Premier League has charged LCFC with an alleged breach of PSR

[ShadowKing]

I feel if you are not going to do a hard cap where all teams cannot go over the same amount, then they should not do points deduction. If you are going to go this type of cap where clubs on field spending will be restricted based on the teams revenue and net profit, I think if you go above the amount you can spend then every dollar you go above you should be paying a luxury tax, and this tax can be split between the teams who don’t go above their cap. This will stop teams fast from over spending, don’t think they will like the fact they will be giving money to the other teams.

[BKLFox]

Ironically with most of our big earners contracts coming to an end and us therefore having to purchase new players and provide contracts within the new rules, subject to promotion, we will be in a better position than a majority of teams currently in the premier Lge who will now have to quickly balance books & in doing so lose assets.

 

I also think we will now see the end of sizeable transfer fees being dealt out or received by those ‘not so big clubs’ as the top clubs get a firmer squeeze on the market, if they can reduce revenue to the opposition they can further reduce competition and that’s what they want & that’s what will happen.

 

 

Edited 22 November 2025 by BKLFox

[Terraloon]

On 19/11/2025 at 13:51, ClaphamFox said:

He may well have been. But based on previous cases, six points sounds about right so he's hardly going out on a limb...

Think we need to buckle up here for a major deduction.

 

Whilst we know the charges have been levied by the PL the charges are in accord with the EFL regulations and in those regulations  are set sanctions which the IC has to work to.

The sum being suggested by which LCFC overspent , if proven, falls into the 12 point minimum level. Depending of the final numbers that 12points may well be viewed as insufficient 

 

The two additional charges are key and again need to be noted. If you go back to the Derby debacle they failed to file accounts to the proper standard and  as such precedent was set in that if accounts aren’t filed to the correct level  or on time then that alone is a  P&S failure .The other charge about co operation is I believe an attempt to counter any claims that LCFC might argue re mitigation ( as Sheffield Wednesday did )If these two aspects are proven they will be aggravating factors and are unlikely to lead to a reduction in sanction
 

 

Edited 23 November 2025 by Terraloon

[Terraloon]

On 19/11/2025 at 09:50, 87fox said:

The top of page 3 in this document confirms from one of the previous hearings that we exceeded the 3 years ending 2023 by £19.5m after allowable losses had been deducted.

The calculation for the 3 years ending 2024 sees FY2021's £33.1m loss come off, and FY2024's £19.4m loss replace it (+£13.7m). Our allowance for that period is reduced by £22m because of being in the EFL (notwithstanding the potential argument at next week's hearing for the interpretation of "T" in the rules).

Some of the addbacks will change, but our breach for the 3 years ending 2024 should be in the region of £28m.

Now, if De Marco is going down the "T" argument route, and is successful, we'd be looking at a loss in the region of £6m.

The allowable losses for the 3 years ending 2023 included significant allowances for Covid. So yes you are right the 2024 accounting  number was better it’s the P& S Submission that changes significantly. 
As for the T argument unless I misunderstood that was re the 24/25 season and as yet there isn’t any news on the 24/25 numbers. 

Edited 23 November 2025 by Terraloon

[CUJimmy]

The problem is the actions the authorities are taking do not support the stated aims.  It is ridiculous that Newcastle are potentially the richest club on the planet with zero possibility of going bust but are prevented from spending whereas the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd are able to exploit loopholes and spend whatever they like.

 

If they were about sustainability and preventing clubs going bust the simple solution would be for clubs to place in bond  sufficient cash (not assets) to cover the previous 3 year’s losses.

 

 The reality of course is that it is all about preserving the position of the ‘big six’ and ensuring that there cannot be another Leicester.

[Silebyfox_89]

2 hours ago, Terraloon said:

Think we need to buckle up here for a major deduction.

 

Whilst we know the charges have been levied by the PL the charges are in accord with the EFL regulations and in those regulations  are set sanctions which the IC has to work to.

The sum being suggested by which LCFC overspent , if proven, falls into the 12 point minimum level. Depending of the final numbers that 12points may well be viewed as insufficient 

 

The two additional charges are key and again need to be noted. If you go back to the Derby debacle they failed to file accounts to the proper standard and  as such precedent was set in that if accounts aren’t filed to the correct level  or on time then that alone is a  P&S failure .The other charge about co operation is I believe an attempt to counter any claims that LCFC might argue re mitigation ( as Sheffield Wednesday did )If these two aspects are proven they will be aggravating factors and are unlikely to lead to a reduction in sanction
 

 

Won't be 12 points as administration is 10 points deduction. 9 at most and we'll negotiate that with De Marco 4 to 6 max imo.

