Leicester 'could face points deduction next season'

[westernpark]

10 minutes ago, JimJams said:

You don't have to care about them to care about them circumventing rules that we're potentially being punished for.

They’re playing within the rules, their behaviour isn’t the reason we’re going to punished by those rules. 

[Scotch]

Tbh, the question shouldn't be why these clubs are doing this, it should be why aren't we? Is it a bit Sly? Ofcourse but it's within the rules that we had no issue breaking so...

[Lambert09]

47 minutes ago, JimJams said:

It's not the same thing though.  They're deliberately inflating the value of players so it doesn't matter who you sell you just need a willing partner to help circumvent the rules. So we could go to Newcastle and sell them Soumare for £40mill and buy Longstaff for £25mill. Massively inflated fees in order to get a big profit in on the books in the immediacy with the inflated purchase you made nicely spread out over a few years.  It's just cheating, and there's no need for it to be youth players in order to do it.

that’s absolutely the issue. 

 

They are not actually bothered about the players they are getting it’s just a way of getting out of psr trouble. 

 

Chelsea’s fans are too dumb to realise this and are up in arms about signing a kid for 20m but the reality is they are just selling maatson for 25m and the kids involved are to help both clubs avoid psr penalty’s 

 

for those confused about this look at it like this:

 

villa and chelsea are let’s say failing by 20m.

 

Villa pay 40m for a chelsea player (maatson) that’s spread over 5 years so just 9m ish  for this year.

 

chelsea then give villa 20m for a kid . spread by 5 so just 4 for chelsea’s books

 

villa are just 9m down  on psr  and have a player they wanted 

 

chelsea are no up by 15m

 

its absolutely cheating and they know that within the 5 years ffp will be long gone 

 

the fact villa can sign a player for 40m and be 11m better off with ffp is a joke 

 

And that’s not even getting me started on the fact that the youth players are going to suffer because of being pawns in this 

Edited 22 June by Lambert09

[Viva]

17 minutes ago, westernpark said:

Don’t care about other clubs. We’re badly run and in the mess we face because of ourselves. The ownership group and directors have to take the blame.

If we had kept Rodgers and not spent in that January window, we would have probably stayed within the rules. Would you have preferred that scenario? In hindsight we went down anyway so it probably would have been the better option, but I bet most fans wouldn't have been happy with that? 

 

We did what we did to try and stay up. We're back in the Premier League now anyway and I'm looking forward to the season ahead. 

[westernpark]

1 minute ago, Viva said:

If we had kept Rodgers and not spent in that January window, we would have probably stayed within the rules. