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

Recommended Posts

Posted


 

Exclusive: Leicester City facing ‘nine-point deduction’

Ciaran MorrisonWed 26 November 2025 17:00, UK

Leicester City are predicted to face a devastating nine-point deduction after allegedly breaking profit and sustainability (PSR) rules.

That is according to ex-Aberdeen and Everton and Aston Villa chief executive Keith Wyness, speaking exclusively to Football Insider who has explained why the Foxes could face such a punishment.

In March 2024, Leicester were initially charged with a spending breach amid losses of up to £90million in the Premier League.

Leicester were then charged in May 2025 by the EFL for allegedly breaking their financial rules in the 2023-24 season.

Leicester could face ‘serious blow’

Everton’s former chief Keith Wyness – who served as CEO at Goodison Park between 2004 and 2009 and now runs a football consultancy advising elite clubs – states that Leicester will likely appeal the point’s deduction which comes their way.

Nottingham Forest and Everton have previously been deducted points for breaking financial regulations, with Leicester awaiting the final verdict on their case.

 

 

Wyness believes a nine-point deduction could be imposed on the Foxes.

 

He told Football Insider‘s Inside Track podcast: “Well, Leicester have got the problem of having won that lawsuit last year or at least found a loophole that made everybody a little bit angry, both the EFL and the Premier League, and they certainly haven’t forgotten. 

“So there’ll be no points let off in terms of good behaviour and cooperation. So overall, there are three charges and it could be three points each charge.

“So it could be nine points maximum. Now, if there would be an appeal, which I’d expect them to appeal.

“I don’t expect any appeal to be looked at favourably, certainly not on cooperation. If there was legal issues around the other two charges where they got three points each, there may be a slight reduction, but certainly I think between seven and nine points is what they’re going to be looking for. And that’s a serious blow for them in the championship. 

“I mean, we’ve been talking about Leicester having these issues for a long time now and it’s coming home to roost and I think this is going to be a big issue for them, but it will be a severe one. And I’ve got the feeling that the league would like to make a bit of an example of the way that Leicester have behaved. So I expect them to come down pretty hard on them.”

Posted
On 24/11/2025 at 22:04, Trav Le Bleu said:

Complete and utter nonsense.

 

Forest aren't a mid-tier club.

Putting Forest in the same bracket as Villa who the f*** did that😂😂😂😂😭😭😭😭

Posted
1 minute ago, Jattdogg said:

Oh look another tosser making crap up with 0 inside knowledge.

 

We find out when we do. You should always expect any "business" to explore appeals and legal options. You would be a total idiot if you didn't.

A former CEO of 2 prem clubs, as opposed to the armchair fans on here that speak on the matter like they have some inside knowledge 

Posted
8 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

A former CEO of 2 prem clubs, as opposed to the armchair fans on here that speak on the matter like they have some inside knowledge 

It read like a bitter bit of wishful thinking from an ex Toffee tbh. 

  • Like 2
Posted
29 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

A former CEO of 2 prem clubs, as opposed to the armchair fans on here that speak on the matter like they have some inside knowledge 

He knows as much about it as we all do. Fook all. Our CEO is a knob lol

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

To be honest 9 is what i was thinking........i just hope Top doesn't appeal it and make it go on any longer..........We will have another season in the champ or L1,but at least that's the slate cleaned.We have to take this on the chin!We all know we've ****ed up.Well not "WE" but handing big contracts to sub par players and keeping them on ££££££ a week really didn't help.For the good of the club we have to suck it up and learn.....but i'm not sure our board room will and that is the most worrying thing.

Edited by PAULCFC
W
  • Like 1
Posted

I'm not sure why we couldn't appeal on cooperation. We won our case last year. We were legally correct. They'd drafted the rules badly. We can't be accused of not cooperating when we simply played by the rules as they were written. 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

How I long for us to be able to go back to being a sustainably run football club with a clear model of signing young hungry players, developing our academy prospects and moving players onto bigger clubs for significant profit which is then reinvested and keeps us competitive and innovative. 
 

At the same time I want to see us develop longer term commercial arrangements with strategic partners that supporters will be proud to see on our shirts rather than these short term deals with betting/crypto companies like FBS, BC Game and KBet whilst they may on paper offer the most money in reality probably hinder and restrict our ability to maximise other commercial revenue streams including kit and merchandise sales. 
 

It seems a very short sighted business plan and model at the moment, all about the here and now to maximise revenue to enable us to fund an out of control wage bill for a squad that carries way too many bang average players who couldn’t give a toss about the club. 

Edited by Claudio Fannieri
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)

We'll be relegated without the points deduction if this continues. The points deduction will just be the final nail in the coffin. 

 

Players are better than 15th in the championship on paper, in reality we don't have a team, strategy or focus. They are individuals wanting out. 

