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

[Fox85]

5 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Copy and paste the article link into 12ft.io 

Haha that's class thank you.

[Bilo]

2 minutes ago, fox_favourite said:

But even if it is 83, they can't justify -6 when Everton's was more? Or have I remembered wrong?

The precedents seem to point to a maximum of 4 points.

[fox_favourite]

Just now, Bilo said:

The precedents seem to point to a maximum of 4 points.

Even with that we're down. But it may start a siege mentality.

 

 

Forget that, I remember who plays for us 

[Jattdogg]

They selling the confiscated diddy baby oil cheap? We might all need some for tomorrow

 

[FrankieADZ]

1 minute ago, Sly said:

The issue with selling stuff, is that it’s not sustainable. 
 

We’ll dodge the bullet once, however what do we sell next season? 
 

To live by the inconsistent rules which doesn’t allow us to pour money if that’s what we choose to do. 

 

What they are actually doing is shooting themselves in the foot and killing their own league.  
 

The other legal challenge I’m waiting on, is if these charges relegate a club. Will they raise a counter charge back to the Premier League to argue against the length of time it’s taking to review the Manchester City situation. 

think the whole PSR crap is just there to protect the top 6 imo, like newcastle could blow the water out of the rest of the league if they didnt have their hands behind their backs with psr

like i wonder if Utd, Arsenal etc will be charged(arsenal had interest free loans from the owner, with the new changes they could potentially be in breach, could be wrong tho)

 

they whole thing is broken anyway, its always one rule for one and one for another

the man city one will be interesting to see, verdict meant to be coming in the next month or 2

[fox_favourite]

I'm frustrated with the rules but frustrated with the board to put us in this position. If we do get a points deduction heads should definitely role. 

 

We are a shambles, and should have been sorted when we were relegated. 

 

The board as a whole made the wrong decision in the summer to appoint Cooper, to then sign the wrong players to a way of 'playing' which was flawed to lose precious points in a season we needed to get right. They didn't. They need to go 

Edited 13 January by fox_favourite

[jbflcfc]

19 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Seen this but do they announce the points deduction upfront? And, if it is around 12m over, that should mean a 2 points deduction based on Everton’s punishment right? 
 

 

This account is a chance merchant.

 

They don’t know anything we don’t, I’d take this with a massive pinch of salt.

[frany104]

50 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Seen this but do they announce the points deduction upfront? And, if it is around 12m over, that should mean a 2 points deduction based on Everton’s punishment right? 
 

 

They know nothing. Always making stuff up saying “I’m hearing” like they have inside contacts. Proper clickbait.

Edited 13 January by frany104

[Bilo]

I obviously cannot copy-pasta the Athletic article, but I can do it to the ChatGPT summary of the relevant details....

 

The article discusses Leicester City's financial and regulatory challenges, focusing on their handling of Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) and the implications of ambiguous Premier League rules. Here's a detailed breakdown of the points related to Leicester:

---

Leicester’s Financial Loophole in 2022-23:

1. Jurisdictional Ambiguity:

Leicester was seemingly relegated from the Premier League in 2022-23 but operated in a "twilight zone" between the Premier League and the English Football League (EFL).

This limbo arose because the Premier League could not sanction Leicester for breaching PSR at the end of the financial year due to their relegation.

The EFL also lacked jurisdiction to prosecute Leicester because their rules did not align with the Premier League's PSR enforcement mechanisms.

2. Delayed Resolution:

The confusion was resolved in September 2024 when a panel ruled Leicester could not be penalized for financial breaches due to their unclear jurisdictional status.

---

Current Financial Investigation (2023-24):

1. Potential PSR Breach:

Leicester may face sanctions for breaching PSR during the 2023-24 season, their first year back in the Premier League.

Industry estimates suggest that Leicester’s losses for the rolling three-year period ending June 30, 2024, amount to around £95m, well above allowable limits.

2. Loss Thresholds:

Premier League clubs can lose up to £35m annually, or £105m over three years, after certain "good" expenditures (e.g., youth development) are excluded.

However, clubs in the EFL (such as Leicester during their relegation season) are subject to stricter limits, reducing the loss threshold by £22m per EFL season. Leicester’s allowable loss might therefore drop to £83m.

