Premier League has charged LCFC with an alleged breach of PSR

[LCFCJohn]

So Sheffield Wednesday haven’t paid staff for the second time in 3 months. Chansiri is also refusing offers to sell the club.

 

Why are the EFL not stepping in here? What about their so called but clearly BS ‘fit and proper owners’ rules!

 

Whilst our problems are of our own making, this does show that the EFL aren’t fit for purpose. It also shows they don’t actually care about the survival of clubs and this is not what the rules are about, regardless of their narrative.

[Jazzy_Jeff]

Just now, LCFCJohn said:

So Sheffield Wednesday haven’t paid staff for the second time in 3 months. Chansiri is also refusing offers to sell the club.

 

Why are the EFL not stepping in here? What about their so called but clearly BS ‘fit and proper owners’ rules!

 

Whilst our problems are of our own making, this does show that the EFL aren’t fit for purpose. It also shows they don’t actually care about the survival of clubs and this is not what the rules are about, regardless of their narrative.

100%. The rules are designed to look like they are doing clubs a favour when in reality they are there to help the leagues manipulate the standings. 

[Terraloon]

On 29/05/2025 at 22:25, davieG said:

https://eflanalysis.com/transfers/leicester-city-tipped-to-make-30m-announcement-as-aiyawatt-srivaddhanaprabha-sets-transfer-budget/

 

Leicester City tipped to make £30m announcement as Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha sets transfer budget
Ailsa Cowen
Thu 29 May 2025 19:15, UK
Finally free from the constraints of Profit and Sustainability Rules, Leicester City’s 2025-26 Championship campaign begins with a sense of financial freedom.

Relegated from the Premier League at the end of a miserable 2024-25 season, the Foxes are now aiming for an immediate bounce back to the top flight.

While the complete 2024-25 accounts are still under wraps, whispers suggest Leicester are in a significantly better financial position compared to previous Premier League years, where substantial losses led to PSR concerns.

However, this newfound financial breathing room does not mean a spending spree is incoming, especially with the threat of a potential points deduction for alleged past PSR breaches.

To understand the true picture of their summer strategy, we turn to our finance expert, Adam Williams, for his predicted financial forecast as Leicester City prepare for life back in the Championship.

Leicester City’s predicted budget for the upcoming season
In an EFL Analysis exclusive, we take a look at how PSR restraints will impact Leicester in 2025/26, as well as player sales and commercial losses, to come up with a rough budget the Foxes can use this summer.

Williams said: “2025-26 will be the first season for a while that Leicester are not under major PSR pressure. We do not have the accounts for 2024-25 yet, but we can deduce that the losses won’t be as heavy as previous seasons.

“Looking at their signings and the wage profile of players they brought in for 2024-25, they have not bet the farm on staying up necessarily.

“In 2023-24, their losses were a relatively modest £19m. If you add back PSR-exempt expenses, that probably swings to about minus £10m.

“They did make a net profit on player sales in cash terms of about £50m that season, compared to negative £36m this season, so that’s one discrepancy with trying to work out 2024-25’s figures, along with the wage bill rising after promotion. Amortisation, which is how clubs account for transfer fees paid over some time, will be somewhere around £60m.

“But I would suggest they will maybe make £175m in revenue. Because the new signings they made are amortised over five years whereas profit on the sales is booked immediately, as well as the fact that Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall was a ‘pure profit’ sale for PSR purposes, I reckon a loss of £30-40m sounds about right. Add back PSR-allowable expenditure and let us say it is £30m.”

So, what does that mean in simpler terms? Well, Leicester may need more money to come in before they spend, but that’s unlikely to come from those at the top.

Williams added: “They are at negative £40m and they will be allowed to lose up to £61m. I think player sales are inevitable and the transfer budget itself will depend on how strong they go in that department. Whatever they spend, I suspect they will have to earn first.

“I do not think the owners will want to put money in externally and it would not make business or PSR sense to do so.”

Just got back into the UK and catching up.

I said a week or two ago I had put some numbers re 24/25 

We know that the loss in 23/24 was £18.9 million 

 My guess is that income will be slightly higher than predicted here at £178 million.  So some £73 million extra on top of the 23/24 numbers.