 

Points deduction or not, this is a disaster of a season. I'm getting Rodgers relegation v1 vibes. 

Edited by fox_favourite
Posted

Pretty sure the ‘not cooperating’ charge relates to documents not being submitted/not being submitted on time. 
 

it doesn’t relate to getting out of past charges due to loopholes

Posted
1 minute ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

Pretty sure the ‘not cooperating’ charge relates to documents not being submitted/not being submitted on time. 
 

it doesn’t relate to getting out of past charges due to loopholes

Yeah that's not what the fella in the article is saying though he references the loophole

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

I'm not sure why we couldn't appeal on cooperation. We won our case last year. We were legally correct. They'd drafted the rules badly. We can't be accused of not cooperating when we simply played by the rules as they were written. 

The final analysis wasn’t that the LCFCs argument about the rules was correct it was simply that the arbitration panel  couldn’t revert back to the original ICs conclusions ,not because of the fact that the  appeal panel had reached the wrong conclusion( which they the Arbitration panel stated the Appeal panel had )but because the process the appeal panel followed wasn’t flawed.

 

In other words LCFC weren’t legally correct it was the fact that at appeal panel ruled incorrectly in the clubs favour but reached that conclusion by a valid process

 

As for co operation the belligerent and deliberate decision not to submit accounts for instance made a major statement and as I said in an earlier post the fact that this fact is a separate charge will almost certainly set the ground for arguments around not just mitigating factors but also aggravating factors.

 

If you trawl back through my , yep very negative, comments I pointed out that it was pretty obvious that the horrendous accounting numbers would come back to bite on the bum  the court cases simply kicked the can down the road, in even more “ good news”. I think  it will be touch and go re a further charge for 24/25 the fact that there will be the full £105 million allowed , well that’s if Top increases his equity probably just tips it in LCFC favour but if there is a charge for 24/25 from the PL then that will lead to an smaller but inevitable further points deduction in 25/26.

 

But it’s going forward that the real problems will stack up, that is unless promotion is achieved my guess is that there will be a EFL charge for 25/26 with the £105million add back allowed in 24/25 dropping to £61 million which for perspective is less that the sums that currently are expended by way of amortisation and other operating costs .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Terraloon
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Terraloon said:

The final analysis wasn’t that the LCFCs argument about the rules was correct it was simply that the arbitration panel  couldn’t revert back to the original ICs conclusions ,not because of the fact that the  appeal panel had reached the wrong conclusion( which they the Arbitration panel stated the Appeal panel had )but because the process the appeal panel followed wasn’t flawed.

 

In other words LCFC weren’t legally correct it was the fact that at appeal panel ruled incorrectly in the clubs favour but reached that conclusion by a valid process

 

As for co operation the belligerent and deliberate decision not to submit accounts for instance made a major statement and as I said in an earlier post the fact that this fact is a separate charge will almost certainly set the ground for arguments around not just mitigating factors but also aggravating factors.

 

If you trawl back through my , yep very negative, comments I pointed out that it was pretty obvious that the horrendous accounting numbers would come back to bite on the bum  the court cases simply kicked the can down the road, in even more “ good news”. I think  it will be touch and go re a further charge for 24/25 the fact that there will be the full £105 million allowed , well that’s if Top increases his equity probably just tips it in LCFC favour but if there is a charge for 24/25 from the PL then that will lead to an smaller but inevitable further points deduction in 25/26.

 

But it’s going forward that the real problems will stack up, that is unless promotion is achieved my guess is that there will be a EFL charge for 25/26 with the £105million add back allowed in 24/25 dropping to £61 million which for perspective is less that the sums that currently are expended by way of amortisation and other operating costs .

 

The idea that a points deduction this season finishes the whole episode is, as you say, likely misplaced.  there is more to come and possibly two unless we manage to get promoted which clearly isn’t going to happen. Most likely we will have one more charge to navigate. 

Posted
31 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

The idea that a points deduction this season finishes the whole episode is, as you say, likely misplaced.  there is more to come and possibly two unless we manage to get promoted which clearly isn’t going to happen. Most likely we will have one more charge to navigate. 

I think we run close to breaches for 24/25, 25/26 and every future year until we go bust.

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

I'm not sure why we couldn't appeal on cooperation. We won our case last year. We were legally correct. They'd drafted the rules badly. We can't be accused of not cooperating when we simply played by the rules as they were written. 

We submitted our accounts late and were literally uncooperative! 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I think we run close to breaches for 24/25, 25/26 and every future year until we go bust.

NOT THAT I WANT THIS TO HAPPEN AT ALL but Top deserves the club winding up under his ownership because of his negligence.

Posted
37 minutes ago, Stadt said:

NOT THAT I WANT THIS TO HAPPEN AT ALL but Top deserves the club winding up under his ownership because of his negligence.

Calm down - we're in a far better place than when King Power took over the club......right!?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...