Leicester at risk of another Premier League PSR charge over latest accounts

[daddylonglegs]

The gaslighting continues from the incompetent suits running the club. 

 

'Annoyed about sacking Cooper'. 'Penalised for showing ambition'. **** off the lot of you. Won't someone at this club show some sodding accountability. 

[Babylon]

Just now, Number 6 said:

It is quite ridiculous for them to keep peddling this given the wage structure we had.

But that would be one of the points, we ran a high wage to turnover plan. With a player being sold to cover that, it worked ok for us for a while. The new rules that came in for Europe and then knowing the league would follow, meant we had to start slashing costs. That lead to the barron summer of no signings, that you could say then impacted us masively in terms of relegation. It all had a knock on effect. 

 

The problem was buying shit players, not particularly our wage structure. If we'd bought good players, then no issue. The rule changes and poor signings made the wage structure an issue. 

[RizLCFC]

If it does end up becoming a legal battle, does that mean the charges/point deduction can’t be applied until the matter is resolved?

Edited 9 January by RizLCFC

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said:

'Annoyed about sacking Cooper'. '

From all the stuff that was said at the time about Top reading the riot act. I would summise that it's aimed at the players failing the manager a bit, we don't know what goes on behind closed doors, but it's not impossible that the players were whining and downing tools for him. So Top's annoyance stems from that a bit, seeing as he had a pop at them. Obviously, don't appoint a shit manager in the first place... but players still need to be professional. Who knows. 

[UniFox21]

4 minutes ago, daddylonglegs said:

The gaslighting continues from the incompetent suits running the club. 

 

'Annoyed about sacking Cooper'. 'Penalised for showing ambition'. **** off the lot of you. Won't someone at this club show some sodding accountability. 

We continue to show ambition to be one of the worse ran clubs in the country 

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 minute ago, Babylon said:

No, we'd made enough of our own poor decisions. But all the rules changes have made it impossible for us to perform in the way that had served us well in the past. The changes negatively impacted our way of working more than it did others. 

 

Not forgetting we've actually won cases against the different leagues for trying to punish us with sanctions etc,  when it was outside of their remits to do so. So, from that persepctive we are correct.

 

We were not correct. A highly paid excellent legal mind found an issue with the drafting. Operating how we were (currently are) in no way was based on understanding the rules. That was an afterthought based on advice. It was hope which paid off.

 

The rules have only impacted us more and made it impossible for us to operate because we were paying extortionate wages on assets which were significantly below such value. That is why we have found it so difficult to adhere to the rules. A practice which we continue with to this day. In a couple of years, it will be the Ayew, Veste, Skipp etc. contracts that have a negative impact. We are then unable to dispose of those overly paid assets and in turn unable to acheive the revenue our initial investment desired. 

 

The club, its ownership and the senior executives have let themselves down and continue to do so. 

[Babylon]

2 minutes ago, RizLCFC said:

If it does end up becoming a legal battle, does that mean the charges/point deduction can’t be applied until the matter is resolved?

They would take points off I imagine, and we'd fight to get them put back on. 

[daddylonglegs]

Just now, Babylon said:

From all the stuff that was said at the time about Top reading the riot act. I would summise that it's aimed at the players failing the manager a bit, we don't know what goes on behind closed doors, but it's not impossible that the players were whining and downing tools for him. So Top's annoyance stems from that a bit, seeing as he had a pop at them. Obviously, don't appoint a shit manager in the first place... but players still need to be professional. Who knows. 

Oh yeah of course. The players have got away with murder at this football club for 4 years. 

The manager (rightly) takes a lot of the blame, whether it was Rodgers or Cooper, but the lack of pride & professionalism we've seen over the last few years has led to barely any accountability on the players. For reference see: applauding the players at Fulham & when we were relegated.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

20 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

"We don't want any more Leicester Citys"

Forest are 3rd. 