According to the 23/24 accounts player trading profit was £71.841 million not  “about £50 million “also let’s not forget the £12.73million compensation for Maresca and staff. Combined that’s £84.5 million that won’t be repeated in 24/25 unless major player sales take place in the next 30 days . I doubt it so at this time I will use that number

I agree that amortisation will be in the £60 million ball park.which is around £17 million more.

Wages will almost certainly go up from the 22/23 number of £93 million .It won’t be as high as 22/23 that’s for sure but my guess is that it will be at least £130 million so plus £37million. Thats being very conservative and I suspect way under when you add in Coopers pay off.

 

So to the £18.9 loss for 23/24 we need to add/ subtract the following

 

+£73 million income growth 

 

-£17 million amortisation 

-£37 million wages

-£84 .5 million non repeating transfer profit/ 

 My estimate is the loss currently is looking to be between £80& £85 million for 23/24.  
 

So 
 

Looking at the 22/23, 23/24 and the 24/25 estimate the losses  of £89.5 million + £18.9 million + £80 million I am projecting over the 3 year period is at least £185 million deductibles of £3x £29 million .
 

So £98 million over . But I havent factored in any cost increases elsewhere when I am sure there will be some.

 

Will the allowances be £105 million or £81 million? The  question of jurisdiction and under which set of rules apply for LCFC post 1/7/25 really is a complication 
 

Its going to be very close. Hopefully wages haven’t grown by more than than £37 million because that really is the key to it all

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[davieG]

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-efl-psr-points-10229486

 

Leicester City ‘pursued with vengeance’ in football’s rulebook era
Leicester City have been stuck in an ongoing soap opera about football's financial rules

ByPeter Smith
12:10, 1 JUN 2025

Leicester City's seemingly eternal battle with football's financial regulations is bad news for the English game, it has been claimed.

Leicester have spiralled into financial rules chaos after chasing their tails trying to sustain a place in the Premier League's top eight. A shock relegation in 2023 took an almighty whack on their income too - and significantly reduced the amount they are allowed to lose over a three-year rolling cycle.

They won promotion in 2023/24 but have now been referred by the Premier League to an independent commission for an alleged breach of profitability and sustainability rules for that season - to cap being relegated back to the Championship.

 

The authorities could now come down on them heavily, with a points deduction likely if found guilty, but leading football writer Martin Samuel claims the rules have become more important than the objective. Leicester, like Manchester United, are not in danger of going bust due to their mistakes, but have their hands tied in terms of trying to put them right.

Samuel writes in today's Sunday Times: "Is this what we do now? Pass raft after raft of regulations until clubs bleed out? Like Leicester City?

"Theirs was a narrative reverberating around the globe, without doubt they improved the Premier League’s standing. Now Leicester are pursued into the leagues below such is the desire for vengeance having made mistakes.

"Think of the most positive stories this year and the clubs involved — Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Bournemouth — all have endured skirmishes and more over financial regulation in recent years. Is this making English football more attractive? As it continues to leak talent to foreign leagues, from Kane to Toney to Michael Olise or Dean Huijsen, it does not look it."

He added: "(Manchester United have) been poorly run and it has caught up with them. Mismanagement, weak executive leadership, flawed recruitment, inconsistency in managerial appointments, United have committed all of football’s cardinal sins.

"They deserve no better than to be where they are. What they do not deserve, however, what no club deserves, is to be afforded no way back. And this is where the involvement of the Premier League is significant.

"In the modern world of sports business, how do you take a club that is a worldwide brand leader, among the most recognisable names on the planet, and allow it to rot, to become a laughing stock, a byword for failure and incompetence? Not that United should be artificially promoted or propelled, not that there hasn’t been ineptitude on an epic scale, but no club should be corralled by regulations that see impoverishment where there is none, trapping them in this puppet-show purgatory."

Leicester won the Premier League title in 2016, the FA Cup in 2021 and competed in the Champions League, Europa League and Conference League between 2016 and 2022.

But they were referred to the commission for the three years up to 2023 - when they allegedly breached PSR limits by £19.5 million - but escaped punishment due to a loophole, successfully arguing they were no longer a Premier League club and not yet a Championship club when they filed their 2022/23 accounts. That loophole has since been addressed by the top flight and EFL.

