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

[fox_favourite]

1 minute ago, moore_94 said:

What this all tells me is that there is a good chance Nick De Marco could have another field day making them look like mugs again

And I suspect all the ground work for it is already done and the club are ready to activate the defence. 

 

Honestly, who wrote and signed off such rules with such holes 

[Number 6]

4 minutes ago, Bilo said:

So my reading is that, as argued by Nick Di Marco, we were a Championship club as of T1 (June 30th 2023), rendering us immune from PL jurisdiction, but T2 was June 30th 2024. For the latter, the Premier League had been transferred to us by either Sheffield United, Burnley or Luton and we are therefore classified as a Premier League club as of that date.

 

Ergo, a team can only be classified as a Championship club if they spent both T1 and T2 in that division, meaning that the effect of the loose wording of the rules is that clubs who are relegated from the Premier League but are immediately promoted become Premier League clubs for the season they're in the Championship for the purposes of Premier League rules. If we successfully prove that argument, that could mean that the EFL may not be able to touch us either as we were not a Championship club at the end of the 23-24 accounting period as we had transferred our Championship club to one of the relegated clubs and taken up our Premier League share.

 

Forest had a lower boundary because, in the season they were promoted, they were a Championship club in the entire season prior to the accounting period and therefore could not use the same defence we have used. 

 

If this is the case, that's good for us but bad for the competition as it would mean that newly relegated clubs effectively have an extra £22m headroom over their rivals as well as the highest point of parachute payments. 

 

Unless I am misunderstanding it all.

I think the argument we used before was on timing and is separate from account period definitions. This argument is moot now anyway as the process is fast tracked, hence noise this week. I don't think we'd be arguing that T wasn't a Champ season anyway, it's just that there's no reduction in the PL rules for T.

 

The £22m extra headroom isn't there as a differentiator to everyone else, just means promoted clubs get a small buffer and everyone in the league gets to treat T as a -£35m allowance. This is murkier for us as the Champ season disappears until next season, but I think makes sense for someone like Ipswich who will naturally need to spend a bit when getting promotion and probably want to be able to start when the window opens rather than waiting until their financial period finishes. Generally the PL will want promoted teams to be competitive as it makes the league more interesting.

[Bilo]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

I don’t think you are - it’s a shitshow 

they should be rewriting it - I doubt they are though 

 

Wonder what Southampton are thinking about their June spend 2024 ……

My reading of it, based on what others have said, is that Southampton could classify themselves as a Premier League club for the whole accounting period.

 

I.e.

 

T1: June 30th 2022 - PL  (after a Premier League season)

T2: June 30th 2023 - EFL (after a Premier League season)

T3:  June 30th 2024 - PL (after promotion from the Championship)

 

Now it could depend on accounting dates. We changed ours from May to June, meaning that our share transferred before the accounting date and changing our jurisdiction. If Forest, the club with the most comparable situation to our own, did not do that (I'd have to look into it,) that may mean that they will have been classed as a Championship club for two successive accounting periods - 2021 and 2022 - because at the end of May 2022, they were a Championship club for accounting purposes because the PL share had not yet transferred to them.

 

My reading of the rules is that clubs are classified as Premier League clubs for a season unless they have two consecutive accounting periods in the EFL. Our decision to change our accounting periods meant that we were immune from PL jurisdiction because the 22-23 accounting period ended after the Premier League share was transferred, making us a Championship club on paper, while we are classified as a Premier League club for last season for the opposite reason - that we had taken up our Premier League share before the end of the accounting period. 

 

This could be why Forest's maximum allowable losses between 2021 and 2023 could be £83m and ours were £105m. If the club's lawyers argue that successfully, it also means that relegation might be less of an opportunity for the EFL to destroy us as we can point to the precedent and say that we were, for accounting purposes, a Championship club only in 22-23 and not 23-24. We may also argue that it would be a breach of the rules for them to try to apply their rules for the 22-23 accounting period as we did not begin the accounting period as an EFL club.

[Bilo]

19 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

What this all tells me is that there is a good chance Nick De Marco could have another field day making them look like mugs again

It goes before an independent panel, doesn't it? That panel may throw it out without Di Marco having to get out of bed.

[Number 6]

From my understanding, across the league for this period you'd have allowable losses of:

 

Ipswich: £61m

Bournemouth, Fulham: £83m

Everyone else: £105m

[coolhandfox]

I think we will be under the 83m just, don't think we will need the 105m

[Bilo]

What it will do, if we're getting this right, is to increase the urgency of relegated clubs to come straight back up and stay up, as they know they will have Premier League budgets and be treated as Premier League clubs if they do. 

 

They'll get the same headroom as Premier League clubs in terms of allowable losses and the maximised parachute payments, reducing the financial necessity for firesales of players and the jeopardy of relegation. In fact, the Premier League could argue that this situation is better for its member clubs as it makes it less likely that they will be absolutely devastated by relegation. 

 

It's very bad for the Championship, mind. You'll get even fewer sides doing what Ipswich did last season as newly relegated teams realise that they can effectively spend like a PL club for a season, so long as they go straight back up. 

[MarriedaLeicesterGirl]

17 minutes ago, Bilo said:

What it will do, if we're getting this right, is to increase the urgency of relegated clubs to come straight back up and stay up, as they know they will have Premier League budgets and be treated as Premier League clubs if they do. 

 

They'll get the same headroom as Premier League clubs in terms of allowable losses and the maximised parachute payments, reducing the financial necessity for firesales of players and the jeopardy of relegation. In fact, the Premier League could argue that this situation is better for its member clubs as it makes it less likely that they will be absolutely devastated by relegation. 

