Changes to Championship Profit & Sustainability Rules approved at EGM

[Lineker's Left Foot]

Just now, splinterdream said:

This has all but done away with relegation from the EPL for those established clubs

Hope they do try and sell Ayew

and BDCT along with some of the other w⚓️s.  Good luck with that 😂

[ACF]

2 hours ago, dooflip said:

Meanwhile Wrexham are able to buy themselves up the football league as a Welsh team in an English league system because of  clever marketing and an overseas fan base. You can’t make this ish up.

Sorry, this is totally the wrong way to spin this and something I’m quite passionate about.

 

Wrexham have done a phenomenal job of commercialising the club, helped by their absolute star power yes, but it’s the case study on how to get attention, and therefore £, into your club.

 

Meanwhile, whilst we had ALL the attention, we treat fans like crap, we continued with KP as front of shirt sponsors rather than accept outside money, we’ve launched absolute crap merchandise, our media and social media team are atrocious and don’t drive engagement with the club, I could go on and on. The online shop has been down for at least 6 weeks whilst our greatest ever player has retired, can’t buy a Vardy shirt. And when we do try to capitalise, it’s shit tours to South East Asia in monsoon season.

 

We all whinge about the amount we spent on shite players, but our revenue generation is also absolutely terrible. 

[FoxesFan#1]

59 minutes ago, Tielemans63 said:

I'd recommend going to watch non league football mate.

 

I've been to Harborough Town a handful times since I moved here a couple of months ago, and it's bloody brilliant. Football as it should be. Players aren't constantly throwing themselves to the floor, there's no tika taka, very little tactical fouling. Just really enjoyable. Planning on getting a season ticket there next season.

 

I find it difficult to watch LCFC knowing that the club is rotting from the inside. I also find top flight football increasingly dull.

I’m with you 100%
 

The moment I swapped Leicester for Brackley in 2020 I started loving football again

 

You're so right, the NL game is played in the style we remembered.  
 

That Arsenal game two years back pretty much sealed it for me.  One of the worst games I have ever watched live.

[Pita]

sounds like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. 

[Chrysalis]

7 hours ago, Genesis1 said:

I'm a bit thick, can somebody sum this up for me in one sentence.

It is a bit like getting convicted because someone is forecasting you will be found guilty, but not yet found guilty.
Also provisions for cross punishment between EPL and EFL.

 

Effectively these are pretty much due to us, as I cant think of any club in recent history that sold players in June to balance the books and escaped breaches based on switching between EPL and EFL.

 

The first change is ridiculous.

Edited Wednesday at 23:14 by Chrysalis

[CloudFox]

7 hours ago, ACF said:

Sorry, this is totally the wrong way to spin this and something I’m quite passionate about.

 

Wrexham have done a phenomenal job of commercialising the club, helped by their absolute star power yes, but it’s the case study on how to get attention, and therefore £, into your club.

 

Meanwhile, whilst we had ALL the attention, we treat fans like crap, we continued with KP as front of shirt sponsors rather than accept outside money, we’ve launched absolute crap merchandise, our media and social media team are atrocious and don’t drive engagement with the club, I could go on and on. The online shop has been down for at least 6 weeks whilst our greatest ever player has retired, can’t buy a Vardy shirt. And when we do try to capitalise, it’s shit tours to South East Asia in monsoon season.

 

We all whinge about the amount we spent on shite players, but our revenue generation is also absolutely terrible. 

Spot on. I guess we shouldn't be surprised that a brand with a monopoly in an airport, and thus to a captive audience, is shit at marketing. And it shows.

[Pliskin]

9 hours ago, Tielemans63 said:

I'd recommend going to watch non league football mate.

 

I've been to Harborough Town a handful times since I moved here a couple of months ago, and it's bloody brilliant. Football as it should be. Players aren't constantly throwing themselves to the floor, there's no tika taka, very little tactical fouling. Just really enjoyable. Planning on getting a season ticket there next season.

 

I find it difficult to watch LCFC knowing that the club is rotting from the inside. I also find top flight football increasingly dull.

I’ve been to watch Ashby a few times myself, and I’ve enjoyed that far more than watching us play. In fact, I’ve been to watch our under 21’s, Coalville town and Ashby more than I’ve watched us this season, and I’ve enjoyed everyone more. 

[OntarioFox]

Been floated around a few times on here, but might be time for a serious discussion around a breakaway fan's club if nothing changes at KPFC?