The club has recorded total losses of £201.6m in the most recent three-year cycle - although not all, such as spending on academy and infrastructure, are applicable to P&S calculations - but is only allowed to lose up to £84.5m because one year of that was spent in the Championship. Premier League clubs are allowed to lose up to £35m a year and Championship clubs can lose up to £13m, plus an extra £1.5m for the 2023/24 season due to the rising cost of living.

 

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, davieG said:

https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-efl-psr-points-10229486

 

Leicester City ‘pursued with vengeance’ in football’s rulebook era
Leicester City have been stuck in an ongoing soap opera about football's financial rules

ByPeter Smith
12:10, 1 JUN 2025

Leicester City's seemingly eternal battle with football's financial regulations is bad news for the English game, it has been claimed.

Leicester have spiralled into financial rules chaos after chasing their tails trying to sustain a place in the Premier League's top eight. A shock relegation in 2023 took an almighty whack on their income too - and significantly reduced the amount they are allowed to lose over a three-year rolling cycle.

They won promotion in 2023/24 but have now been referred by the Premier League to an independent commission for an alleged breach of profitability and sustainability rules for that season - to cap being relegated back to the Championship.

 

The authorities could now come down on them heavily, with a points deduction likely if found guilty, but leading football writer Martin Samuel claims the rules have become more important than the objective. Leicester, like Manchester United, are not in danger of going bust due to their mistakes, but have their hands tied in terms of trying to put them right.

Samuel writes in today's Sunday Times: "Is this what we do now? Pass raft after raft of regulations until clubs bleed out? Like Leicester City?

"Theirs was a narrative reverberating around the globe, without doubt they improved the Premier League’s standing. Now Leicester are pursued into the leagues below such is the desire for vengeance having made mistakes.

"Think of the most positive stories this year and the clubs involved — Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, Bournemouth — all have endured skirmishes and more over financial regulation in recent years. Is this making English football more attractive? As it continues to leak talent to foreign leagues, from Kane to Toney to Michael Olise or Dean Huijsen, it does not look it."

He added: "(Manchester United have) been poorly run and it has caught up with them. Mismanagement, weak executive leadership, flawed recruitment, inconsistency in managerial appointments, United have committed all of football’s cardinal sins.

"They deserve no better than to be where they are. What they do not deserve, however, what no club deserves, is to be afforded no way back. And this is where the involvement of the Premier League is significant.

"In the modern world of sports business, how do you take a club that is a worldwide brand leader, among the most recognisable names on the planet, and allow it to rot, to become a laughing stock, a byword for failure and incompetence? Not that United should be artificially promoted or propelled, not that there hasn’t been ineptitude on an epic scale, but no club should be corralled by regulations that see impoverishment where there is none, trapping them in this puppet-show purgatory."

Leicester won the Premier League title in 2016, the FA Cup in 2021 and competed in the Champions League, Europa League and Conference League between 2016 and 2022.

But they were referred to the commission for the three years up to 2023 - when they allegedly breached PSR limits by £19.5 million - but escaped punishment due to a loophole, successfully arguing they were no longer a Premier League club and not yet a Championship club when they filed their 2022/23 accounts. That loophole has since been addressed by the top flight and EFL.

The club has recorded total losses of £201.6m in the most recent three-year cycle - although not all, such as spending on academy and infrastructure, are applicable to P&S calculations - but is only allowed to lose up to £84.5m because one year of that was spent in the Championship. Premier League clubs are allowed to lose up to £35m a year and Championship clubs can lose up to £13m, plus an extra £1.5m for the 2023/24 season due to the rising cost of living.

 

Thanks for sharing.

 

Here's the original Martin Samuel article:

https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/manchester-united-asia-tour-ruben-amorim-martin-samuel-gvwl9cbj0

https://archive.ph/amIX1#selection-1645.0-1648.0

 

Samuel only mentions us a couple of times but it's still an important read. It's extremely heartwarming to see Man Utd fail on their own terms when we haven't been given the same luxury. 

 

He also wrote this before we won the September case:

https://www.thetimes.com/sport/football/article/leicester-city-doomed-to-fail-under-premier-leagues-warped-logic-x9h2dm62f

https://archive.ph/tEG0t

 

The Premier League have broken the sport. 

