Premier League has charged LCFC with an alleged breach of PSR

[Spudulike]

13 minutes ago, teblin said:

I do think we could get 9 in total however

Just as likely to be zero given how the restrospective applying of rules doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny. 

 

It's all guesswork beyond most of our pay grades.

[Pliskin]

I’m now hoping they crucify us…. Such is Tops complete blaze approach to it all, it might be enough for him to sell up. 

Edited 29 January by Pliskin

[teblin]

2 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Just as likely to be zero given how the restrospective applying of rules doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny. 

 

It's all guesswork beyond most of our pay grades.

Very true, but all of it is a bit of a farce. That it’s happening mid season.

[Spudulike]

Not sure how the new SCR rules that replaces PSR next term (Premier League) would make a difference in our circumstances if applied retrospectively.

 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/13473576/premier-league-clubs-approve-new-squad-cost-ratio-rules-to-replace-psr-but-vote-against-a-proposal-that-could-have-introduced-a-salary-cap

 

[Terraloon]

46 minutes ago, Nick said:

Should they be found guilty, the club is likely to be hit with a nine-point deduction for each charge, which could total as many as 27 points.

 

 

The major charge is the FFP excesses and almost certainly that will come , if proven, with a points deduction.

 

I am not suggesting that an IC doesn’t have  the authority to award sporting sanctions for the other two charges because they do.However I doubt that either of the two charges in themselves will lead to a points deduction even if they are proven

 

What the PL have down is to try and shut down any claims from LC around mitigation. How can the club realistically claim they assisted the investigation if they get found to not have submitted documents on time and didn’t actively engage in the investigation?
 

I am still far from convinced that there will be a 24/25 charge but if the allowable sums are exceeded then it wouldn’t make any sense for the PL to make further charges till the 23/24 charge is dealt with.

[Guest BlueApple]

8 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I’m now hoping they crucify us…. Such is Tops complete blaze approach to it all, it might be enough for him to sell up. 

Well let's hope they don't!

We can't be moaning about the lack of signings and say Top has a blaze approach to it.

We've brought no players in this season, have a net spend of nearly +£50m had 10 players from our youth academy in our squad on Saturday and yet the league wish to punish us to the full extent of the law.

 

At least we're showing a willingness to comply despite it having massive implications on our season, whilst the big clubs just behave like nothing has happened when they've breached PSR and the league couldn't give two shiny s***s. 

[Pliskin]

1 minute ago, BlueApple said:

Well let's hope they don't!

We can't be moaning about the lack of signings and say Top has a blaze approach to it.

We've brought no players in this season, have a net spend of nearly +£50m had 10 players from our youth academy in our squad on Saturday and yet the league wish to punish us to the full extent of the law.

 

At least we're showing a willingness to comply despite it having massive implications on our season, whilst the big clubs just behave like nothing has happened when they've breached PSR and the league couldn't give two shiny s***s. 

Oh come off it, don’t you dare give the club an inch. They’re not trying not to spend out of choice, it’s out of necessity…. We are in this mess because of our horrific wage bill, we’ve got more money going out than we have coming in……. And our “owner” has just delivered the most pathetic/worrying view on things here at the club, and sees to think it’s all a bit of a joke, giggling when thinking we could gain automatic promotion signing no players? 
 

You can’t blame the EPL and the EFL for the mess we’re in, everyone know the rules are bent towards to elite, but both Everton and Nottingham Forest took their punishments and sorted themselves out….

 

Roughly five years we’ve been embroiled in this PSR cycle, and it’s so bad we still haven’t managed to get the mega earners off the books. Top and Rudkin are completely to blame for this mess, they’re the ones who put us in it, not the league, and even worse allegedly we’ve beached the last two seasons again!!!

 

Its utter sheer incompetence, and if Top remains this club will end up in administration playing none league football within the next decade, probably a hell of a lot less.

 

They deserve no leeway at all, it’s a mega deduction forced that useless twat out, I’m all for it. I care about the long term future of this club, not this clown. 

[ian__marshall]

18 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

The major charge is the FFP excesses and almost certainly that will come , if proven, with a points deduction.