 

I guess the rise of standalone alternatives like Harborough and Coalville slightly lessens the urgency, but there must surely be a core of a few thousand LCFC fans now that would gladly follow a team in the mould of an FC United of Manchester or AFC Liverpool, at the expense of the morons currently sat at Filbert Way.

[st albans fox]

14 hours ago, Lambert09 said:

So championship clubs have voted for a system that will brutally rip apart a club that get promoted and actually try to bridge the gap by spending. 
 

Yet people wonder why the task of staying up after promotion is so tough?  In this example, had a club done what forest had done and still go down… they’d be hit with a mallet and never return. nice one efl 

Forest - yes

ipswich - no

there’s a difference between spending large amounts of money on young, promising players who will have a good resale value and won’t insist on a big salary and what forest did when they came up. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

1 hour ago, OntarioFox said:

Been floated around a few times on here, but might be time for a serious discussion around a breakaway fan's club if nothing changes at KPFC?

 

I guess the rise of standalone alternatives like Harborough and Coalville slightly lessens the urgency, but there must surely be a core of a few thousand LCFC fans now that would gladly follow a team in the mould of an FC United of Manchester or AFC Liverpool, at the expense of the morons currently sat at Filbert Way.

Maybe Foxestalk should focus on getting a solid entry to the UFS 6 a side tournament first before trying to get a phoenix club off the ground

[urban.spaceman]

On 30/04/2025 at 16:15, moore_94 said:

https://www.efl.com/news/2025/april/30/efl-statement--changes-to-championship-profit---sustainability-rules-approved-at-egm/
 

EFL Statement: Changes to Championship Profit & Sustainability Rules approved at EGM
 

At an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) today, Clubs in the EFL approved changes to the Championship division’s Profit & Sustainability Rules (P&S) for the 2025/26 season to address the transition of Clubs between the EFL and Premier League.

 

As is currently the case, all Clubs will still be required to file an estimated P&S calculation in March for the current season and the two immediately preceding seasons, irrespective of whether the Club was in the EFL or not for all or part of that time.

 

As a result of the changes agreed today, from the 2025/26 season:

 

• The Club will then file its audited accounts

and a final P&S calculation with whichever League it is in at that time in the following December.

 

• The EFL will be able to apply a sanction imposed by the Premier League’s independentCommission, with an equivalent provision included in the Premier League’s rules, should it be required.

 

• When the EFL receives the estimated P&S calculation in March, it can still take pre-emptive action if a Club is forecasting a breach, which can be in the form of a business plan or requiring player sales once the transfer window opens in June.

 

At an earlier Club Meeting in February of this year, Clubs approved other changes to the P&S rules relating to add backs, audit and disclosure. Following today’s votes, the full P&S rules for the 2025/26 season will be distributed to Clubs and published on EFL.com in due course.

 

In addition, as part of a broader review of financial controls in the Division, discussions remaining ongoing amongst Championship Clubs on the merits of introducing a Squad Cost Ratio system which would limit clubs to spending to a set percentage of their income on player-related costs. The Premier League has been operating a similar shadow Squad Cost Ratio calculation during the 2024/25 season and will continue to do so in 2025/26.

The EFL’s statement from last April:

 

EFL Statement: Leicester City

12 Apr

On 22 March 2024 Leicester City Football Club announced they had commenced urgent legal proceedings against the EFL and the Premier League.

This followed the Club’s referral to an independent Premier League Disciplinary Commission for an alleged breach of the Profitability and Sustainability Rules (P&S), ending in financial year 2022/23. The Club had also been placed under an EFL registration embargo, in accordance with Profitability & Sustainability Rule 2.10.1, after filing its 2023/24 P&S calculation.

One element of the Club’s legal proceedings involved an application to a League arbitration panel under the EFL Regulations in which it accused the EFL, amongst other things, of acting ‘unlawfully by conspiring with the Premier League to use unlawful means and to procure or induce a breach of contract by the Premier League’ in relation to its proceedings against the Club.

The Club made an application for an interim injunction to prevent the EFL from imposing a sporting sanction in the current 2023/24 season. 

Leicester City sent no letter before action and issued the proceedings without notice. 

The core issue in question was whether the EFL has the ability under its Regulations to apply a points deduction in its competition if ordered by a Premier League Disciplinary Commission.  

Having taken legal advice, the EFL has confirmed to all parties that whilst it would want to respect any decision of a Premier League Disciplinary commission (and vice versa) to deduct points in the EFL, it does not have the power under the Regulations as currently drafted. 