[Wymsey]

Why would it just be LCFC alone that the upper echelons at the Premier League don't, apparently, like about clubs that have broken/could break the 'top-six' glass?

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

We were not correct. A highly paid excellent legal mind found an issue with the drafting. Operating how we were (currently are) in no way was based on understanding the rules. That was an afterthought based on advice. It was hope which paid off.

No that's wrong, there were other cases we won. Not just the one you are talking about. 

 

[Number 6]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

But that would be one of the points, we ran a high wage to turnover plan. With a player being sold to cover that, it worked ok for us for a while. The new rules that came in for Europe and then knowing the league would follow, meant we had to start slashing costs. That lead to the barron summer of no signings, that you could say then impacted us masively in terms of relegation. It all had a knock on effect. 

 

The problem was buying shit players, not particularly our wage structure. If we'd bought good players, then no issue. The rule changes and poor signings made the wage structure an issue. 

I don't think having the wages to turnover ratio above 100% is showing ambition though. It's massively gambling with the financials of the club. PSR gets a lot of stuff wrong but it should absolutely be stopping that kind of structure being implemented.

 

Admittedly you could argue that turning that around once contracts were signed was difficult to do though, and the rule changes on wage structure made it very difficult for us to pivot.

Edited 9 January by Number 6

[Dahnsouff]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

But that would be one of the points, we ran a high wage to turnover plan. With a player being sold to cover that, it worked ok for us for a while. The new rules that came in for Europe and then knowing the league would follow, meant we had to start slashing costs. That lead to the barron summer of no signings, that you could say then impacted us masively in terms of relegation. It all had a knock on effect. 

 

The problem was buying shit players, not particularly our wage structure. If we'd bought good players, then no issue. The rule changes and poor signings made the wage structure an issue. 

True, but we failed to adapt to both the financial situation as it related to us, and the rise of player power resulting in the running down of contracts.

[HitchinFox]

Just an irrelevant observation about that Percy article...

He finishes with the following:
"The club’s slogan “Foxes Never Quit” is being tested to the full." 

That's something you usually only see from undergraduates or trainee journalists. Ie. letting their personal feelings (Percy's a Forest fan) shine through in childish ways.
 

[Mickyblueeyes]

Just now, Babylon said:

No that's wrong, there were other cases we won. Not just the one you are talking about. 

 

But they were based on legal advice post event right - we didnt have De Marco review business strategy pre-event. The point is, the club were very much part of the decision making in implementing these rules (and finance is not my area so I am not chapter and verse expect on them), they were also operating on the high wages, experienced player target and altering the previous method. 

 

We have very much caused this on our own. 

 

There are players at this club, still, to this day, who shouldve left 3 years ago - accepted, some have had redemption but the reality is, we cannot dispose of assets because they are not worth what we pay them. We went down with the 7th highest wage bill in the most exclusive league in the world. Our wage bill though lower is no where near where it should be for the talented within the fundamental aspect of the business. 

 

Let's hope Nick has scrutinised the rules as well has he did last time. I also hope that if the PL do decide on taking action, they are absolutely sure - it will get very messy otherwise. 

[Babylon]

1 minute ago, Number 6 said:

I don't think having the wages to turnover ratio above 100% is showing ambition though. It's massively gambling with the financials of the club. PSR gets a lot of stuff wrong but it should absolutely be stopping that kind of structure being implemented.

 

Admittedly you could argue that turning that around once contracts were signed was difficult to do though, and the rule changes on wage structure made it very difficult for us to pivot.

At the time we had a team rammed with huge assets, who looked like they could all fetch massive amounts of money to easily cover that expense. Unfortunately, massive injuries to a number of players, a couple of players seeing out contracts really put us in a pickle. We had an awful run with injuries with big assets like Barnes, Maddison, Justin (at the time), Ndidi, Ricardo all struggling with injuries. We basically went from a team of bankable assets, to losing about 7 of them over the course of a season or so. 