 

I am not suggesting that an IC doesn’t have  the authority to award sporting sanctions for the other two charges because they do.However I doubt that either of the two charges in themselves will lead to a points deduction even if they are proven

 

What the PL have down is to try and shut down any claims from LC around mitigation. How can the club realistically claim they assisted the investigation if they get found to not have submitted documents on time and didn’t actively engage in the investigation?
 

I am still far from convinced that there will be a 24/25 charge but if the allowable sums are exceeded then it wouldn’t make any sense for the PL to make further charges till the 23/24 charge is dealt with.

Thanks for sharing, I find your posts on this topic very insightful. Out of interest what makes you think we are likely to be OK for 24/25?

 

Genuinely keen to understand from someone who understands the situation better than myself, as there's obviously been a lot of talk suggesting that we may still be stuck in this loop of continuous breaches for some time yet. 

[ClaphamFox]

1 hour ago, Nick said:

Should they be found guilty, the club is likely to be hit with a nine-point deduction for each charge, which could total as many as 27 points.

 

 

I found it—it's from a story in the local rag in Portsmouth. I can tell you exactly what's happened here. The reporter has quickly cobbled together a story on the Top interview has used articles from other publications as source material, one of which (probably on Football Insider) has mentioned the possibility we'll get nine points in total. In his haste, the reporter has misunderstood and read it as nine points per charge, and has put that in his article. I guarantee you that a local reporter in Portsmouth will not have uncovered a massive scoop about us getting a record points deduction and then just casually dropped that into an article as background rather than selling it to one of the national tabs.

 

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/football/portsmouth-fc/portsmouthfc-news-leicester-championship-pointdeduction-psrhearing-5491470

Edited 29 January by ClaphamFox

[ClaphamFox]

39 minutes ago, Pliskin said:

I’m now hoping they crucify us…. Such is Tops complete blaze approach to it all, it might be enough for him to sell up. 

In his interview on RL, Top said that he won't sell up until we're established back in the PL because we wouldn't be able to find a decent buyer otherwise. If you take him at his word, that means relegation to League One will only mean that he remains our owner for longer.

[Pliskin]

2 hours ago, ClaphamFox said:

In his interview on RL, Top said that he won't sell up until we're established back in the PL because we wouldn't be able to find a decent buyer otherwise. If you take him at his word, that means relegation to League One will only mean that he remains our owner for longer.

We are well and truly ****ed then.

[purpleronnie]

3 hours ago, ClaphamFox said:

In his interview on RL, Top said that he won't sell up until we're established back in the PL because we wouldn't be able to find a decent buyer otherwise. If you take him at his word, that means relegation to League One will only mean that he remains our owner for longer.

By decent he means a buyer willing to make him a huge profit.

[Terraloon]

3 hours ago, ian__marshall said:

Thanks for sharing, I find your posts on this topic very insightful. Out of interest what makes you think we are likely to be OK for 24/25?

 

Genuinely keen to understand from someone who understands the situation better than myself, as there's obviously been a lot of talk suggesting that we may still be stuck in this loop of continuous breaches for some time yet. 

Thanks for you comment.

 

All I have to work on is historical numbers and a “ back of a fag  packet” calculation when it comes to things like wages , other running costs and actual profit when it comes to players sold and amortisation for players purchased. Indeed we know from the 23/24 accounts that there was a need to include the sales of KDH was put into the earlier year. What that means that there will be very little profits in 24/25.

 

When I say I am far from convinced what I probably need to add is that I have it at 50-50.

 

For the two years 22/23+23/24 I estimate that there will be around £60 million after allowable meaning the loss before allowables for 24/25 can’t be over £65 million ish.

 

Wages will have grown for 24/25 but it’s  player trading that is the issue. Indeed effect in the two proceeding years the profit in total was over £140 m

 

 

 

 

Edited 29 January by Terraloon

[LCFCJohn]

3 hours ago, BlueApple said:

Well let's hope they don't!

We can't be moaning about the lack of signings and say Top has a blaze approach to it.

We've brought no players in this season, have a net spend of nearly +£50m had 10 players from our youth academy in our squad on Saturday and yet the league wish to punish us to the full extent of the law.

 

At least we're showing a willingness to comply despite it having massive implications on our season, whilst the big clubs just behave like nothing has happened when they've breached PSR and the league couldn't give two shiny s***s. 

Also gave Luke Thomas a pay rise and long contract so yeah….