[Terraloon]

3 hours ago, Terraloon said:

The allowable losses for the 3 years ending 2023 included significant allowances for Covid. So yes you are right the 2024 accounting  number was better it’s the P& S Submission that changes significantly. 

Administration is 12 points not 10 in the EFL indeed that’s what Wednesday have just suffered

 

https://www.facebook.com/hmetrozimpapers/posts/sean-fusires-club-sheffield-wednesday-have-been-struggling-to-play-players-their/841991385073897/

 

In 2020 Wednesday were deducted 12 points for breaching PSR in accordance with either set down sanctions but were able to mitigate that down.

 

[ClaphamFox]

15 hours ago, Terraloon said:

Think we need to buckle up here for a major deduction.

 

Whilst we know the charges have been levied by the PL the charges are in accord with the EFL regulations and in those regulations  are set sanctions which the IC has to work to.

The sum being suggested by which LCFC overspent , if proven, falls into the 12 point minimum level. Depending of the final numbers that 12points may well be viewed as insufficient 

 

The two additional charges are key and again need to be noted. If you go back to the Derby debacle they failed to file accounts to the proper standard and  as such precedent was set in that if accounts aren’t filed to the correct level  or on time then that alone is a  P&S failure .The other charge about co operation is I believe an attempt to counter any claims that LCFC might argue re mitigation ( as Sheffield Wednesday did )If these two aspects are proven they will be aggravating factors and are unlikely to lead to a reduction in sanction
 

 

If it is true that the IC must set sanctions according to EFL rules, I agree that changes the picture. It’s interesting that a number of the football finance ‘experts’ (Maguire, Borson, etc) have missed this aspect and seem to assume that because the PL charged us and our fate will be determined by an IC, then previous PL cases (Everton, Forest) can be used as a guide, whereas in reality it seems Sheffield Wednesday is the more likely template. And yes, like you I think those additional charges were an attempt to pre-empt any plea for mitigation on our part. I hope Nick De Marco enjoyed a good night’s sleep and has a good breakfast this morning. 

Edited 24 November 2025 by ClaphamFox

[Gamble92]

It's genuinely a disgrace what's happening and if Gary Neville isn't ranting like a Salford Salmon with Headphones and a cold red nose then we just all let it go under the radar 

[Ric Flair]

3 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

If it is true that the IC must set sanctions according to EFL rules, I agree that changes the picture. It’s interesting that a number of the football finance ‘experts’ (Maguire, Borson, etc) have missed this aspect and seem to assume that because the PL charged us and our fate will be determined by an IC, then previous PL cases (Everton, Forest) can be used as a guide, whereas in reality it seems Sheffield Wednesday is the more likely template. And yes, like you I think those additional charges were an attempt to pre-empt any plea for mitigation on our part. I hope Nick De Marco enjoyed a good night’s sleep and has a good breakfast this morning. 

I suspect nobody really knows, there's not been a team in this position before. The club however seem to be confident it will be more in line with what the PL dish out.

[Gamble92]

Just now, Ric Flair said:

I suspect nobody really knows, there's not been a team in this position before. The club however seem to be confident it will be more in line with what the PL dish out.

You're up early Ric 

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, Gamble92 said:

You're up early Ric 

Got the garries

[mod hero]

11 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Got the garries

I told you the goblin stuff in confidence.

[CrazyKopCorner]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

Got the garries

Brilliant - I didn't think you could use that term anymore - Cracking 

[Terraloon]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

If it is true that the IC must set sanctions according to EFL rules, I agree that changes the picture. It’s interesting that a number of the football finance ‘experts’ (Maguire, Borson, etc) have missed this aspect and seem to assume that because the PL charged us and our fate will be determined by an IC, then previous PL cases (Everton, Forest) can be used as a guide, whereas in reality it seems Sheffield Wednesday is the more likely template. And yes, like you I think those additional charges were an attempt to pre-empt any plea for mitigation on our part. I hope Nick De Marco enjoyed a good night’s sleep and has a good breakfast this morning. 