 

That's the risk you take with that game plan though. 

[Claudio Fannieri]

14 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You must have read a totally different article to me. He's repeated that we are confident we will pass, not for the first time. 

It says we are confident but will be close which could still mean it is open to conjecture or interpretation, I would not be shocked if PL announce we have breached. 

[Foxin_Mad]

The problem still remains in a way, clubs like Leicester have to sell their best players and try and compete on wages else the greedy six and red cartel just suck up any available talent from Europe and shove them in their squad.

 

The fundamentals of football are broken.

 

Yes we have been run badly, yes we have take silly risks.

 

I am not sure that any club that trys to compete is sustainable long term, I guess Brentford and Bournemouth will tell. 

 

You are always a couple of bad decisions away from complete collapse.

 

The game is broken, PSR will make it worse and less competitive. It needs to end. 

 

Want to make the game fair stop the big clubs hoard every half talented player and youngster, make then PAY fair value.  Of course they wont upset the cartel. 

Edited 9 January by Foxin_Mad

[Blanchflower78]

Percy suggesting a couple of cheap full backs all were considering 🤣🤦‍♂️

[Pliskin]

47 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Not sure it's that clear, the rules as they are written clearly aren't up to much, they've admitted that themselves and keep relying on the "spirit" of how they were meant, rather than how they are written. Be assured, if the rules aren't absolutely watertight in terms of who can do what and when, they might not have a case. It's become clear, despite us being a bit shambolic, that we're actually planning well in advance to work ourselves into positions to exploit their own rules. We''ll have been pouring over the rules long ago and will quite likely already know our next moves. 

I hope so. 
 

It’s why I think the club are confident this time….. having worked with De Marko you would like to think we’ve looked ahead already. 

[daddylonglegs]

Yeah, please for the love of god don't take any solace in the club's hierarchies 'confidence' on avoiding charges. 

 

 

I think we've seen enough examples in the last 3 or 4 years that where they place their 'confidence' is drastically misplaced more often than not. 

 

[EastAnglianFox]

No way would RVN taken the job if he'd only been promised a couple of cheap fullbacks?

 

Another manager lied to?

[Happy Fox]

Just now, EastAnglianFox said:

No way would RVN taken the job if he'd only been promised a couple of cheap fullbacks?

 

Another manager lied to?

Yes unequivocally, but he should have done his due diligence. Maybe Enzo told him a white lie or two. 

[urban.spaceman]

1 minute ago, daddylonglegs said:

Yeah, please for the love of god don't take any solace in the club's hierarchies 'confidence' on avoiding charges. 

 

 

I think we've seen enough examples in the last 3 or 4 years that where they place their 'confidence' is drastically misplaced more often than not. 

 

They've won 5 out of 6 disputes against both the Premier League and the EFL.

[Number 6]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

At the time we had a team rammed with huge assets, who looked like they could all fetch massive amounts of money to easily cover that expense. Unfortunately, massive injuries to a number of players, a couple of players seeing out contracts really put us in a pickle. We had an awful run with injuries with big assets like Barnes, Maddison, Justin (at the time), Ndidi, Ricardo all struggling with injuries. We basically went from a team of bankable assets, to losing about 7 of them over the course of a season or so. 

 

That's the risk you take with that game plan though. 

Agreed. But we were extremely unprepared for that kind of situation arising. We were definitely all in on that one strategy and once the contracts were signed it was always going to be difficult to pivot to another strategy. Probably more of an issue that average players were offered big wages than good players were offered a good wage. It's like somebody saw that there was a correlation between performance and team wages and thought that offering everyone a pay rise would make us better.

 

I think that selling model is our only way back to some success though, which is why I was particularly frustrated with our summer activity. Difficulty comes when you end up where Forest are and then have to decide which players get a salary bump and which you allow to move on. Which is ultimately what will prevent the non-traditional big 6 from competing.