 

I have said before, I don’t think Aiyawatt and co understand PSR, in that they seem to think it’s just about not signing anybody, but still chucking stupid wages at existing contracts or any incomings we do have. Whereas, if they understood and were trying to be compliant, this would be reflected in the wages handed out also.

 

It sounds like a far fetched thing to say, how could the club not know that wages are included in PSR? But given his revelation about not understanding PSR in the interviews, I genuinely think it’s true!

[Product of 84]

Could it be the case that if we are relegated through a PSR points deduction, lets say the doomsday 27 points mentioned earlier, that we would then automatically fail the following year as well as our outgoings would continue to be much more than our incomings without players contracts being terminated which cannot happen without payoffs etc. You are also failing to get a fee for the player as well. 

 

PSR is a joke. It seems a sudden relegation and you are in a real mess with no hope to comply. It simply needs to go away. 

 

The issue we have as a club is our situation is unique until say a West Ham or Everton are relegated and they too can't comply. 

 

I go back to the reasoning for PSR which was to prevent clubs from going bust. It seems with our loans etc that PSR could actually make us go bust!

 

If only we had spent big in January, completely broke the rules, sacked Rogers, survived, took the points deduction the following season and survived the following season too (Forest and Everton). If only...

[alanf0x]

4 minutes ago, Product of 84 said:

Could it be the case that if we are relegated through a PSR points deduction, lets say the doomsday 27 points mentioned earlier, that we would then automatically fail the following year as well as our outgoings would continue to be much more than our incomings without players contracts being terminated which cannot happen without payoffs etc. You are also failing to get a fee for the player as well. 

 

PSR is a joke. It seems a sudden relegation and you are in a real mess with no hope to comply. It simply needs to go away. 

 

The issue we have as a club is our situation is unique until say a West Ham or Everton are relegated and they too can't comply. 

 

I go back to the reasoning for PSR which was to prevent clubs from going bust. It seems with our loans etc that PSR could actually make us go bust!

 

If only we had spent big in January, completely broke the rules, sacked Rogers, survived, took the points deduction the following season and survived the following season too (Forest and Everton). If only...

Rudkin needs to go away, not PSR

[87fox]

6 minutes ago, Product of 84 said:

Could it be the case that if we are relegated through a PSR points deduction, lets say the doomsday 27 points mentioned earlier, that we would then automatically fail the following year as well as our outgoings would continue to be much more than our incomings without players contracts being terminated which cannot happen without payoffs etc. You are also failing to get a fee for the player as well. 

 

PSR is a joke. It seems a sudden relegation and you are in a real mess with no hope to comply. It simply needs to go away. 

 

The issue we have as a club is our situation is unique until say a West Ham or Everton are relegated and they too can't comply. 

 

I go back to the reasoning for PSR which was to prevent clubs from going bust. It seems with our loans etc that PSR could actually make us go bust!

 

If only we had spent big in January, completely broke the rules, sacked Rogers, survived, took the points deduction the following season and survived the following season too (Forest and Everton). If only...

I'm unclear on League 1 PSR – I don't think the same rules apply. Birmingham spent £15m on Stansfield alone when they were down there.

[Product of 84]

3 minutes ago, alanf0x said:

Rudkin needs to go away, not PSR

I'd argue both

[Bourbon Fox]

27 minutes ago, Terraloon said:

“ back of a fag “ calculation

 

 

 

 

Tiny writing!

[LCFCJohn]

3 minutes ago, Product of 84 said:

Could it be the case that if we are relegated through a PSR points deduction, lets say the doomsday 27 points mentioned earlier, that we would then automatically fail the following year as well as our outgoings would continue to be much more than our incomings without players contracts being terminated which cannot happen without payoffs etc. You are also failing to get a fee for the player as well. 

 

PSR is a joke. It seems a sudden relegation and you are in a real mess with no hope to comply. It simply needs to go away. 

 

The issue we have as a club is our situation is unique until say a West Ham or Everton are relegated and they too can't comply. 

 

I go back to the reasoning for PSR which was to prevent clubs from going bust. It seems with our loans etc that PSR could actually make us go bust!

 

If only we had spent big in January, completely broke the rules, sacked Rogers, survived, took the points deduction the following season and survived the following season too (Forest and Everton). If only...

I both agree and disagree with parts of this.