Borson touched on this whilst talking on talk sport and yes acknowledged the fact that the charges were under the PL jurisdiction but EFL rules and whilst accepting the fact that sanctions are listed in those same EFL regulations doesn’t explain why he thinks the deduction( if proven)  will be determined using the PL rulebook which as we know doesn’t mention sanctions.

 

It will of course  come down to how the IC  members are guided but yet a further complication for me is that LCFC as we know all too well are at this point an EFL club and it was where the excess happened 
 

 

 

Edited 24 November 2025 by Terraloon

[Gamble92]

I'm off my tits. Watched our season review from 00/01 and managed to fall into the ****ing Christmas tree 

[davieG]

Surely if they can now punish teams across the PL and FL then they should have the same punishments for similar offences.

[Terraloon]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

Surely if they can now punish teams across the PL and FL then they should have the same punishments for similar offences.

I think you will always get different sets of rules if for no other reasons they are two governing bodies indeed you could probably say that all the rules at domestic level should match UEFas rules and punishments.

What we are now seeing isn’t to be fair that unreasonable in that because of the likelihood that a club can be either promoted or relegated that they should in effect get  a free hit. 

Months ago I said what should be the greater concern would be being dealt with by the EFL and whilst not quite what is happening it’s the fact that the charges laid by the PL are under the EFL rules. In reality it’s over to the IC.

The 24/25 accounts aren’t yet in the public domain . It’s possible the allowance in the PL rules will make all the difference but once T becomes T-1 then in a blink of an eye £22 million will disappear meaning the 25 /26 numbers won’t see £105 million allowed it will drop £61 million and that’s assuming equity is injected.

 

[Terraloon]

On 22/11/2025 at 11:17, BKLFox said:

Ironically with most of our big earners contracts coming to an end and us therefore having to purchase new players and provide contracts within the new rules, subject to promotion, we will be in a better position than a majority of teams currently in the premier Lge who will now have to quickly balance books & in doing so lose assets.

 

I also think we will now see the end of sizeable transfer fees being dealt out or received by those ‘not so big clubs’ as the top clubs get a firmer squeeze on the market, if they can reduce revenue to the opposition they can further reduce competition and that’s what they want & that’s what will happen.

 

 

 

Ironically I expect it to work in the exact opposite to what you suggest.Clubs that have  big earners on long term contracts will probably be given protection. It’s what happened when UEFA introduced FFP all contracts signed prior to 2010 were exempt. If they do indeed get exemption then the likes of Chelsea who have super long contracts will benefit for many a year.

In relation to LCFC there will  only be a benefit if promotion is achieved .

The fact that most of the top PL clubs will already be mindful of the squad ratio costs of UEFA will mean they will cruise through the PL 85% level.

 

[PhillippaT]

1 hour ago, Gamble92 said:

I'm off my tits. Watched our season review from 00/01 and managed to fall into the ****ing Christmas tree 

Oh Christmas tree, oh Christmas tree, how sturdy were thou branches?

Answer: Still more sturdy than LCFC's position vs the leagues financial rules  

[jammie82uk]

32 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

It’s what happened when UEFA introduced FFP all contracts signed prior to 2010 were exempt. If they do indeed get exemption then the likes of Chelsea who have super long contracts will benefit for many a year.

And that would make sense considering Chelsea was still signing 7 year contracts when the limit was put in place to restrict the Book payments over 5 years  

[BKLFox]

32 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

 

Ironically I expect it to work in the exact opposite to what you suggest.Clubs that have  big earners on long term contracts will probably be given protection. It’s what happened when UEFA introduced FFP all contracts signed prior to 2010 were exempt. If they do indeed get exemption then the likes of Chelsea who have super long contracts will benefit for many a year.

In relation to LCFC there will  only be a benefit if promotion is achieved .

The fact that most of the top PL clubs will already be mindful of the squad ratio costs of UEFA will mean they will cruise through the PL 85% level.

 

Yes there probably will be some protection for existing contracts & the top clubs probably won’t feel the pinch but it’s geared for them, a they can spend close to half a billion in 1 sitting & discount 200k+ contracts & be safe from existing PSR rules they probably are not going to be affected that much with this change.

 

Its more the little guy the likes of Bournemouth paying/receiving 30-40m on players or being able to sway a player by paying 10-20-30k more pw from a like minded club will most certainly dry up.

