Leeds considering legal action against Leicester

[Manwell Pablo]

3 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Hahaha beat us home and away and still finished more points behind us than we were deducted for the equivalent season  someone probably needs to have a quiet word with them that they're in danger of looking very silly.

 

You're bang on, in principle,  but this is the kind of shit you leave yourself open to if you delay a FFP decision over years by using mitigation to delay it when you are bang to rights. 

 

We will still have to defend it and courts of laws are tricky places.

 

I mean some people say they regretted winning the Premier League, I regret winning the Championship a lot more, the thinking we'd stay up after getting straight back up it probably the highest, albeit in a long list, of failings by this ownership, along with the idelogy that all of these financial irregulations would continue to go away because we were to big to face them and bouncing between leagues. 

 

We should have consolidated and rebuilt properly. 

[fox_favourite]

So Wrexham could sue Southampton for this season. Just missed out on the chance for a game worth promotion and £200m because Southampton cheated to get into the play offs. 

 

We could sue Everton for sending us down by one point. What about last season?

 

Could teams sue us for our promotion under Adminstration all those years ago? And what about our last League 1 season?

 

I know I'm getting silly, but my point is where does it stop? Leeds are probably a more stable club because of what has happened. They now have a solid base to keep them in the prem for a few years, so just moved on. 

 

If this happens then football is dead and we'd go bust because we couldn't afford it. 

[ClaphamFox]

9 hours ago, moore_94 said:

Ok we will go back and take 6 points off our total in 2023/24 instead then... oh. Leeds are still below us.

 

 

What if we had been given a 6 point deduction in 2022/23...?

 

 

You can have the £2m or whatever it is we got for finishing a position higher then

 

In both cases they are still either not promoted or are still relegated, its nothing like Burnley's case

This. Burnley‘s case was simple: if Everton’s six-point deduction had been imposed within the season they breached, it would have materially affected the outcome (ie, Burnley would have survived and Everton would have gone down). That does not apply in either of the seasons that Leeds are apparently ‘considering’ suing us for. 
 

Maybe somebody with legal knowledge can explain how Leeds may have a case here because at face value it doesn’t make any sense. 

Edited 21 hours ago by ClaphamFox

[Gamble92]

5 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

You're bang on, in principle,  but this is the kind of shit you leave yourself open to if you delay a FFP decision over years by using mitigation to delay it when you are bang to rights. 

 

We will still have to defend it and courts of laws are tricky places.

 

I mean some people say they regretted winning the Premier League, I regret winning the Championship a lot more, the thinking we'd stay up after getting straight back up it probably the highest, albeit in a long list, of failings by this ownership, along with the idelogy that all of these financial irregulations would continue to go away because we were to big to face them and bouncing between leagues. 

 

We should have consolidated and rebuilt properly. 

Agree with you that the way they've handled it is so bad and takes the term papering over the cracks to a whole new level. Rudkin is still showing no signs of changing either. I expect them to have offered Martin plenty of money to operate way beyond our means again.

 

But, as we are seeing now, there wasn't time for a big rebuild. They needed to get out straight away. It's just a shame they thought they needed to do it with signings with money we didn't have. 

[LCFCJohn]

Leeds looking very very silly here and should be told to stop wasting everyone’s time.

 

As said, they’d have gone down anyway. If the £2 mill or whatever for finishing 18th not 19th means that much to them, just give it them so they can stop crying about it.

 

As for the 23/24 promotion season, it made zero difference. Anyway, had they gone up that season rather than us, they have just come down with Southampton and Ipswich. The year after (season just finished) there were established teams ready to implode like Wolves and West Ham so they benefitted from going up a year later both in terms of their own being ready and a more competitive relegation battle.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Another first for King Power!

[hackneyfox]

6 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

You're bang on, in principle,  but this is the kind of shit you leave yourself open to if you delay a FFP decision over years by using mitigation to delay it when you are bang to rights. 

 

We will still have to defend it and courts of laws are tricky places.

 

I mean some people say they regretted winning the Premier League, I regret winning the Championship a lot more, the thinking we'd stay up after getting straight back up it probably the highest, albeit in a long list, of failings by this ownership, along with the idelogy that all of these financial irregulations would continue to go away because we were to big to face them and bouncing between leagues. 

 

We should have consolidated and rebuilt properly. 

Some people regret winning the Premier League??????