 

Where I disagree is that we brought this on ourselves through incompetence. Even since that first relegation, we have continued to spend poorly, how out inflated wages, poor managerial choice etc etc. In terms of your last bit, look at what we did spend (sorry waste) in that January. Spending is one thing, but there’s no way we would have spent it well with the morons running the club and would have been relegated in an even bigger hole. We needed players with the right mindset and we still aren’t doing that to this day. 
 

But it is true that when the club ends up so restricted, it does create a vicious cycle and points deductions aren’t really helpful as they push a club down the league, potentially out that league and relegated which like you say, actually pushes a club closer to going bust. We know the PSR rules are to protest the elite and not actually to protect the future of other clubs.

 

Ultimately, like with Wednesday, it should be incompetent owners like Chansiri and Aiyawatt who are punished. We should also be managed by the authorities so that competent financial people take the decisions on contracts and signings out of the clubs hands in my option.

[Pliskin]

6 minutes ago, Product of 84 said:

Could it be the case that if we are relegated through a PSR points deduction, lets say the doomsday 27 points mentioned earlier, that we would then automatically fail the following year as well as our outgoings would continue to be much more than our incomings without players contracts being terminated which cannot happen without payoffs etc. You are also failing to get a fee for the player as well. 

 

PSR is a joke. It seems a sudden relegation and you are in a real mess with no hope to comply. It simply needs to go away. 

 

The issue we have as a club is our situation is unique until say a West Ham or Everton are relegated and they too can't comply. 

 

I go back to the reasoning for PSR which was to prevent clubs from going bust. It seems with our loans etc that PSR could actually make us go bust!

 

If only we had spent big in January, completely broke the rules, sacked Rogers, survived, took the points deduction the following season and survived the following season too (Forest and Everton). If only...

But we’re a failing business model….. the rules aren’t fair, but plenty of teams manage to deal with them comfortably. We are in this mess because of Top and Rudkin, not PSR, we are serial offenders, breaching every season pretty much, because of the mistakes made my Top and Rudkin, and mistakes they continue to make. His football club isn’t being ran, it’s being destroyed….

 

The points deduction is entirely their fault, our demise is entirely their fault. 

[Tommy G]

34 minutes ago, purpleronnie said:

By decent he means a buyer willing to make him a huge profit.

Talk me through the profit vs what King Power have funnelled into the club? Not a prayer, more about mitigating losses.

[ClaphamFox]

4 hours ago, Spudulike said:

Just as likely to be zero given how the restrospective applying of rules doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny. 

 

It's all guesswork beyond most of our pay grades.

The PL clearly believes it has the jurisdiction to charge us for 2021-24, even though we were a Championship cub in 23-24, via a retrospective application of the 'loophole closure' that occurred last April. I suspect our lawyers have strongly contested this based on the fact that, under English law, it is not normal practice to introduce new regulations and apply them retrospectively. I have no legal knowledge so cannot say which side will win the argument, but I wonder if this dispute over the retrospective application of the rules is one of the reasons why we haven't heard anything yet. And if the IC finds in favour of the PL, it wouldn't surprise me if we exhaust every avenue for appeal, possibly even taking it beyond the Premier League Appeal Board and into the law courts. This could drag on for a long time...

 

[Spudulike]

8 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

The PL clearly believes it has the jurisdiction to charge us for 2021-24, even though we were a Championship cub in 23-24, via a retrospective application of the 'loophole closure' that occurred last April. I suspect our lawyers have strongly contested this based on the fact that, under English law, it is not normal practice to introduce new regulations and apply them retrospectively. I have no legal knowledge so cannot say which side will win the argument, but I wonder if this dispute over the retrospective application of the rules is one of the reasons why we haven't heard anything yet. And if the IC finds in favour of the PL, it wouldn't surprise me if we exhaust every avenue for appeal, possibly even taking it beyond the Premier League Appeal Board and into the law courts. This could drag on for a long time...

 

Keiran Maguire suggested this may be the case after speaking to legal associates. 

[purpleronnie]

38 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Talk me through the profit vs what King Power have funnelled into the club? Not a prayer, more about mitigating losses.

Profit on what they purchased the club for.  I'm sure overall they'll be worse off.  That's how I took 'decent' others might take it as meaning something else.