A Call for Change: A Footballing Reset at Leicester City Football Club

[ACF]

I for one am looking forward to the club acknowledging the protests by launching a new Fox & Crop range in yellow.

[lestuhfox]

11 hours ago, Saxondale said:

Along with about every club outside the rich 6. Nobody made any signings this window.

Most didn't need to.

We needed to because of our league position.

We needed strengthening. 

[Pliskin]

7 hours ago, Tommy G said:

We didn’t breach by the way. 

……… seriously? 

[CosbehFox]

9 hours ago, Tommy G said:

We didn’t breach by the way. 

Our PSR calculation was £19.5 million over the permitted loss. 

 

In LCFC's appointed solicitors own words within the legal document of the appeal hearing 

 

So while in this case the Premier League say, and the Commission

unfortunately adopted this at paragraph 51 of its decision, that it is

impossible to determine the precise date of breach. We say that's

wrong. It is not only possible, it is obvious and it is necessary to

determine the point of breach. It is how the rules work. The precise

date of breach is clearly identifiable under the rules and it is

crucial. It is the accounting position at midnight on 30 June 2023,

if that is the account ending period. It is that date and time only

that is determinative of breach or not.

 

 

[moore_94]

9 hours ago, Tommy G said:

We didn’t breach by the way. 

We absolutely did

 

We just got away with it on a technicality

[Tommy G]

17 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

We absolutely did

 

We just got away with it on a technicality

Doesn't matter, the fact is we didn't. It's not our fault the Premier League's rules are so badly drafted. 

 

We didn't get any points deduction and we weren't charged, they are the simple facts.

[GingerrrFox]

14 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Doesn't matter, the fact is we didn't. It's not our fault the Premier League's rules are so badly drafted. 

 

We didn't get any points deduction and we weren't charged, they are the simple facts.

So while in this case the Premier League say, and the Commission

unfortunately adopted this at paragraph 51 of its decision, that it is

impossible to determine the precise date of breach. We say that's

wrong. It is not only possible, it is obvious and it is necessary to

determine the point of breach. It is how the rules work. The precise

date of breach is clearly identifiable under the rules and it is

crucial. It is the accounting position at midnight on 30 June 2023,

if that is the account ending period. It is that date and time only

that is determinative of breach or not.

[fox in the sox]

4 hours ago, lestuhfox said:

Most didn't need to.

We needed to because of our league position.

We needed strengthening. 

We bought quite a few in the summer and one in January. If we keep on signing players and get into more financial trouble people will moan about that as well.

[Tommy G]

53 minutes ago, GingerrrFox said:

 

So while in this case the Premier League say, and the Commission

unfortunately adopted this at paragraph 51 of its decision, that it is

impossible to determine the precise date of breach. We say that's

wrong. It is not only possible, it is obvious and it is necessary to

determine the point of breach. It is how the rules work. The precise

date of breach is clearly identifiable under the rules and it is

crucial. It is the accounting position at midnight on 30 June 2023,

if that is the account ending period. It is that date and time only

that is determinative of breach or not.

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

[Globalfox]

Do we have a deeper problem here driven by Tops religious beliefs. I recall his time out to become a Buddhist monk. Studying the beliefs of that particular religion would appear to pervade what many of us see as lack of firm control and direction. Does his view of the world preclude making tough business decisions, relieving poor performers of their positions, getting angry at being ripped off. Is he viewing the world through rose colored glasses. Not knocking his beliefs just challenging are they behind what many of us perceive as inaction. Thinking it through it would explain a lot and if so becomes truly worrying as it means nothing will change. 

[Adster]

1 minute ago, Globalfox said:

Do we have a deeper problem here driven by Tops religious beliefs. I recall his time out to become a Buddhist monk. Studying the beliefs of that particular religion would appear to pervade what many of us see as lack of firm control and direction. Does his view of the world preclude making tough business decisions, relieving poor performers of their positions, getting angry at being ripped off. Is he viewing the world through rose colored glasses. Not knocking his beliefs just challenging are they behind what many of us perceive as inaction. Thinking it through it would explain a lot and if so becomes truly worrying as it means nothing will change. 