 

Think Villa have a charge pending with regards to the UEFA rules don’t they & they would be seen as the biggest club outside those top 7 earners, so don’t bode well for those behind them.

[Terraloon]

2 hours ago, BKLFox said:

Yes there probably will be some protection for existing contracts & the top clubs probably won’t feel the pinch but it’s geared for them, a they can spend close to half a billion in 1 sitting & discount 200k+ contracts & be safe from existing PSR rules they probably are not going to be affected that much with this change.

 

Its more the little guy the likes of Bournemouth paying/receiving 30-40m on players or being able to sway a player by paying 10-20-30k more pw from a like minded club will most certainly dry up.

 

Think Villa have a charge pending with regards to the UEFA rules don’t they & they would be seen as the biggest club outside those top 7 earners, so don’t bode well for those behind them.

Villa have already been charged and agreed a settlement with UEFA . UEFA almost certainly will be charging Forest and NUFC in the next round of charges.

 

[davieG]

https://talk2soccer.com/breaking-news-gary-lineker-slams-efl-over-leicester-city-point-deduction/?fbclid=IwY2xjawORTVRleHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeGSGOKJ-KzmSH3TPKAsvapbsZHM1pJXJuaUkJI_AsFZ8b61tdGbee3AJDwZw_aem_OfIL82GdY-YZMBz8cIXxdw

 

 

BREAKING NEWS: Gary Lineker Slams EFL Over Leicester City Point Deduction

2 days ago

Add Comment

by talk2soccer

Former England striker Gary Lineker, 64, has sparked a storm of controversy in the football world after openly criticizing the English Football League (EFL) for their treatment of Leicester City. The football legend has revealed exactly why, in his view, the League has no right to deduct points from the club, reigniting debates about fairness, transparency, and governance in English football.

 

Lineker’s Criticism: “The EFL Has Overstepped Its Boundaries”

Speaking on social media, Lineker made his stance clear: the EFL’s decision to impose point deductions on Leicester City is unjustified and procedurally flawed. According to him, the League’s approach sets a dangerous precedent that could negatively impact not only Leicester but other clubs in the future.

 

“Clubs, fans, and players should never bear the consequences of administrative mishandling,” Lineker stated. “Point deductions should only come after a fully transparent process, and I don’t believe the EFL has met that standard in this case.”

 

He further questioned whether the League even has the legal authority to implement such sanctions in this instance, highlighting concerns over fairness and accountability.

 

 

The Context: Leicester City’s Off-Field Struggles

Leicester City, one of England’s most beloved clubs, has faced a turbulent period off the pitch. From financial scrutiny to administrative complications, the club has been under intense media and regulatory attention. The EFL’s decision to deduct points was reportedly related to alleged breaches in league regulations, though specifics remain hotly debated.

 

For the club’s supporters, the deduction represents more than just numbers on a table—it’s a blow to the team’s morale and a disruption to months of hard work by players and coaching staff. Lineker emphasized that such decisions affect everyone involved, not just the club executives.

 

Fan Reactions: Social Media Erupts

The backlash to the EFL’s decision has been swift, with fans and pundits echoing Lineker’s criticism across social media platforms. Many argue that the League is being overly punitive, while others have raised concerns about consistency in enforcement, asking why similar cases in the past were handled differently.

“Leicester deserves fair treatment,” one fan tweeted. “Point deductions should be about the rules, not punishment for administrative mistakes.”

Lineker’s intervention has amplified the debate, bringing the issue into the national spotlight and prompting discussions about how disciplinary measures should be applied in professional football.

What This Means for the EFL and Clubs

Lineker’s comments are not just a critique—they serve as a wake-up call for the EFL and other governing bodies in English football. Transparency, fairness, and consistent enforcement of rules are essential to maintain the integrity of the sport.

If the League continues down this path without addressing these concerns, it risks alienating clubs and fans alike. For Leicester City, the controversy could potentially impact their position in the Championship and even affect player morale during the season.

The Bigger Picture: Governance in English Football

This incident also raises broader questions about governance in English football. Who truly holds authority in disciplinary matters? How are decisions communicated to clubs and fans? And perhaps most importantly, how can fairness be ensured across all levels of competition?

Lineker’s statements shine a light on these critical issues, reminding fans and officials that football isn’t just about points and trophies—it’s about respecting the rules, players, and supporters who make the sport what it is.