[orangecity23]

It certainly would not be surprising if it became urgent to change the PSR rules now that Man United are on the brink of breaking them. The league needs it's plastic willy puller team near the top, because the broadcasters want to endlessly show Yanited matches to plastic glory hunting tossers who were at school in the 90s and picked the team winning all the time (but wouldn't recognise Manchester on a map) to "follow" because they think associating them selves with a faceless number 1 sporting brand is a substitute for a personality. It would be "bad for business", just like they got to choose their own punishment for trying to destroy the domestic game with the super league plot - couldn't dock them points for that, because it would be unfair to "punish the fans" - strange how we never get that argument applied to us in the press. Media wants to look after their golden goose.

[urban.spaceman]

On 30/05/2025 at 13:54, john ridley said:

Why is it bollocks? We've  been poorly  run for years despite all this  self sustainable crap they keep coming out with .All this is through  bad management with the culprits  still in place .Until  there's a big change this will crop up every  year till all these silly contracts handed out have gone .No sympathy,**** em .

Two things are true.

 

1. The club has made some terrible mistakes over the last few years. Awful signings, ridiculous wages, failing to sack failing managers at the right time and making terrible choices in recruitment.
2. The Premier League’s rules have explicitly restricted our earnings and constrained our spending power since winning the league. They failed to hold the Super League clubs accountable for far greater crimes than alleged “overspending”, and consistently changed the rules to punish “smaller” clubs for retrospective offences before those rules existed. They’ve broken their own rules multiple times while proving we have broken exactly none.

Am I angry at the club’s many mistakes? **** yes.

 

Do I believe they are solely responsible for our current situation? **** no. Not even close.

 

The club spent money on players and wages under previous PSR rules that was entirely legal, sustainable and justified given our ambitions and achievements at the time. Yes, the players ended up being shit and contracts became very, very costly. But the club was thriving regardless - League Cup and Europa Conference semi finalists. FA Cup and Community Shield winners. Two seasons in the Top 3 until the very end. 

 

What changed was the tightening of the rules. The contracts we'd already given out to players made it impossible for us to adhere to the new limits unless we could get them out of the door quickly. But because of those rules, nobody would be willing to pay the same or more that we were. A breach was therefore inevitable and the club made the mistake of self-harming in an attempt to comply. Rules that the Premier League have admitted were poorly written. So poorly written that it is proven that we didn't actually break any of them. 

 

I want accountability within the club for the many mistakes but I strongly believe we should not be thrown into an existential crisis - which we are in now - with serious restrictions on getting out of it, because a demonstrably corrupt league wrote very poor rules, are implementing them differently against different clubs, not only refusing to hold other clubs accountable for worse crimes and changing the competition to be even more in their favour, but also breaking their own rules in a demented pursuit of a club that has already lost everything it had built.

 

Read the article shared by @davieG above, and the ones I posted below his. Read the statements posted by the club after each case they won against the Premier League and the EFL. The club is fighting for our future and the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions in fair competition. We have every right to do that, and hold the Premier League accountable to their own rules. 

[john ridley]

1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said:

Two things are true.

 

1. The club has made some terrible mistakes over the last few years. Awful signings, ridiculous wages, failing to sack failing managers at the right time and making terrible choices in recruitment.
2. The Premier League’s rules have explicitly restricted our earnings and constrained our spending power since winning the league. They failed to hold the Super League clubs accountable for far greater crimes than alleged “overspending”, and consistently changed the rules to punish “smaller” clubs for retrospective offences before those rules existed. They’ve broken their own rules multiple times while proving we have broken exactly none.

Am I angry at the club’s many mistakes? **** yes.

 

Do I believe they are solely responsible for our current situation? **** no. Not even close.

 

The club spent money on players and wages under previous PSR rules that was entirely legal, sustainable and justified given our ambitions and achievements at the time. Yes, the players ended up being shit and contracts became very, very costly. But the club was thriving regardless - League Cup and Europa Conference semi finalists. FA Cup and Community Shield winners. Two seasons in the Top 3 until the very end. 