On the basis of that confirmation, the League Arbitration Panel held that the Club’s application for an interim injunction was neither necessary nor appropriate. The League Arbitration Panel dismissed the Club’s application accordingly. 

Click here to read the decision.  

It remains a matter for Leicester City to comply with the P&S rules in all circumstances. In accordance with the League’s established processes, the EFL will continue to apply the P&S rules to ensure all Clubs meet their financial obligations so the competition can continue to operate in a fair and consistent manner.

 

By changing the rules yesterday (EFL) and last month (Premier League), they’ve just proven this segment:

One element of the Club’s legal proceedings involved an application to a League arbitration panel under the EFL Regulations in which it accused the EFL, amongst other things, of acting ‘unlawfully by conspiring with the Premier League to use unlawful means and to procure or induce a breach of contract by the Premier League’ in relation to its proceedings against the Club.

 

Absolutely spot on. 

 

Both leagues have proven themselves to be corrupt, and hostile to a club that was trying to comply with their (by their own admission) incompetent rules.

 

Take the disastrous transfer and wages dealings out of it for a minute.

 

We tried so hard to comply with the rules that we deviated from a successful strategy, harmed our squad and the progress we had made, and ended up relegated because of it.

We were then pursued by two leagues, breaking their own rules multiple times, and ultimately proved we had broken none of theirs.

Yet now we’ve been relegated for a second time, and they’ve gone and changed the rules AGAIN to further harm our chances to get back to where we were before.

These new rules give them new powers to control our ability to compete in the transfer market.

 

Meanwhile, another club who DID exceed PSR when they came up and were given a points deduction the season after, are possibly on the brink of qualifying for the Champions League.

 

So what the **** is the incentive for complying with their rules? One club who did break them has ended up progressing into Europe, while the club who DIDN’T break their rules, has ended up in a Kafkaesque nightmare of the league’s making. 

 

How are we supposed to compete?

[HankMarvin]

On 30/04/2025 at 22:38, ACF said:

we continued with KP as front of shirt sponsors rather than accept outside money

Probably just as well, if the last two are anything to go by

Edited yesterday at 23:29 by HankMarvin

[Tom12345]

if this is really about fairness and sustainability, they should put a limit on how much the top clubs in the EPL can spend on player transfers and wages so that:

- the rest do not need to pay extraordinary money just to try to stay within reach

- more importantly prices generally do not become overly inflated

 

 

[ACF]

56 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Probably just as well, if the last two are anything to go by

Understood completely! But a good sponsor relationship is mutually beneficial to both sides, not just a cash grab. An opportunity to raise a your own profile via another vehicle.

 

Source: Me, marketing professional with focus on consumer, commercialisation & brand partnerships.

[Terraloon]

These changes were inevitable. 
 

I said many months ago that my concern would  be that the previous “ victories “ would  end up biting LCFC on the bun and that I believe in now going to be the case:

First let’s look forward to the 25/26implications season.

 

Irrespective of anything else we know that initially in June  the EFL will now looking at not just the books for closed years but looking forward to see if the indications are that the £61m allowable for 23/24-24/25 &25/26 will be exceeded . They, the EFL, will look at available numbers and projections going forward to gain some understanding of planning 

If the numbers point toward that £61 million being exceeded then a business plan will be imposed. Forget the notion that the EFL can force player sales, they can’t, but what they can do is restrict signings , not allow contract extensions etc. There is a minimum squad number that is required  but be under no illusions the implementation of a business plan could be catastrophic.You can’t bring in contracted players nor can you just go out and loan.

 

LCFC spend way above its means not just in wages but other areas of expenditure simply can’t be afforded and if  the beneficial impact of parachute payments is removed then without massively reducing those costs then it’s a very slippery slope

 

But that’s not where it stops.

 

Based on the EFL statement and depending on the arbitration outcome it’s highly likely that either the PL or the EFL will charge LCFC for the years 21/22- 23/24. If it’s proven that the PL didn’t have jurisdiction then by default the EFL do.

Depending on how the 24/25 numbers play out then my concern is that there will be a charge for 22/23, 23/24 and 24/25 . Allowable losses would be £83 million . The first two years saw accounting losses alone of £91 million . 
 

Throw into the mix in all this that Man City are still going after the need to include a nominal sum in respect of beneficial owner loans . How that plays out could further muddy the waters.
 

I don’t know how it would have turned out but I  do wonder if a better approach would have been to allow the PL to lay charges and use the defence around the PLs rules at a FFP hearing potentially blocking any actions for 21/22- 23/24 but not getting to the charge state means any argument around double jeopardy won’t even be considered. 
 