 

It's very bad for the Championship, mind. You'll get even fewer sides doing what Ipswich did last season as newly relegated teams realise that they can effectively spend like a PL club for a season, so long as they go straight back up. 

When I was a young man, I was somewhat "libertarian" - but I seriously now think there should be legislation on sports. Right now, there are nearly 100 clubs that are "fully professional" - admittedly, most of them are not paying good wages. But the "big clubs" dream of maybe 18 really rich teams, and everyone else being semi-professional.

 

You see what US sports are like - you either make millions of dollars, or you have a second job to afford to eat.

[Bilo]

16 minutes ago, MarriedaLeicesterGirl said:

When I was a young man, I was somewhat "libertarian" - but I seriously now think there should be legislation on sports. Right now, there are nearly 100 clubs that are "fully professional" - admittedly, most of them are not paying good wages. But the "big clubs" dream of maybe 18 really rich teams, and everyone else being semi-professional.

 

You see what US sports are like - you either make millions of dollars, or you have a second job to afford to eat.

I think they have tried that with PSR, but the rules are so ridiculous and loose that they're a waste of time.

 

A salary cap or draft would make more sense.

[Spudulike]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

What this all tells me is that there is a good chance Nick De Marco could have another field day making them look like mugs again

I would hope the club have been awarded expenses for having to explain to the PL/EFL their own rules.

[Bilo]

20 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

I would hope the club have been awarded expenses for having to explain to the PL/EFL their own rules.

I am left wondering if the club can pursue the costs. 

[Bilo]

5 hours ago, Number 6 said:

From my understanding, across the league for this period you'd have allowable losses of:

 

Ipswich: £61m

Bournemouth, Fulham: £83m

Everyone else: £105m

Yep. That would be my inference.

 

Ipswich

 

Season 1 (2021-2022, League One) 

T1: 1st July 2021 - EFL

T2: 30th June 2022 -EFL

Allowable losses: £13m

 

Season 2 (2022-2023, League One)

T1: 1st July 2022 - EFL

T2: 30th June 2023 - EFL

Allowable losses: £13m

 

Season 3 (2023-2024, Championship)

T1: 1st July 2023 - EFL

T2: 30th June 2024 - PL

Allowable losses: £35m

 

Total allowable losses,: £61m.

 

Interestingly, this means that their allowable losses next year will be set at £83m. 

[foxfanazer]

The embarrassment for them if we get away with it again

 

The likes of Everton and Forest won't be happy of course but the club have maintained their confidence that they're not in the wrong 

[CaliFOXnia]

7 hours ago, Chrysalis said:

We are the only club I have seen reported as having to be cautious in the window targeting loans and free agents.

This is where I take real umbridge with the whole farcical s**t show that is PSR. 
 

Not only is it utter bollocks aimed solely at clipping the wings of anyone bar the big boys. Even if there’s no breach or you manage to get around the rules that are seemingly written by Jonny age 5 in Crayola, the powers that be will ensure they spin up a full propaganda operation so that no player besides the ilk of Conor Coady and the like will touch you with a shitty stick. It’s like going on a date with a bird and all your mates turn up to let her know you’re still banging your ex. In the end you leave with nowt, or in our case Conor Coady. 
 

Add to that, we’re the club that dared to try and destabilise the “Big 6” and try and muscle in at the feeding trough, they’re never letting us out of their crosshairs.

Edited 11 January by CaliFOXnia

[Nolucklcfc]

Wouldn’t surprise me if it’s announced on Wednesday to throw us off for the game 

[Lionator]

7 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

And I suspect all the ground work for it is already done and the club are ready to activate the defence. 

 

Honestly, who wrote and signed off such rules with such holes 

What happens if we get relegated by the margin of any deducted points when there is no case to answer and it is overturned?

[KrefelderFox666]

Just now, Lionator said:

What happens if we get relegated by the margin of any deducted points when there is no case to answer and it is overturned?

We stay up

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

The last few pages have got a bit complicated. Can anyone sum it up in very lay language?

[foxfanazer]

2 minutes ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said:

The last few pages have got a bit complicated. Can anyone sum it up in very lay language?

We've beaten more charges than Michael Jackson 

[Bilo]

1 hour ago, foxfanazer said:

The embarrassment for them if we get away with it again

 

The likes of Everton and Forest won't be happy of course but the club have maintained their confidence that they're not in the wrong 

Neither would have a leg to stand on.

 

Everton breached the £105m limit for a start.

 

In terms of Forest, even if they had successfully argued that they should have had an £83m limit instead of the £61m they were given, they'd have still been £12m over and still stayed up in spite of the four point deduction- a sanction they may well have received anyway for a £12m breach. 

[fox_favourite]

40 minutes ago, Lionator said:

What happens if we get relegated by the margin of any deducted points when there is no case to answer and it is overturned?

The results of appeal have to be given before the end of the season apparently 

[Wink84]

Expecting this thread will go hot over the next few days.

[ClaphamFox]

5 hours ago, Wink84 said:

Expecting this thread will go hot over the next few days.

I’ve found my feelings about this have oscillated between optimism and pessimism, much like they do before a match day. I’ve sort of settled on feeling cautiously optimistic that we won’t be charged. Really hope I’m right - not just for our sake,  but because there is such a widespread expectation among rival fans that we’re about to get royally shafted by PSR that the collective fit of rage and anguish if it doesn’t happen will be a joy to behold. 

[Chrysalis]

Is it deliberate that this PSR stuff is designed to be in the middle of a transfer window?

[Ric Flair]

Happy PSR Day