6 point deduction - confirmed

[UniFox21]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Would be incredibly unfair and just plain wrong for us to get another deduction this season. 

With how long it's taken them to make these decisions, it would be a real kick if the outcomes were both to take impact in the same season. Would much rather start on -6 (for example) next season than be docked 12 in a year for historical issues ranging numerous seasons. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

20 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

The current 6 point deduction is for period ending FY24 (Enzo promotion season). So this punishment is already a season late (in part because of our protestations). So if the EFL punishes us (again) this season, for period ending 24/25 that would actually be 'consistent'. We'd only end up with 2 deductions in the same season because we delayed the one we 'should' have had last season (RVN relegation season) 

Can't we have them taken off last season's tally?

[Les-TA-Jon]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

Would be incredibly unfair and just plain wrong for us to get another deduction this season. 

Would it though? The 6 point deduction is for period ending FY24, (Enzo promotion season). So should have been applied in last season, under RVN. 

 

So if we get another punishment this season, for season ending FY25, that would be consistent

[Gamble92]

Just now, Trav Le Bleu said:

Can't we have them taken off last season's tally?

I wonder how they felt for the last 12 or so games knowing we were well adrift and taking the hit then would have been better for everyone. 

[Trav Le Bleu]

Just now, Gamble92 said:

I wonder how they felt for the last 12 or so games knowing we were well adrift and taking the hit then would have been better for everyone. 

Seems to me that if they can make the judgement seasons latter, we can take the punishment seasons later.

[ClaphamFox]

1 minute ago, UniFox21 said:

With how long it's taken them to make these decisions, it would be a real kick if the outcomes were both to take impact in the same season. Would much rather start on -6 (for example) next season than be docked 12 in a year for historical issues ranging numerous seasons. 

It wouldn’t be another six. If we’re punished for 2022-25, they’ll have to take account of the fact that we’ve already been punished for 2021-24, so we’ll only be sanctioned for the additional year’s breach 

[st albans fox]

I can see this getting messy for the EFL if they’re trying to enforce psr for our season in the PL  

 

if the EFL have different rules and regs then they’d better hope that their legal stuff regarding EFL being able to bring psr breaches that occurred within the PL is watertight or demarco will have a field day with it. 
 

they changed the rules last season because we found a loophole.  Surely they wouldn’t have left more loopholes ? 

[gazzaa2]

7 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

At this point wish we'd just done some dodgy accounting and sold the women's team etc to a different holding company 

Are the club too honest or too incompetent? I don't think it's too honest because we exploited a loophole last year to avoid a deduction.

 

Everton exaggerated Covid losses to stay compliant and all kinds of other shenanigans. Eventually got done but only after staying up at our expense.

 

Newcastle/Everton/Villa/Forest selling players to each other for inflated fees to cook the books.

 

Villa/Chelsea selling their women's team. Chelsea selling hotels back to themselves.

 

There's ways around the rules if you're creative and at least pay lip service to them.

Edited 25 February by gazzaa2

[stu]

2 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

I think you're misunderstanding something here. 

 

The quote from Leicester's statement is saying 'this provides the club with certainty on [the time period in question] for compliance for FY25' not 'the commission has said LCFC have complied for FY25'

Ok, but it still suggests that Leicester believe they are compliant for Y25 based on the 36 month commission ruling, which surely would have been checked for accuracy from a legal point if view before being published?

[Terraloon]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I'm fascinated how we have provided assurance to the EFL that we are OK for 2025/26 too. I was led to believe that strict business plans and embargo are brought in mid season if this cannot be evidenced and the backstop of selling players in June to comply is not accepted as proof either. 

If you cast your mind back to the 23/24 season the EFL wanted LC to produce a business plan but the club went all guns blazing to challenge the “request” to produce one and in the end it was ruled in March 24 that clubs relegated to the PL weren’t  required to submit business plan in December ( I think) but by the next deadline then LC did have a player embargo put in place by the EFL.

 

We simply don’t know what is going on re the 25/26 season in terms of having a business plan in place but even if you have one in place it isn’t a given that embargo follows. 
 

Something in the back of mind is saying that some other numbers are due to be sent in around now.

[Terraloon]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

It wouldn’t be another six. If we’re punished for 2022-25, they’ll have to take account of the fact that we’ve already been punished for 2021-24, so we’ll only be sanctioned for the additional year’s breach 

Here’s the thing. In the  EFL regs you are right there is a rule that you can’t be punished for the same period although the loss total is relevant and could impact. 
 

It’s not quite as simple as this but LC were punished for £20 million over and got 6 points for the years 21/2+22/23+23/24 . So say 2 points a year.

 

So if the loss for the years 22/23+23/24+24/25 is say £20 million over then you would expect that it would only be another 2 points.

 

However there isn’t the same rule in the PL rules re not being punished for the same period . That said in Everton 2 the IC did take into account that a punishment had already been handed down for the first 2 years. 

 

[Corky]

The large 22/23 loss is still included plus we appeared to spend significantly under Cooper. Throw in the fact we breached by over £20 million so even harder to get under the limit and I would not be surprised if we have failed to comply again.

