Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
moore_94

Premier League has charged LCFC with an alleged breach of PSR

By moore_94, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pliskin said:

Samual does make a very good point. We’re the only club that’s actually managed to breach the elite’s party. And look at us now? They relentlessly pursue us, at every given opportunity, and yet Man City are allowed to carry on as normal. Arsenal are allowed to continually play, pay and support and potential rapist…..

 

The whole league set up is to protect their key assets. 
 

If the EPL and EFL could drive us into none existence, they would. 
 

The only way to change it, is every single team steps forward and agrees to ignore the rules, or every single club comes forward and demands change. 

The Premier League have only “relentlessly pursued” us because we’ve relentlessly refused to cooperate and relentlessly breached.

 

The Arsenal situation is not relevant at all and the delay in the Man City cases isn’t due to the Premier League not caring, there is not a lot else they can do.

 

The EFL way over stepped their mark two seasons a go, granted, but the idea that they would be happy to see us go out of business is ridiculous. Maybe if the club sorted themselves out and cooperated with the leagues then things would be a lot smoother.

  • Like 1
Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted

People moan about PSR and I understand why due to the loopholes and inconsistencies, but imagine a world with no financial restrictions at all? Newcastle and Man City would blow everybody out of the water, agents would have a field day, whilst erratic or incompetent owners would be allowed to risk limitless long term financial damage.

 

Imagine if we’d been allowed to spend in the summer of 2022? More crap like Daka, Soumare, Vestergaard, Kristiansen and Tete would only have deepened our problems in the long run, especially once King Power ran into their financial problems, and probably not kept us up.

 

PSR does favour the big clubs, and that needs to be softened, but it also rewards smart operators, which we are absolutely not.

  • Like 2
splinterdream

splinterdream

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Ricey said:

The Premier League have only “relentlessly pursued” us because we’ve relentlessly refused to cooperate and relentlessly breached.

 

The Arsenal situation is not relevant at all and the delay in the Man City cases isn’t due to the Premier League not caring, there is not a lot else they can do.

 

The EFL way over stepped their mark two seasons a go, granted, but the idea that they would be happy to see us go out of business is ridiculous. Maybe if the club sorted themselves out and cooperated with the leagues then things would be a lot smoother.

Maybe thats whats happening now, we're negotiating with the EFL hence the sell off of our players 

Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, splinterdream said:

Maybe thats whats happening now, we're negotiating with the EFL hence the sell off of our players 

It wouldn’t surprise me. Going public that we are under a business plan serves no benefit to us or the EFL whilst the transfer window is open.

CornwallFox

CornwallFox

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Ricey said:

People moan about PSR and I understand why due to the loopholes and inconsistencies, but imagine a world with no financial restrictions at all? Newcastle and Man City would blow everybody out of the water, agents would have a field day, whilst erratic or incompetent owners would be allowed to risk limitless long term financial damage.

 

Imagine if we’d been allowed to spend in the summer of 2022? More crap like Daka, Soumare, Vestergaard, Kristiansen and Tete would only have deepened our problems in the long run, especially once King Power ran into their financial problems, and probably not kept us up.

 

PSR does favour the big clubs, and that needs to be softened, but it also rewards smart operators, which we are absolutely not.

It should be based on an even spend cap of £x per club. Not a proportion of revenue. That would make it more even rather than keeping all the trophies with the top few clubs. 

  • Like 1
trooky

trooky

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Gazza M said:

Our story broke the mould. We didn't plough millions in to our squad. It was great recruitment and nurturing the right characters to build a unit. 

PSR stops billionaires ploughing millions upon millions in to a club to achieve success ala Jack Walker in the 90s with Blackburn. Newcastle were going down same route until PSR stopped them.

We are in a mess due to handing out silly wages like smarties to average footballers, something if managed better we could have avoided and stopped players walking away for free. 

In a way basing PSR against a clubs turnover is cruel, but I do like preventing people buying their way to success. The big clubs need a transfer spending restriction also that is more realistic to be fair. 

We all know the mistakes, but he's correct in that PSR limits ambition. 

 

They'll never be another team like Leicester City winning the PL under PSR it's physically impossible now to invest and comply with the rules. 

 

Villa could be the next Leicester, they've spent to reach the champions league and missed out and now having to break up their squad to comply with the accountants whilst Man U in 15th can spend £200+ million.

 

Its bollocks, the football leagues and FA need to do more to protect the Morecambes, Burys and Sheffield Wednesday instead of protecting Man U, Chelsea and Spurs from the likes of Villa, Newcastle and Forest. 

 

 

Edited by trooky
  • Like 3
moore_94

moore_94

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Ricey said:

It wouldn’t surprise me. Going public that we are under a business plan serves no benefit to us or the EFL whilst the transfer window is open.

I would think it definitely serves a benefit for the EFL to announce it if we are under one with how many times we made them look stupid a couple of years ago

Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

It should be based on an even spend cap of £x per club. Not a proportion of revenue. That would make it more even rather than keeping all the trophies with the top few clubs. 

Easier said than done, finding a suitable middle ground would allow too much spend for the promoted teams, putting them in danger if they went back down.

splinterdream

splinterdream

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

I would think it definitely serves a benefit for the EFL to announce it if we are under one with how many times we made them look stupid a couple of years ago

It may seem to us that everyone is out to get us, but not sure its the case, they just want to show that psr is working and gets you in the end, and we're a great example of that. Perhaps we are under a voluntary business plan to keep points deduction down low or perhaps to nothing 

stevostadium

stevostadium

Posted
Posted

Lets assume the worse and we have been given a transfer embargo.