Conclusion

Gary Lineker’s public criticism of the EFL over Leicester City’s point deduction has reignited discussions about fairness, transparency, and governance in English football. While the League has yet to respond formally, the pressure is mounting to ensure that clubs are treated justly and that the integrity of the game remains intact.

One thing is clear: the football world is watching, and fans will be holding the EFL accountable.

 

[Fox forever]

28 minutes ago, davieG said:

https://talk2soccer.com/breaking-news-gary-lineker-slams-efl-over-leicester-city-point-deduction/?fbclid=IwY2xjawORTVRleHRuA2FlbQIxMABzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeGSGOKJ-KzmSH3TPKAsvapbsZHM1pJXJuaUkJI_AsFZ8b61tdGbee3AJDwZw_aem_OfIL82GdY-YZMBz8cIXxdw

 

 

BREAKING NEWS: Gary Lineker Slams EFL Over Leicester City Point Deduction

2 days ago

Add Comment

by talk2soccer

Former England striker Gary Lineker, 64, has sparked a storm of controversy in the football world after openly criticizing the English Football League (EFL) for their treatment of Leicester City. The football legend has revealed exactly why, in his view, the League has no right to deduct points from the club, reigniting debates about fairness, transparency, and governance in English football.

 

Lineker’s Criticism: “The EFL Has Overstepped Its Boundaries”

Speaking on social media, Lineker made his stance clear: the EFL’s decision to impose point deductions on Leicester City is unjustified and procedurally flawed. According to him, the League’s approach sets a dangerous precedent that could negatively impact not only Leicester but other clubs in the future.

 

“Clubs, fans, and players should never bear the consequences of administrative mishandling,” Lineker stated. “Point deductions should only come after a fully transparent process, and I don’t believe the EFL has met that standard in this case.”

 

He further questioned whether the League even has the legal authority to implement such sanctions in this instance, highlighting concerns over fairness and accountability.

 

 

The Context: Leicester City’s Off-Field Struggles

Leicester City, one of England’s most beloved clubs, has faced a turbulent period off the pitch. From financial scrutiny to administrative complications, the club has been under intense media and regulatory attention. The EFL’s decision to deduct points was reportedly related to alleged breaches in league regulations, though specifics remain hotly debated.

 

For the club’s supporters, the deduction represents more than just numbers on a table—it’s a blow to the team’s morale and a disruption to months of hard work by players and coaching staff. Lineker emphasized that such decisions affect everyone involved, not just the club executives.

 

Fan Reactions: Social Media Erupts

The backlash to the EFL’s decision has been swift, with fans and pundits echoing Lineker’s criticism across social media platforms. Many argue that the League is being overly punitive, while others have raised concerns about consistency in enforcement, asking why similar cases in the past were handled differently.

“Leicester deserves fair treatment,” one fan tweeted. “Point deductions should be about the rules, not punishment for administrative mistakes.”

Lineker’s intervention has amplified the debate, bringing the issue into the national spotlight and prompting discussions about how disciplinary measures should be applied in professional football.

What This Means for the EFL and Clubs

Lineker’s comments are not just a critique—they serve as a wake-up call for the EFL and other governing bodies in English football. Transparency, fairness, and consistent enforcement of rules are essential to maintain the integrity of the sport.

If the League continues down this path without addressing these concerns, it risks alienating clubs and fans alike. For Leicester City, the controversy could potentially impact their position in the Championship and even affect player morale during the season.

The Bigger Picture: Governance in English Football

This incident also raises broader questions about governance in English football. Who truly holds authority in disciplinary matters? How are decisions communicated to clubs and fans? And perhaps most importantly, how can fairness be ensured across all levels of competition?

Lineker’s statements shine a light on these critical issues, reminding fans and officials that football isn’t just about points and trophies—it’s about respecting the rules, players, and supporters who make the sport what it is.

Conclusion

Gary Lineker’s public criticism of the EFL over Leicester City’s point deduction has reignited discussions about fairness, transparency, and governance in English football. While the League has yet to respond formally, the pressure is mounting to ensure that clubs are treated justly and that the integrity of the game remains intact.

One thing is clear: the football world is watching, and fans will be holding the EFL accountable.

 

What was the points deduction the article mentions? I must have missed it