[Foxdiamond]

2 hours ago, gazzaa2 said:

Are the club too honest or too incompetent? I don't think it's too honest because we exploited a loophole last year to avoid a deduction.

 

Everton exaggerated Covid losses to stay compliant and all kinds of other shenanigans. Eventually got done but only after staying up at our expense.

 

Newcastle/Everton/Villa/Forest selling players to each other for inflated fees to cook the books.

 

Villa/Chelsea selling their women's team. Chelsea selling hotels back to themselves.

 

There's ways around the rules if you're creative and at least pay lip service to them.

This is the thing. I know two wrongs don't make a right but being punished at the same knowing that fiddles are going on that also damage the integrity of the game sticks in the throat

[boosmanana]

What then happens if Man City get found guilty of the charges that have been thrown their way? If they then get an enormous points deduction now for something that happened whilst we were in the top part of the PL you could argue that we've lost CL revenue as a result of their actions? The whole thing could get incredibly messy

[jammie82uk]

1 hour ago, boosmanana said:

What then happens if Man City get found guilty of the charges that have been thrown their way? If they then get an enormous points deduction now for something that happened whilst we were in the top part of the PL you could argue that we've lost CL revenue as a result of their actions? The whole thing could get incredibly messy

I can see their “punishment” being a transfer ban and a fine, Premier league won’t want to lose them from the league especially if the gossip about tv rights holders is correct about wanting reimbursement if Man City are removed 

[Nolucklcfc]

4 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

I can see their “punishment” being a transfer ban and a fine, Premier league won’t want to lose them from the league especially if the gossip about tv rights holders is correct about wanting reimbursement if Man City are removed 

But at the same time, we can’t then be deducted points because it’s blatantly unfair. 

[Foxdiamond]

7 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

I can see their “punishment” being a transfer ban and a fine, Premier league won’t want to lose them from the league especially if the gossip about tv rights holders is correct about wanting reimbursement if Man City are removed 

Basically a slap on the wrist compared to clubs losing points

[Frank Large's Black Book]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before because I'm too despondent to read it all but what grinds my gears (besides manc) is reading that Man U are carrying a debt of £1.3 billion.

 

Think of a million pounds in one pile, then think of another 1,300 piles.

 

That's c£60m a year just to service the debt.

Tell me how that is sustainable.

[jammie82uk]

7 minutes ago, Nolucklcfc said:

But at the same time, we can’t then be deducted points because it’s blatantly unfair. 

I agree but unless it’s a points deduction of 50 or more points it won’t really affect them 

[Terraloon]

10 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

I can see their “punishment” being a transfer ban and a fine, Premier league won’t want to lose them from the league especially if the gossip about tv rights holders is correct about wanting reimbursement if Man City are removed 

The first thing that has to happen is the more important charges have to be proven. If and a big if all 115+ charges are proven then without doubt they will suffer a massive sporting sanction. The PL  shareholders are the clubs and the majority won’t give a toss if Man City are either relegated or banished. 
 

There is absolutely no way that the likes of Sky will have any clauses around the clubs that make up the league nor will they be entitled to getting money back if a club falls foul of a PL disciplinary process. 
 

[Terraloon]

9 minutes ago, Frank Large's Black Book said:

I don't know if this has been mentioned before because I'm too despondent to read it all but what grinds my gears (besides manc) is reading that Man U are carrying a debt of £1.3 billion.

 

Think of a million pounds in one pile, then think of another 1,300 piles.

 

That's c£60m a year just to service the debt.

Tell me how that is sustainable.

It’s sustainable because they have such vast income. In excess of £650m Pa so interest around 9%
 

Try looking at LC accounts. In 23/24 from income of £105 m interest £14 m so I test around 13.5%.

[coolhandfox]

4 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

I'm fascinated how we have provided assurance to the EFL that we are OK for 2025/26 too. I was led to believe that strict business plans and embargo are brought in mid season if this cannot be evidenced and the backstop of selling players in June to comply is not accepted as proof either. 

We would have submitted a business plan, I think this is reflected in our transfer business this season.

[pleatout]

1 hour ago, coolhandfox said:

We would have submitted a business plan, I think this is reflected in our transfer business this season.

There was an early RL interview with Cifuentes where he let slip that there was a business plan in place with the EFL. 

 

Just found a reference to it on 11 sept.  So it would around there , if anyone wants to scour BBC sounds and get his exact words.

 

[ian__marshall]

So am I correct in thinking any new sanction would apply to 24/25, I.e. When we were a PL club? 

 

If so, shouldn't we be sanctioned under PL rules?

 

If that is the case, then any sanction must be applied this season under the amendment issued last April. The rules were clear that it has to apply to the same season the charges are brought to maintain sporting integrity.

 

Therefore if we have breached it has to be applied this season, otherwise I don't see how any such sanction could be applied at a later date, based on the rules. 

 

Edited 25 February by ian__marshall

[jammie82uk]

46 minutes ago, pleatout said:

There was an early RL interview with Cifuentes where he let slip that there was a business plan in place with the EFL. 

 

Just found a reference to it on 11 sept.  So it would around there , if anyone wants to scour BBC sounds and get his exact words.

 

This is the 11th of September episode where marti is live in the studio if anyone is interested 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0m299fs