 

What changed was the tightening of the rules. The contracts we'd already given out to players made it impossible for us to adhere to the new limits unless we could get them out of the door quickly. But because of those rules, nobody would be willing to pay the same or more that we were. A breach was therefore inevitable and the club made the mistake of self-harming in an attempt to comply. Rules that the Premier League have admitted were poorly written. So poorly written that it is proven that we didn't actually break any of them. 

 

I want accountability within the club for the many mistakes but I strongly believe we should not be thrown into an existential crisis - which we are in now - with serious restrictions on getting out of it, because a demonstrably corrupt league wrote very poor rules, are implementing them differently against different clubs, not only refusing to hold other clubs accountable for worse crimes and changing the competition to be even more in their favour, but also breaking their own rules in a demented pursuit of a club that has already lost everything it had built.

 

Read the article shared by @davieG above, and the ones I posted below his. Read the statements posted by the club after each case they won against the Premier League and the EFL. The club is fighting for our future and the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions in fair competition. We have every right to do that, and hold the Premier League accountable to their own rules. 

 I agree with your points , and yeah the rules are all over the place depending  who you are .But giving Vestergaard'another contract, the Eduoard  fiasco, signing Skipp for all that money  etc  that's on Rudkin , Glover etc   serves em right ,fed up of hearing about it .

[Dan]

Those odds on us to win the league or get promoted next season tell us a points deduction is an absolute certainty.

[Richmondfox]

59 minutes ago, Dan said:

Those odds on us to win the league or get promoted next season tell us a points deduction is an absolute certainty.

All the more reason for the club to get transfers out and in and the manager, team & staff all working together to hit the ground running.

 

No doubt Ruskin and Susan will return from a well deserved break a week before the season starts. 

[ClaphamFox]

3 hours ago, Dan said:

Those odds on us to win the league or get promoted next season tell us a points deduction is an absolute certainty.

The odds tell us precisely zero. The bookies have no more idea than anybody else what will happen. 

[Guest Bilo]

42 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

The odds tell us precisely zero. The bookies have no more idea than anybody else what will happen. 

Especially in niche markets like 'next Leicester manager.' The amounts gambled are so small that it probably only takes three figures to change the odds drastically. People see the odds changing, have a cheeky tenner themselves and the odds go in again. A week later, a manager who was 5/1 is now 1/3 and everyone thinks we've got our man.

[SemperEadem]

On 31/05/2025 at 08:32, LCFCJohn said:

So Sheffield Wednesday haven’t paid staff for the second time in 3 months. Chansiri is also refusing offers to sell the club.

 

Why are the EFL not stepping in here? What about their so called but clearly BS ‘fit and proper owners’ rules!

 

Whilst our problems are of our own making, this does show that the EFL aren’t fit for purpose. It also shows they don’t actually care about the survival of clubs and this is not what the rules are about, regardless of their narrative.

They are, they are looking to dish out to them a three window transfer ban.

[Dames]

14 hours ago, orangecity23 said:

It certainly would not be surprising if it became urgent to change the PSR rules now that Man United are on the brink of breaking them. The league needs it's plastic willy puller team near the top, because the broadcasters want to endlessly show Yanited matches to plastic glory hunting tossers who were at school in the 90s and picked the team winning all the time (but wouldn't recognise Manchester on a map) to "follow" because they think associating them selves with a faceless number 1 sporting brand is a substitute for a personality. It would be "bad for business", just like they got to choose their own punishment for trying to destroy the domestic game with the super league plot - couldn't dock them points for that, because it would be unfair to "punish the fans" - strange how we never get that argument applied to us in the press. Media wants to look after their golden goose.

I think this is actually the key and might see us escape punishment yet again. I can see the rules being changed in extraordinary circumstances to protect Utd and the backdating of those rules will see us ride on their coat tails. 
 

The reality is both clubs deserve what they get. 

[Chelmofox]

49 minutes ago, Bilo said:

Especially in niche markets like 'next Leicester manager.' The amounts gambled are so small that it probably only takes three figures to change the odds drastically. People see the odds changing, have a cheeky tenner themselves and the odds go in again. A week later, a manager who was 5/1 is now 1/3 and everyone thinks we've got our man.

I bet most bookies wont even take 3 figures on the next Leicester manager market right now. I don't even see a betfair market for bookies to even lay a bet.