[moore_94]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

This. Burnley‘s case was simple: if Everton’s six-point deduction had been imposed within the season they breached, it would have materially affected the outcome (ie, Burnley would have survived and Everton would have gone down). That does not apply in either of the seasons that Leeds are apparently ‘considering’ suing us for. 
 

Maybe somebody with legal knowledge can explain how Leeds may have a case here because at face value it doesn’t make any sense. 

We have a better case against Forest - if this is the way it is all going to go

[coolhandfox]

PSR has been dreadful for football, poorly implemented.

 

 

[hebangsthedrums]

Just when I think I couldn't dislike Leeds any more.. stupid activity. 

 

Give it 2/3 years and the transfer window chat will see players secondary and all the news about who is signing the best solicitor/legal firm/accountant

 

Can't wait to see sky frothing over case win ratios and XP's (expected prosecutions) 

[Foxmeister]

The big one will be Man City, we wouldn’t have breached the rules at all if they hadn’t. Good luck to all the authorities dealing with the knock-on effect created if they’re found guilty. 

[Merchant_Banker]

10 hours ago, Ross 'LCFC' Turner said:

Get him on the books and get him up top!!

I thought being up Top was Rudkins job. 😒

[cityfanlee23]

13 hours ago, richardsfoxes said:

Then we will sue Everton for when we went down by 1 point and they broke PSR.

This is the crux of the issue really. Football finances are so broken, there MUST be a way for PSR to analyse a clubs accounts within weeks of the season ending, the fact Everton got punished for a PSR breach does absolutely nothing for the fact that we then got relegated whilst their punishment came the season after. If they were punished for the season they breached, we should have stayed up. 

It's impossible to prove that the breach was the difference in us going down/staying up, but we shouldn't need to prove that. If you breach, you should be given a deduction THAT SEASON. 

I don't know what the solution is, it's the speed of the investigations that are the issue here, clubs don't hand their final accounts in until the season is over, and then the league opens an investigation and the legal back and forth begins for 12 months. 
The sort of changes the sport needs are mid-season accounting checkpoints, so say Feb 1st once the window closes they have to give a macro view of their finances and a clear projection so that the league can begin investigations early and work out how close to breaching the club actually is, then come the end of the season they will be able to fast-track everything as they've already had 6 months of monitoring, couple this with the fact that it's a 3 year rolling window, that would double the amount of information the league has over a clubs finances. 

The current system is basically "spend now, investigate later" If the league could implement investigations 6 months earlier, it could prevent situations where a club survives by a point but had 6 points deducted next season. 
 

[Lambert09]

4 hours ago, moore_94 said:

We have a better case against Forest - if this is the way it is all going to go

Why though? We broke the rules the same season didn’t we? 

[Danizen]

**** sake shall we just all do away with pitches, players, managers competitions and just settle it all in court? Sad bastards.

Edited 14 hours ago by Danizen

[Muzzy_no7]

Well if they do then we will then sue Forest, Everton, Chelsea and Man City.

 

Leeds clutching here though, 7pts gap despite us handing them 6pts with dodgy decisions.

[foxfanazer]

[ealingfox]

2 hours ago, cityfanlee23 said:

This is the crux of the issue really. Football finances are so broken, there MUST be a way for PSR to analyse a clubs accounts within weeks of the season ending, the fact Everton got punished for a PSR breach does absolutely nothing for the fact that we then got relegated whilst their punishment came the season after. If they were punished for the season they breached, we should have stayed up. 

 

If Burnley have successfully litigated this why aren't we already doing the same?

[inckley fox]

3 hours ago, Foxmeister said:

The big one will be Man City, we wouldn’t have breached the rules at all if they hadn’t. Good luck to all the authorities dealing with the knock-on effect created if they’re found guilty. 

Whether they are punished a lot, a little, or exonerated, the implications will be huge. Football, as many have said, will be played out in courtrooms and bankruptcy hearings for years to come.

 

Ultimately the game has to decide whether it wants to be competitive and dynamic, or an elite sport. Do you set strict spending limits and block transfers the moment a club runs out of cash, which the richest outfits never will? Even worse, for most of us, do you allow a complete free-for-all? Or do you accept defeat, realise that the status quo can't be maintained, and cap at the top end?

 

The 'third way' hasn't worked. But it's been the compromise that keeps the richest clubs on board, and everyone else happy that they still get a share of the revenue those clubs bring into the game. But is it specifically Chelsea, Spurs and co. who generate that money by the sheer force of their brand, or in time could you sub out a Spurs for a Leeds, an Everton, a Villa, or a club of similar historic standing? Or less?

