could be around £25m or so I suppose. Hideous if so.

[Clever Fox]

4 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

Disagree. UEFA enforced the ban, but it was overturned by CAS on the technicality that it was "time barred" because UEFA took so long. And UEFA took so long because Manchester City refused to cooperate with ANY authority on the matter. The Premier League didn't even bother investigating Manchester City until 2018 and didn't bring those charges until February 2023, in which time (extending to the end of 2023) they won the Premier League 5 times, FA Cup twice, League Cup 4 times, Community Shield twice, a Champions League, a Super Cup and a World Club Cup.

 

Trophies that Villa, Watford, Sevilla and Fluminense could have won (specifically not mentioning the other clubs they beat to those trophies as they're just as corrupt) if they had been participating in a fair competition. Even now, sixteen years after they started this industrial cheating, they're in a manufactured 3-way title race, an FA Cup semi-final and a Champions League Quarter Final, all against other equally corrupt clubs, and the people that have lost out are those whose ambitions have been killed dead by rules that were designed specifically to protect the same corrupt clubs.

 

The Premier League destroyed the sport to placate cheats.

What's needed is a Fans Class action Lawsuit against the league EFL and man city.

[Matt]

6 hours ago, Basildon Fox said:

The more I think about it, I can see why we are opting to fight any case and for Transparency for the potential charges for both Man City and Chelsea.  They will have to come out and say what the potential charges are for and the years they relate to.

 

When we finished 5th twice we were not breaching at that point. if there is a whiff that either of those 2 had massive breaches of the rules in those seasons, then quite rightly we can blame the corrupt system that led us to breach in the first place as nothing was done to prevent cheating.  This could get very messy.  I am not sure who comes out on top.

I am.

 

You've already mentioned both of them in your post.

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[Fox in the North]

 

[Vazman]

4 minutes ago, Fox in the North said:

 

Are they in breech as well then? 

[ClaphamFox]

2 hours ago, Vazman said:

Are they in breech as well then? 

Unlikely.

[moore_94]

I imagine if we do go up and our accounts look horrendous again for this season (which I expect they will) then we could get similar to what Sheff Utd have just got

 

Although Sheff Utd didn't get it for FFP/PSR etc., I expect it is something the EFL would want to do to us to make sure they "get us"

 

https://www.efl.com/news/2024/april/11/efl-statement--sheffield-united-football-club/

 

An independent Disciplinary Commission (IDC) has determined that Sheffield United Football Club are to be deducted two points at the start of the next season the Club is in the EFL’s jurisdiction, with a further two points suspended until the end of that same season.

 

The sanction relates to the 2022/23 season, when the Club defaulted on a number of payments to other Clubs. These defaults cumulatively were in excess of 550 days.

 

The suspended points deduction will be activated if the Club defaults on any payment due to another Club under a transfer or compensation agreement for more than five business days from the due date for payment.

 

The Club has agreed to pay the EFL’s costs in the sum of £310,455.

Edited 11 April 2024 by moore_94

[moore_94]

Clubs likely to be limited to spending 85% of revenue on transfers, wages, and agents fees

 

PSR and the points deductions etc. would still be in place for next season before transitioning to new rules

 

 

Edited 11 April 2024 by moore_94

[Muzzy_no7]

19 hours ago, ClaphamFox said:

Unlikely.

I actually think it’s very likely unless they sell massively before June 30th 

[StanSP]

8 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Clubs likely to be limited to spending 85% of revenue on transfers, wages, and agents fees

 

PSR and the points deductions etc. would still be in place for next season before transitioning to new rules

 

 

Is it me or does it not just skew it in favour of the big six still (considering they are more profitable clubs and already have extortionately better finances), and doesn't actually do anything to level up the playing field? 

[moore_94]

4 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Is it me or does it not just skew it in favour of the big six still (considering they are more profitable clubs and already have extortionately better finances), and doesn't actually do anything to level up the playing field? 

Yeah it will still mean the big 6 can spend a lot more than everyone else, at least double and maybe even triple that the highest of the rest can

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68713522#:~:text="The Premier League has been,broadcast and commercial%2Fsponsorship."

 

[Greg2607]

so man city's budget for wages, transfers and agent fees becomes £600m a year and for someone like West Ham, Villa, Everton etc... it's more like £170m.................. with those kind of disparities it's going to lock MOST of the premier league out of competing in Europe and therefore growing their revenues.... 

[davieG]

17 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Is it me or does it not just skew it in favour of the big six still (considering they are more profitable clubs and already have extortionately better finances), and doesn't actually do anything to level up the playing field? 

I don’t believe they have any interest in levelling up they’re only thinking of stopping clubs going bust. Even debt doesn’t seem to bother them. 

[davieG]

1 minute ago, Greg2607 said:

so man city's budget for wages, transfers and agent fees becomes £600m a year and for someone like West Ham, Villa, Everton etc... it's more like £170m.................. with those kind of disparities it's going to lock MOST of the premier league out of competing in Europe and therefore growing their revenues.... 

No real change then, you surely didn’t expect any. 
It’s all about keeping 6 richer than the rest to have a high profile in Europe which enables tv money  income. 

[purpleronnie]

I mean whats the point unless they cap the richer clubs more than the rest?  Unless the point is to make the rich clubs richer. 

[Spudulike]

10 minutes ago, davieG said:

No real change then, you surely didn’t expect any. 
It’s all about keeping 6 richer than the rest to have a high profile in Europe which enables tv money  income. 

Is the big 6 still a thing now? Shouldn't it be the big 4 as Chelsea are going to find it difficult to return in the same way the world's richest club can't muscle in with the current rules? Tottenham are positioned about the same as West Ham and Villa.

[lcfc278]

Is this basically just Fifa/Uefa's way of creating their own super league without openly admitting it. The gap between our big 6 and the top clubs in Europe is now only going to get bigger and bigger - how dare any other smaller team try and go for it and invest in their squad if they don't have a big enough ground or sell enough merchandise to generate enough revenue to do so.

[Corky]

There really is no excuse for the top sides to fail and it is exactly what the broadcasters and media want. Any top side who would finish outside the top six would fail massively.

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

Yeah it will still mean the big 6 can spend a lot more than everyone else, at least double and maybe even triple that the highest of the rest can

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68713522#:~:text="The Premier League has been,broadcast and commercial%2Fsponsorship."

 

So, you can only compete by spending money that you earn,

 

 

But the money that you earn, especially from broadcast and commercial, is significantly higher if you have more games broadcast. 

 

 

 

And the number of games broadcast is selected on purely *perceived* popularity by broadcasters, which gives those clubs the argument to sign more lucrative contracts with sponsors and merchandisers.

 

We spent most of 2019/20 & 2020/21 in the top 3, yet had fewer games broadcast than clubs who finished below us

 

This is such an unrelentingly anti-competitive system that quite literally outlaws sporting merit yet rewards ****ing Tottenham.

 

Utterly corrupt.

[kenny]

39 minutes ago, Corky said:

There really is no excuse for the top sides to fail and it is exactly what the broadcasters and media want. Any top side who would finish outside the top six would fail massively.

The rich 6 are much less dependant on their league placing than the lower clubs as the prize money is much less signifcant to their turnover. Worst comes to the worst they can sell some well hyped high value players. (See Nketiah being valued at £35m).

 

They are where they are with commercial revenues and that will stay that way.

 

They only way to grow is to sell players to raise the club turnover.