So worse case scenario for me 

1) A player embargo as part of an EFL business plan

2) Points deduction for 21/22-23/24. Worse case is the PL the arbitration because if it’s the EFL then they will almost certainly be requesting that it’s implemented in 25/26.

3) Points deduction for 22/23-24/25 ( handed down by the PL but implemented in the EFL) before the 25/26 season ends.

 

 

Meanwhile in  good news …….
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AKCJ]

9 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

How are we supposed to compete?

How are other clubs supposed to compete when we're handing out 80k a week contracts for fun?

[stu]

1 hour ago, Terraloon said:

Based on the EFL statement and depending on the arbitration outcome it’s highly likely that either the PL or the EFL will charge LCFC for the years 21/22- 23/24. If it’s proven that the PL didn’t have jurisdiction then by default the EFL do.

I don't understand this. It's already been confirmed we passed PSR for this period that ended when we were promoted back to the premier league after a season in the championship.

 

The arbitration is based on the outcomes of the 22/23 season when we argued that neither the PL or the EFL had the juristication to impose penalties related to being charged for PSR, not for the season ending 23/24.

 

1 hour ago, Terraloon said:

So worse case scenario for me 

1) A player embargo as part of an EFL business plan

2) Points deduction for 21/22-23/24. Worse case is the PL the arbitration because if it’s the EFL then they will almost certainly be requesting that it’s implemented in 25/26.

3) Points deduction for 22/23-24/25 ( handed down by the PL but implemented in the EFL) before the 25/26 season ends.

Based on my (admittedly limited) understanding:

• Point 1 can only be imposed if we looking likely to breach in the upcoming championship season in 25/26 (like we were suspected to in 23/24, but as confirmed we didn't actually breach at all) not before.
• Point 2 is mute as we passed PSR for this period
• Point 3 depends on the PSR outcome for this season, which won't be known until Jan 26.

So I don't think your suggestions as to what may happen are founded, based on what we actually know.

 

The only outstanding question is if the EFL can impose a points deduction for the 22/23 charge, which no one knows for certain but it is probably likely the EFL will try.

Edited 13 hours ago by stu
Mistake

[moore_94]

I think it has been said that it will be VERY surprising if the PL manages to be successful with the arbitration relating to 22/23

[Ricey]

1 hour ago, stu said:

I don't understand this. It's already been confirmed we passed PSR for this period that ended when we were promoted back to the premier league after a season in the championship.

 

The arbitration is based on the outcomes of the 22/23 season when we argued that neither the PL or the EFL had the juristication to impose penalties related to being charged for PSR, not for the season ending 23/24.

 

Based on my (admittedly limited) understanding:

• Point 1 can only be imposed if we looking likely to breach in the upcoming championship season in 25/26 (like we were suspected to in 23/24, but as confirmed we didn't actually breach at all) not before.
• Point 2 is mute as we passed PSR for this period
• Point 3 depends on the PSR outcome for this season, which won't be known until Jan 26.

So I don't think your suggestions as to what may happen are founded, based on what we actually know.

 

The only outstanding question is if the EFL can impose a points deduction for the 22/23 charge, which no one knows for certain but it is probably likely the EFL will try.

I'm not sure we did pass PSR for the period ending June 2024. We avoided a charge, but there is a theory that is only because there is an on-going arbitration case. The Premier League wording in the statement was odd.

From what I can see there is still the threat of three separate points deductions.

 

Period ending June 2023 - We avoid it this year by claiming we weren't a PL team at the time. The EFL will try and apply that next season.
Period ending June 2024 - See above, once the arbitration case is settled, I wouldn't be shocked if a breach for this period is revealed.
Period ending June 2025 - We'll need to sell before this date to avoid a third breach, which if it goes via the PL expedited route, could mean a third deduction towards the end of next season.

We should have just taken our medicine this season, accepted the 23 breach, likewise the 24 breach if there was one and did everything we could to avoid a 25 breach...even if it meant, you know, not spending money on players like Ayew, Skipp, BDR, Edouard etc.

 

You can call it hindsight, but were were never going to outrun it. Kicking the can down the road has caused the situation to become worse, with the added legal costs added on top.

 

 

[Ricey]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

I think it has been said that it will be VERY surprising if the PL manages to be successful with the arbitration relating to 22/23

Yes, the PL might fail to apply the punishment...but the EFL might be able to. The only way we win is if we can prove we were neither a PL club or EFL club at the time of the breach.