 

Is it the competitiveness itself that people are drawn to? Are we misled by the number of shirts Spurs sell in China compared to Newcastle? There's a theory that, in spite of those figures, many of the people who buy those tops don't put any more of their money into the game, and those who do are only inclined to do so because the game, and the competition, means something. If the competitiveness subsides, if we're hit with the La Liga-fication of English football, then maybe the revenue generated by the Premier will more closely resemble the far inferior revenue generated by other top leagues.

 

Thus far, the majority of clubs challenge the elite here and there on FFP and its successors, but not too much. But as more and more of them wind up facing extinction or irrelevance while the wealthiest clubs threaten them with exclusive super leagues, escaping punishment for their own transgressions, then at some point the entire institution of football will turn into a farce. Existential threats shatter the urge not to go rocking any boats.

 

And when the does descend into farce (which is clearly where it's headed) the weight of public opinion may be too great for nervy football club owners, hesitant politicians - and maybe even, at some point, broadcasters - to resist. If a huge percentage of football fans support clubs that aren't even in the league due to liquidation, then that's a massive number of fans, viewers and voters.

 

 

[st albans fox]

15 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

 

If Burnley have successfully litigated this why aren't we already doing the same?

Cos we also broke the rules that season so should have had a deduction??

 

or maybe the fact that we passed up the opportunity to do this when it was presented several years ago (on the basis that we also offended) and it’s now timed out to do so. 
 

 

[Manwell Pablo]

12 hours ago, fox_favourite said:

So Wrexham could sue Southampton for this season. Just missed out on the chance for a game worth promotion and £200m because Southampton cheated to get into the play offs. 

 

We could sue Everton for sending us down by one point. What about last season?

 

Could teams sue us for our promotion under Adminstration all those years ago? And what about our last League 1 season?

 

I know I'm getting silly, but my point is where does it stop? Leeds are probably a more stable club because of what has happened. They now have a solid base to keep them in the prem for a few years, so just moved on. 

 

If this happens then football is dead and we'd go bust because we couldn't afford it. 

No because no imposed sanction on Southampton would have resulted in Wrexham getting into the play offs. 
 

I can’t even get my head around why you’d think we’d have a case against Everton. 
 

No as there was no law against going into administration when we did. 
 

what about out last league one season? We did nothing wrong 😂

 

I would imagine Leeds case solely rests on we were promoted over a 46 game season whilst infringing the rules, and in infringing the rules, we’ve denied them promotion a lot of money unfairly. 
 

Actually when I put it like that it does actually start to sound like a reasonable case. 

[Manwell Pablo]

In terms of us sueing others for our relegation  

 

Its kind of hard to do that when you’ve been found guilty of breaking the FFP rules yourself 😂

[Loughborough Rob]

What next? KPFC suggesting Southampton needed to spy on us to pick up 6 points?

[fox_favourite]

50 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

No because no imposed sanction on Southampton would have resulted in Wrexham getting into the play offs. 
 

I can’t even get my head around why you’d think we’d have a case against Everton. 
 

No as there was no law against going into administration when we did. 
 

what about out last league one season? We did nothing wrong 😂

 

I would imagine Leeds case solely rests on we were promoted over a 46 game season whilst infringing the rules, and in infringing the rules, we’ve denied them promotion a lot of money unfairly. 
 

Actually when I put it like that it does actually start to sound like a reasonable case. 

But there were 3 places for promotion, and they failed on all 3 attempts. If we were the problem, why didn't they come 2nd or if not they could have won the playoffs, we didn't infringe on that. Us getting promoted didn't stop them from doing the same, they had other opportunities. 

 

So personally, I don't see why they have a case? Yes, we may have overspent on getting promoted and winning, but Leeds didn't win enough games to come close and they still failed in the playoffs. 

 

Simple fact is, they had a slow start and paid the price for it at the end. We didn't make them lose 4-0 (if my horrendous memory is correct) to QPR, for example

 

 

Edited 10 hours ago by fox_favourite

[em9999]

It doesnt take a spy to confirm we can't defend 

 

28 minutes ago, Loughborough Rob said:

What next? KPFC suggesting Southampton needed to spy on us to pick up 6 points?

 

Edited 10 hours ago by em9999