goose2010 Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 47 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said: Naming rights to the stadium, but it's KPFC so we can't do that. We get that you dont like King Power but mate its getting pretty boring now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 3 minutes ago, goose2010 said: We get that you dont like King Power but mate its getting pretty boring now. Pop me on ignore then 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gw_leics772 Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 16 hours ago, Lambert09 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jattdogg Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March (edited) Lets face it, we have no effing clue what this really means for us and just have to see how it all unfolds. Just focus on trying to get promoted and deal with it if and when any sanctions come. Its out of our control (club, do your job). Edited 7 March by Jattdogg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 2 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. They wonder how so many clubs get around the rules with litigation when this is the state of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosbehFox Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March If you want an example of how dim they are at the top..... it's going to be a tight fit financially on the 23/24 accounts - why have we committed ourselves upon promotion to spending £16-18 million on two players with obligation clauses? One of which isn't very good. That's absolute madness by whoever executed that deal considering players will need to be sold. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpleronnie Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March Might be a good idea to ease up the mocking of everton and notts forest for their possible deductions. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosbehFox Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 3 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. Exactly Forest's problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March Just now, purpleronnie said: Might be a good idea to ease up the mocking of everton and notts forest for their possible deductions. Its an interesting one, we're set to breach the EFL mitigated losses of £83m, a situation we're in because of their breaking of rules. Then if we go up having broken rules, one or two of Leeds/Ipswich/soton will miss out on promotion etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
An Away Move Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 2 minutes ago, purpleronnie said: Might be a good idea to ease up the mocking of everton and notts forest for their possible deductions. Not if we can comply. Why is everyone assuming we haven’t. We’re just on course to not comply. Sell players, which I assume is in the plan, and we avoid falling foul. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkonline Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 10 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. I thought it would be breach 2 years PL + 1 year equivalent EFL pro rata? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkonline Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 8 minutes ago, purpleronnie said: Might be a good idea to ease up the mocking of everton and notts forest for their possible deductions. I don't think there's been much of that - think most fans are pretty sympathetic to their issues - because it can happen to anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March Who fancies going to The Winchester...? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthStandUpperTier Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 5 minutes ago, CosbehFox said: If you want an example of how dim they are at the top..... it's going to be a tight fit financially on the 23/24 accounts - why have we committed ourselves upon promotion to spending £16-18 million on two players with obligation clauses? One of which isn't very good. That's absolute madness by whoever executed that deal considering players will need to be sold. Yunus' obligation is also dependent on a certain number of appearances, is it not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moore_94 Posted 7 March Author Share Posted 7 March 1 minute ago, SouthStandUpperTier said: Yunus' obligation is also dependent on a certain number of appearances, is it not? Both are 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 6 minutes ago, pkonline said: I thought it would be breach 2 years PL + 1 year equivalent EFL pro rata? This is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox 4 Life Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March The irony of us "trying to sue" Everton, makes Rudkin look even more ridiculous. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 14 minutes ago, CosbehFox said: If you want an example of how dim they are at the top..... it's going to be a tight fit financially on the 23/24 accounts - why have we committed ourselves upon promotion to spending £16-18 million on two players with obligation clauses? One of which isn't very good. That's absolute madness by whoever executed that deal considering players will need to be sold. Wait - you’re criticising two deferred deals for players that have significantly contributed to the teams efforts this season? The clauses are triggered based on appearances and promotion, with the fees coming out of the following PS&R period. I’d say that’s more astute than madness. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chocolate Teapot Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 3 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Wait - you’re criticising two deferred deals for players that have significantly contributed to the teams efforts this season? The clauses are triggered based on appearances and promotion, with the fees coming out of the following PS&R period. I’d say that’s more astute than madness. Yunus significantly contributed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 26 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. That is pro-rata. £35 million for the two Premier League seasons, £15 for this year’s Championship season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March Just now, Chocolate Teapot said: Yunus significantly contributed? Who would have played in midfield if he wasn’t available and playing recently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankMarvin Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 30 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. It’s not, it’s 35m 35m prem and 13 for the championship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chocolate Teapot Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 1 minute ago, DJ Barry Hammond said: Who would have played in midfield if he wasn’t available and playing recently. He's playing because there's no one else available, I just don't think he's significantly contributed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iancognito Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 34 minutes ago, gw_leics772 said: From percys article. what a crock of shit. How can you be punished for 3 years cumulative losses in chapionship when 2 of 3 were in prem with different rules. Should have to wait 3 years, or at least pro rata it for 1 year. This is what Everton argued and was part of the reason they got pts back. The new rules will still take another couple of points off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K789 Posted 7 March Share Posted 7 March 2 minutes ago, Chocolate Teapot said: He's playing because there's no one else available, I just don't think he's significantly contributed. Yunus I get, cannon seems like madness tho when we knew daka wasn't going Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts