MancFox24 Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 24 minutes ago, studentofthegame said: I think the entire purpose of FFP/PSR whatever bollocks they will come up with next is to ensure that they don't Financial controls were never about saving clubs, they were about closing the door and making a quasi league within a league, just like the new Champions League changes have all been about forming a quasi super league We did everything we were supposed to do, got unlucky to miss out on Champions League and spiralled after one terrible season It happens to almost every club that challenges the established elite, Spurs are basically the only team to have bridged the gap legitimately, Manchester City did it and Newcastle will do it by being funded by oil countries. People talk about Villa as bridging the gap but a few seasons ago they were in the Championship and during covid they were one technical error away from being relegated. Villa are also right on the edge of a PSR breach and could find themselves in trouble if they don't get CL this season 1
cityfanlee23 Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 12 minutes ago, STUHILL said: Can they deduct us points for next season? Surely, it has to be applied now. Or have they purposely timed this to be decided once we are considered a Championship club and hit us for the start of the season down there. AFAIK although it's the premier league bringing the case against us, because it happened in the championship season they can defer the punishment to them.
Ricey Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 32 minutes ago, Product of 84 said: So when an established Premier League Club (who is expecting to finish in the top half) is relegated how do they survive? You can't sack the players because you have to pay their wages for the duration of their remaining contracts. My understanding is you are basically being forced to sell. But what if the player doesn't want to leave as the club buying them is less favorable in terms of location or wages offered. I just can't see what the club were supposed to do to meet the regulations and stay competitive. Also all three promoted teams have been relegated. Doesn't this prove that with the financial restraints teams have that the league has become fixed. How much do Leeds say need to spend to survive? And what player is going to move there under the present PSR rules? We breached PSR even before relegation, so I don’t think we can use that as an excuse. 1
Ricey Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 19 minutes ago, dannythefox said: Don’t understand it. They’ve changed the rules from now but want to charge us on something that’s happened in the previous season how does that work then? They’ve closed the loophole around breaches occurring to promoted or relegated teams and who can punish who. They haven’t changed the PSR rules themselves.
Les-TA-Jon Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 3 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: It seems that way - various media reports suggest that the proceedings against us for that period have concluded and we can't be punished for it. The 23/24 period is a puzzle. The view at the time seemed to be that it was very tight but the KDH and Enzo money might have just keep us the right side of a breach. Now we know that didn't happen, but we have no idea what level of breach it was. And we probably won't find out for a while yet. £83m allowable losses We lost £202m So we breached by £119m less whatever the add-backs are. Unless we have huge add-backs, it's the biggest breach by anyone, by far. 1
Ricey Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 15 minutes ago, STUHILL said: Can they deduct us points for next season? Surely, it has to be applied now. Or have they purposely timed this to be decided once we are considered a Championship club and hit us for the start of the season down there. It was our challenging of the 22/23 breach that has delayed this. If it wasn’t for that we would have had all points deductions applied this season. 1
messerschmitt Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 1 minute ago, Ricey said: We breached PSR even before relegation, so I don’t think we can use that as an excuse. Can we not use the defence that those running the club don't have the mental capacity to understand they've done wrong? 3
Ric Flair Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 Just now, Les-TA-Jon said: £83m allowable losses We lost £202m So we breached by £119m less whatever the add-backs are. Unless we have huge add-backs, it's the biggest breach by anyone, by far. Pretty sure the likes of Swiss Ramble had us down to breach by £10-20m but that was without factoring in Maresca and maybe KDH? 1
kingfox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 54 minutes ago, hejammy said: Shift worker? or just lazy? I’m currently in Nuuk, Greenland 👍🏻 1
Iwebema Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 I'm still not sure if we were allowed to lose 83m or 105m in the period up until the end of last season based in the season in the championship I thought it was 83m. But reading around it suggests that we were at 206m losses at the end of the championship season. So well over both figures, but I dont think these figures from the BBC and Telegraph include KDH and Enzo if they were within the same accounts. Looking ahead the positive if those 2 horrendous years between 21-23 will fall off and we were only at a 19m loss in 23/24 so in theory we shouldn't be as broken as before.....
djskydiver Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 Explains why Ruud is still here; the accounts can’t be that great for 24/25 and probably trying to avoid any charges being brought against us in the future.