Are we still able to sign free agents and bring in players on loan.

Or is every decision in the hands of the EFL and treated on a case by case basis?

Jattdogg

Jattdogg

Posted
Posted

Salary caps which automatically decrease player salaries if they get relegated. 

 

So, if the cap is 50 mill in the EPL say 30 mill in the championship, then salaries for all players go down based on the percentage drop etc. Perhaps for relegated clubs it's 35.

 

Then for promoted clubs to EPL perhaps it's 40 to 45 mill for first season and if they stay up 50 mill.

 

I'm not sure the correct path but caps ARE needed. Smarter people then me need to figure out how that ties into the relegation/promotion thing along with some breathability  (soft/hard salary caps, luxury tax etc).

 

justfoxes

justfoxes

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, grth2004 said:

Anyone know a date when we hear our fate ? 

If we were ManOil City NEVER, but a club like ours knowing how much W⚓️s The PL & EFL are probably Christmas Day !

davieG

davieG

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, justfoxes said:

On a Free wasn’t he?

still a transfer /adding to the squad.

  • Like 1
  • Popular Post
Detroit Blues

Detroit Blues

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
3 hours ago, Ricey said:

People moan about PSR and I understand why due to the loopholes and inconsistencies, but imagine a world with no financial restrictions at all? Newcastle and Man City would blow everybody out of the water, agents would have a field day, whilst erratic or incompetent owners would be allowed to risk limitless long term financial damage.

 

Imagine if we’d been allowed to spend in the summer of 2022? More crap like Daka, Soumare, Vestergaard, Kristiansen and Tete would only have deepened our problems in the long run, especially once King Power ran into their financial problems, and probably not kept us up.

 

PSR does favour the big clubs, and that needs to be softened, but it also rewards smart operators, which we are absolutely not.

I completely disagree. The teams at the top of the Premier League have no financial restrictions, Just look at Man City. What consequences have they suffered? They know they can spend however much money they want, and can flex their legal muscle anytime the Premier League accuses of them of wrong doing. The penalties for breaking PSR are inconsistent, and often toothless. Short of a massive points deduction leading to relegation, there's nothing the Premier League can do that would sufficiently penalize Man City to the point that they would have been better off not breaking the rules. 

 

The only thing PSR has done is to further entrench the elite clubs. Teams like Leicester, that had the money to spend, did not do so because of the fear of a points deduction. They would have been better off investing when Brendan Rodgers said the squad needed a refresh, even if it meant  a points deduction the following season. 

 

If parity is something we want, the financial rules need to be the same across the board. Allowing a club's revenue to dictate how much they can spend, effectively allows the "big clubs" to stay the big clubs, and forces every other club to lower their ambition. 

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Globalfox

Globalfox

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Detroit Blues said:

I completely disagree. The teams at the top of the Premier League have no financial restrictions, Just look at Man City. What consequences have they suffered? They know they can spend however much money they want, and can flex their legal muscle anytime the Premier League accuses of them of wrong doing. The penalties for breaking PSR are inconsistent, and often toothless. Short of a massive points deduction leading to relegation, there's nothing the Premier League can do that would sufficiently penalize Man City to the point that they would have been better off not breaking the rules. 

 

The only thing PSR has done is to further entrench the elite clubs. Teams like Leicester, that had the money to spend, did not do so because of the fear of a points deduction. They would have been better off investing when Brendan Rodgers said the squad needed a refresh, even if it meant  a points deduction the following season. 

 

If parity is something we want, the financial rules need to be the same across the board. Allowing a club's revenue to dictate how much they can spend, effectively allows the "big clubs" to stay the big clubs, and forces every other club to lower their ambition. 

 

 

True if you want competitive leagues spending is set at 95% of the income of the lowest income in the division. Coaches then have to coach and develop to that. Breaches are clear up to 5% overspend 5 point deduction, up to 10% 10 points. Over 10 up to 20% 30 point deduction. Over 20% automatic relegation. Never going to happen but oh what fun to watch.

  • Like 1
Claudio Fannieri

Claudio Fannieri

Posted
Posted

I think it’s far more likely we have imposed our own internal business plan to start to get the club back on an even keel. I imagine once we have raised X in outgoings it will then mean we can then spend Y on incoming players. I reckon the sale of Bilal unlocks our transfer budget and we see movement this week on a couple of loans and one or two free transfers or maybe just 3 or 4 loans with options/obligations 

Twitcher

Twitcher

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, splinterdream said:

Maybe thats whats happening now, we're negotiating with the EFL hence the sell off of our players 

Yes, I wondered if we were sending a message.

Lionator

Lionator

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Ricey said:

People moan about PSR and I understand why due to the loopholes and inconsistencies, but imagine a world with no financial restrictions at all? Newcastle and Man City would blow everybody out of the water, agents would have a field day, whilst erratic or incompetent owners would be allowed to risk limitless long term financial damage.

 

Imagine if we’d been allowed to spend in the summer of 2022? More crap like Daka, Soumare, Vestergaard, Kristiansen and Tete would only have deepened our problems in the long run, especially once King Power ran into their financial problems, and probably not kept us up.

 

PSR does favour the big clubs, and that needs to be softened, but it also rewards smart operators, which we are absolutely not.

Nobody’s saying there should be no restrictions, it’s that the current PSR policies are not working. 

coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Ricey said:

It wouldn’t surprise me. Going public that we are under a business plan serves no benefit to us or the EFL whilst the transfer window is open.

Why does it benefit the EFL? 

 

They would be all over us like a rash and would have it in the public domain 100% 

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...