[ClaphamFox]

10 minutes ago, Ricey said:

I'm not sure we did pass PSR for the period ending June 2024. We avoided a charge, but there is a theory that is only because there is an on-going arbitration case. The Premier League wording in the statement was odd.

From what I can see there is still the threat of three separate points deductions.

 

Period ending June 2023 - We avoid it this year by claiming we weren't a PL team at the time. The EFL will try and apply that next season.
Period ending June 2024 - See above, once the arbitration case is settled, I wouldn't be shocked if a breach for this period is revealed.
Period ending June 2025 - We'll need to sell before this date to avoid a third breach, which if it goes via the PL expedited route, could mean a third deduction towards the end of next season.

We should have just taken our medicine this season, accepted the 23 breach, likewise the 24 breach if there was one and did everything we could to avoid a 25 breach...even if it meant, you know, not spending money on players like Ayew, Skipp, BDR, Edouard etc.

 

You can call it hindsight, but were were never going to outrun it. Kicking the can down the road has caused the situation to become worse, with the added legal costs added on top.

 

 

Yes, it's still not clear whether we passed PSR for the period ending June 2024, but if there was a breach it was likely very small (most experts at the time seemed to think it was very tight). So a heavy points deduction for that period is unlikely.

 

Re: the period ending 2023, the ideal outcome for us would be for the PL to win the arbitration case and impose a points deduction on us before the end of this season. However it's probably too late for that now. The big question is: if the arbitration process upholds the verdict at our appeal (ie, that we weren't a PL club at the time), does jurisdiction automatically pass onto the EFL or is that also a legal grey area? I don't know the answer to this question but I'm very interested to find out.

 

I worry for the current period because I'm not convinced we'll raise enough from player sales before the end of next month, but I suppose we'll just have to wait and see on that one...

[Guy]

PSR strikes me as like being offered a credit card by a bank with a fixed £250 limit but go beyond that putrid amount spend and you're no longer credit worthy You also can't then apply for another bank's credit card if you breach the limit!

[Sol thewall Bamba]

2 hours ago, AKCJ said:

How are other clubs supposed to compete when we're handing out 80k a week contracts for fun?

We spent £40m on Okoli and Skipp and now we have no money left for anyone else. 

 

We're the victims and it's not fair

[Terraloon]

3 hours ago, Ricey said:

I'm not sure we did pass PSR for the period ending June 2024. We avoided a charge, but there is a theory that is only because there is an on-going arbitration case. The Premier League wording in the statement was odd.

From what I can see there is still the threat of three separate points deductions.

 

Period ending June 2023 - We avoid it this year by claiming we weren't a PL team at the time. The EFL will try and apply that next season.
Period ending June 2024 - See above, once the arbitration case is settled, I wouldn't be shocked if a breach for this period is revealed.
Period ending June 2025 - We'll need to sell before this date to avoid a third breach, which if it goes via the PL expedited route, could mean a third deduction towards the end of next season.

We should have just taken our medicine this season, accepted the 23 breach, likewise the 24 breach if there was one and did everything we could to avoid a 25 breach...even if it meant, you know, not spending money on players like Ayew, Skipp, BDR, Edouard etc.

 

You can call it hindsight, but were were never going to outrun it. Kicking the can down the road has caused the situation to become worse, with the added legal costs added on top.

 

 

Looking just at the bottom line for the 3 years ending June 24 the losses were £201million (£92.4,£89.7 & £18.9)  deduct the £105 ( remember that for clubs promoted T was even though a Championship club increased effectively to£35 million) that’s £96 million over the £105 meaning deductibles of £33 million Pa  for academy, woman’s football and depreciation) which is way above the sort of numbers I believe is correct. I work on a round £23 million a year a number I extracted from the PLs claims that in the 3 years to 23 losses were £129.4 million 

 

Neither the PL nor the EFL will believe that LCFC have co operated so if points deductions are the “ medicine” then they will argue that there are aggravating factors and little to no justification to mitigate down any sanction in their mind would be appropriate 

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Terraloon

[Bilo]

On 30/04/2025 at 16:50, stu said:

I interpret that as to meaning the previous two seasons for the PSR period 25/26. You can't change the rules for a PSR period thats already been completed, surely? Especially if the clubs the rules are being imposed on haven't agreed to it, being as current EFL clubs have voted it in.

 

Sounds like the grounds for another messy legal battle, if that is what they mean.

I would imagine it would be difficult to enforce rules retrospectively that didn't exist at the time alleged breaches happened. Ex post facto.