ClaphamFox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said: £83m allowable losses We lost £202m So we breached by £119m less whatever the add-backs are. Unless we have huge add-backs, it's the biggest breach by anyone, by far. I understand the argument you're making. I'm just pointing out that it runs contrary to what pretty much all experts have said about the FV24 period (ie that it was very tight and that we either narrowly breached or narrowly avoided a breach). And I assume they'd have made their calculations based on estimated add-backs. Edited 20 May 2025 by ClaphamFox 1
SixtiesFox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 We crashed the party, became the life and soul of the party but now the party's over. Vardy leaving really was the last hurrah. Was it worth it? Hell yeah! But now we need to clean up the mess with a mass clearout from Top to bottom and find a new Pearson to start the long rebuild. 1
DezFox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 20 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said: Don't get me wrong I completely agree and this scenario is a best case scenario, a lot of it will be down to WHO we can get rid of, if for example we fail to ship out Faes, Daka, Coady etc, we may then be in a position where we are forced to sell players like El Khannouss, Fatawu or Nelson. I'm curious to know how the EFL deal with certain scenarios, say they come in and force us to produce a business plan, and part of that plan is to sell one of the big wage earners like Winks, if we are offered lowball fees for him which would result in us losing money, would the EFL accept us making another book loss to try to achieve wage stability? Or would they say "that's great you got 90k per week off the books, but you still made a book loss so you've breached again here's another deduction" It's a weird merry-go-round, we can't afford to keep these players but because of PSR breaches we can't afford to lose them for a cheap fee if it results in a loss of money on the books. I get this however, ultimately you would think it would ensure we don’t keep going out and buying players on big wages you can’t sell. They have warned us many times but we’re have just kept on doing it. Buying Ayew, BDR and extending vestergard is a prime example of this afain. We just do not learn, it’s embarrassing. 3
Iwebema Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 1 minute ago, djskydiver said: Explains why Ruud is still here; the accounts can’t be that great for 24/25 and probably trying to avoid any charges being brought against us in the future. Think the 89m losses in the first relegation season drop off at the end of this accounting period. Should give us some wiggle room for the summer pending punishments.
Number 6 Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 7 minutes ago, Ricey said: It was our challenging of the 22/23 breach that has delayed this. If it wasn’t for that we would have had all points deductions applied this season. The delay this season was due to the PL challenging the independent decision wasn't it? Not an LCFC challenge. 1
ClaphamFox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 1 minute ago, Number 6 said: The delay this season was due to the PL challenging the independent decision wasn't it? Not an LCFC challenge. Yes.
VLC86 Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 10 minutes ago, messerschmitt said: Can we not use the defence that those running the club don't have the mental capacity to understand they've done wrong?
urban.spaceman Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 23 minutes ago, Qwerty said: Am I missing something, or wasn't there a new rule recently that cases had to be fast-tracked, and punishments had to be issued in the season that the charges were brought? Would that not mean that if they charge us now, in the 24-25 season, they have to deduct points in this season too? They can take all our points this season for all I care. It makes no difference really. Much better than starting next season on minus points. They tried to fast-track our case in when we were in the Championship because they changed the rule to do so after we were relegated. That was one of the many, many cases we won against them. The Premier League themselves stated this in their failed case against us in September: 49. The PL submits that the PSRs for a particular season involving accounting process and must continue to apply, however, long it takes for the accounting process to be concluded. It further submits that a breach of the PSR‘s in a given season has a detrimental effect on other clubs in the competition in that season, that effective enforcement of the PSR is important, and that it would not accord with the purpose of the PSR’s if they were construed in such a way that’s a breach became “untethered from the season in which the adverse effect on competition was felt all the PSR failed to affect over spending incurred in an unsuccessful attempt to avoid relegation” That’s the same Premier League who ignored Manchester City’s brazen rule breaking for a full decade, has taken SEVEN years to investigate and charge and STILL not concluded a case that has had a blatant detrimental effect on our club’s ability to comply with their PSR they also admitted were poorly written.
hejammy Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 16 minutes ago, kingfox said: I’m currently in Nuuk, Greenland 👍🏻 So just Lazy then....
Les-TA-Jon Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 15 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: Pretty sure the likes of Swiss Ramble had us down to breach by £10-20m but that was without factoring in Maresca and maybe KDH? 13 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: I understand the argument you're making. I'm just pointing out that it runs contrary to what pretty much all experts have said about the FV24 period (ie that it was very tight and that we either narrowly breached or narrowly avoided a breach). And I assume they'd have made their calculations based on estimated add-backs. Sure. I''m just saying, it's the unknown add-backs that's the point of uncertainty. £83m allowable losses vs £202m losses doesn't make for good reading. Given we've not done any Chelsea style shenanigans, I can't see where we're getting £100m+ of add-backs from.
BigC Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 PSR is complete rubbish and totally unfair. Chelsea and even us have made a complete mockery of it. But in some ways a points deduction is what our hierarchy deserve.
Guest Lako42 Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 Worst thing about this is that we are going to have to sell Faes or Soumare to cover the hole. **** my life
volpeazzurro Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 18 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said: £83m allowable losses We lost £202m So we breached by £119m less whatever the add-backs are. Unless we have huge add-backs, it's the biggest breach by anyone, by far. Whoever is employed to do the accounting is about as much use as this year's playing staff and the people that employed them!
Chelmofox Posted 20 May 2025 Posted 20 May 2025 Once again the Lawyers win. If only as much effort was put into supporting the grass routes and diversity of the overall game, rather than ensuring the big boys can asset strip clubs at will. They'll take you best performers and your academy kids. If you stop being a compliant feeder club, then we are coming for you.
Recommended Posts