Think that's looking way too much into it, tbh. 

[DerbyshireFox]

22 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

Yes! We were charged! We got off because the leagues failure to word their rules correctly. Doesn’t mean we did nothing wrong or completely mismanaged our wage bill and recruitment

 

 

[CosbehFox]

40 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

Charged? Yes 

Won on appeal? Yes 

[Raj]

42 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

Oh Dear Tommy!!

 

You can go through a red light and NOT get prosecuted.

 

Did you go through the red light? YES

 

Were you prosecuted? NO

 

STILL went through the red light didn't you.

 

We got away with it because for once we actually hired the right man to get us off.

[Tommy G]

9 minutes ago, Raj said:

Oh Dear Tommy!!

 

You can go through a red light and NOT get prosecuted.

 

Did you go through the red light? YES

 

Were you prosecuted? NO

 

STILL went through the red light didn't you.

 

We got away with it because for once we actually hired the right man to get us off.

Main thing is you aren't prosecuted, that's fundamentally my point and the most important part. 

 

[FoxesDeb]

12 hours ago, Tommy G said:

We didn’t breach by the way. 

 

2 hours ago, Tommy G said:

Doesn't matter, the fact is we didn't. It's not our fault the Premier League's rules are so badly drafted. 

 

We didn't get any points deduction and we weren't charged, they are the simple facts.

 

7 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Main thing is you aren't prosecuted, that's fundamentally my point and the most important part. 

 

I mean tbf your initial point has changed quite drastically in 12 hours.

 

We did breach, we were charged, we just got off under a technicality. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

Yes

[DJW1]

1 hour ago, Globalfox said:

Do we have a deeper problem here driven by Tops religious beliefs. I recall his time out to become a Buddhist monk. Studying the beliefs of that particular religion would appear to pervade what many of us see as lack of firm control and direction. Does his view of the world preclude making tough business decisions, relieving poor performers of their positions, getting angry at being ripped off. Is he viewing the world through rose colored glasses. Not knocking his beliefs just challenging are they behind what many of us perceive as inaction. Thinking it through it would explain a lot and if so becomes truly worrying as it means nothing will change. 

Does his spirtual/business view of the world differ from that of his father? 

The legal action brought recently in the case of the fatal helicopter crash includes a claim for loss of income due to the death of Vichai, stating that KP has suffered as his heirs are not as good as him in business terms.

[Muzzy_no7]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

Did we get charged for a breach of PSR? Yes or No.

Boooooh yes bee did biiiiiiiaan 

[DJW1]

Just now, DJW1 said:

Does his spirtual/business view of the world differ from that of his father? 

The legal action brought recently in the case of the fatal helicopter crash includes a claim for loss of income due to the death of Vichai, stating that KP has suffered as his heirs are not as good as him in business terms.

"spiritual"

[Tommy G]

8 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

 

 

I mean tbf your initial point has changed quite drastically in 12 hours.

 

We did breach, we were charged, we just got off under a technicality. 

What was the charge then? Monetary or points? 

[CL Fox]

9 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

What was the charge then? Monetary or points? 

EATING A MEAL. A SUCCULENT CHINESE MEAL.

[FoxesDeb]

19 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

What was the charge then? Monetary or points? 

Eh? A fine or points would be the penalty, not the charge.

[CosbehFox]

Just now, FoxesDeb said:

Eh? A fine or points would be the penalty, not the charge.

Yeah, a brush up on the definition of a charge required. 

formally accuse (someone) of something, especially an offence under law.

 

As said by the admittance of LCFC's solicitor, we breached - the appeal was successful because that breach was defined as not occurring while LCFC were a Premier League club. 

[CL Fox]

2 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Eh? A fine or points would be the penalty, not the charge.

Yeah, had a howler here hasn't he.