---

Rule Ambiguities and Loopholes:

1. Ambiguities in "T" Definition:

The Premier League assesses clubs based on audited accounts for three financial years: the current season ("T"), the prior season ("T-1"), and the season before that ("T-2").

Rule E.54 specifies that losses are reduced for seasons in the EFL during T-1 and T-2 but makes no mention of T. Leicester’s legal team could argue this oversight means their loss limit remains £105m rather than being reduced.

2. Challenges to Enforcement:

Leicester’s lawyer, Nick De Marco KC, is known for exploiting legal loopholes and could use these ambiguities to challenge any sanctions.

The club might also cite rule A.1.247, which suggests "T" could refer to the accounting period ending in 2024-25, potentially pushing the assessment window forward and undermining any current-season penalties.

---

Wider Implications:

1. Impact of Past Cases:

Leicester’s situation echoes previous controversies, such as Everton’s delayed punishment for 2021-22 breaches, which highlighted the Premier League’s inconsistent enforcement.

If Leicester avoids punishment due to legal interpretations, it may expose further regulatory weaknesses and undermine the league’s credibility.

2. Leicester’s Stance:

The club has remained silent on their financial situation, declining to comment when contacted by The Athletic.

---

Conclusion:

Leicester City's case underscores the challenges of enforcing financial regulations in football, especially when rules are poorly defined. The club’s use of legal experts to exploit loopholes highlights systemic issues in the Premier League's governance and the need for clearer, more enforceable financial guidelines.

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, jbflcfc said:

This account is a chance merchant.

 

They don’t know anything we don’t, I’d take this with a massive pinch of salt.

Massive pinch of salt ?  It’s garbage,  the PL won’t advise their requested sanction until the hearing sits. And precedent says that the hearing would ignore that request. 

[RoboFox]

24 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Seen this but do they announce the points deduction upfront? And, if it is around 12m over, that should mean a 2 points deduction based on Everton’s punishment right? 
 

 

Hearing? From who? 

[st albans fox]

Just now, RoboFox said:

Hearing? From who? 

The voices in his head 

[foxfanazer]

1 minute ago, RoboFox said:

Hearing? From who? 

Sean from enderby 

[Bilo]

1 minute ago, RoboFox said:

Hearing? From who? 

 

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

The voices in his head 

 

Just now, foxfanazer said:

Sean from enderby 

Some absolute prong on TikTok. 

[Sunbury Fox]

17 minutes ago, Fox85 said:

Isn't maddison included in this financial year as well?

 

 

Thought that sake was in the FY before this one but I may be wrong. 

Edited 13 January by Sunbury Fox

[Bluetintedspecs]

The gift that keeps on giving 

[StanSP]

44 minutes ago, em9999 said:

I've heard rumours today there is problems between rvn and the club 😕  only a rumour but there it is 

Doesn't sound like it based on his press conferences. 

[Bilo]

Just now, Sunbury Fox said:

Thought he was the one before but I may be wrong. 

I think our big money sales went in July, putting them in the 23-24 accounts. The released players like Mendy, Tielemans and Bertrand would have gone before June 30th 2023, putting them in the 22-23 accounts.

[Paninistickers]

10 minutes ago, jbflcfc said:

This account is a chance merchant.

 

They don’t know anything we don’t, I’d take this with a massive pinch of salt.

Probably that prize pillock Ben Jacobs 

[phoneticerror]

Take all you want, we’re going down anyway

[Skidmark]

Nothing to worry about.

[Bilo]

The wording of the rules is looser than the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe's fanny. 

 

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they ended up issuing fines that we aren't that bothered about.

[Swarles Barkley]

Honestly it will hurt more if Rudkin isn’t sacked more than the points deduction

[FoxinNotts]

1 minute ago, Bilo said:

The wording of the rules is looser than the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe's fanny. 

 

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they ended up issuing fines that we aren't that bothered about.

Rooney’s bit on the side?

[Bilo]

Just now, FoxinNotts said:

Rooney’s bit on the side?

Bit on the side? He didn't even touch the sides.