[Guest Bilo]

1 minute ago, Chelmofox said:

I bet most bookies wont even take 3 figures on the next Leicester manager market right now. I don't even see a betfair market for bookies to even lay a bet.

There isn't even one on Oddschecker AFAIK. 

[hackneyfox]

9 hours ago, Dan said:

Those odds on us to win the league or get promoted next season tell us a points deduction is an absolute certainty.

How did you come to a conclusion like that?

 

I hadn't realised the EFL set the odds, when did this happen?

 

 

[Dan]

8 hours ago, ClaphamFox said:

The odds tell us precisely zero. The bookies have no more idea than anybody else what will happen. 

They don't though do they? They aren't going to price us like that without very good reason.

[Dan]

2 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

How did you come to a conclusion like that?

 

I hadn't realised the EFL set the odds, when did this happen?

Because if there is zero chance of a points deduction then making us those sorts of odds are ridiculously valuable. I'm genuinely surprised at the pushback here. Are you all sure?

[ClaphamFox]

2 minutes ago, Dan said:

They don't though do they? They aren't going to price us like that without very good reason.

A points deduction seems likely given the recent charge, but the bookmakers have no more insight into that than anybody else. Their odds don't mean anything in themselves.

[Dan]

6 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

A points deduction seems likely given the recent charge, but the bookmakers have no more insight into that than anybody else. Their odds don't mean anything in themselves.

I think unless the chance of a points deduction was nearly certain that they would price us in line with Ipswich and Southampton. The fact they're offering that sort of price tells me we're almost certainly getting done. If it isn't a certainty, then this makes Leicester's odds to be promoted or win the league extremely generous.

 

I would put money on it myself but I can only conclude based on those odds that we are getting a deduction.

 

I mean I may be wrong but I'll happily revisit this in 6 months because I'm quite sure I won't be.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Just now, Dan said:

I think unless the chance of a points deduction was nearly certain that they would price us in line with Ipswich and Southampton. The fact they're offering that sort of price tells me we're almost certainly getting done. If it isn't a certainty, then this makes Leicester's odds to be promoted or win the league extremely generous.

 

I would put money on it myself but I can only conclude based on those odds that we are getting a deduction.

 

I mean I may be wrong but I'll happily revisit this in 6 months because I'm quite sure I won't be.

Exactly. Why on earth would we be priced like we are unless they were (all) very confident that they know something? 

 

And don't give it the "prices are just fueled by activity" line, because Birmingham are the most backed team and their odds aren't the shortest.

[Dan]

Just now, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Exactly. Why on earth would we be priced like we are unless they were (all) very confident that they know something? 

 

And don't give it the "prices are just fueled by activity" line, because Birmingham are the most backed team and their odds aren't the shortest.

I'll take what they do with Man City as a flip side.

 

Man City were favourites to win the league last season (as expected) but were something like 6th favourites to be relegated, on the basis of them possibly getting a big punishment.

 

The difference there is in neither instance are the bookies giving you the value. They're giving you a crap price on both.

 

This is different, they're giving you a frankly enormous price. 11/1 on Leicester to win the Championship, without a deduction, even in our current state is insane. They would only offer you that for good reason.

 

* Not trying to encourage you all to bet on it  but to be honest if I was as confident as some of you it meant nothing then I would be all over that.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

8 minutes ago, Dan said:

I'll take what they do with Man City as a flip side.

 

Man City were favourites to win the league last season (as expected) but were something like 6th favourites to be relegated, on the basis of them possibly getting a big punishment.

 

The difference there is in neither instance are the bookies giving you the value. They're giving you a crap price on both.

 

This is different, they're giving you a frankly enormous price. 11/1 on Leicester to win the Championship, without a deduction, even in our current state is insane. They would only offer you that for good reason.

 

* Not trying to encourage you all to bet on it  but to be honest if I was as confident as some of you it meant nothing then I would be all over that.

You can get 14-1 in some places!

[Lambert09]

4 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

You can get 14-1 in some places!

Yep I whacked a bet on that. Not because I think we will but at those prices it’s well worth a pop because with the right bits of business of course we’d be in contention. 
 

With a 6 point penalty you only need to beat you closest rival twice and the gaps gone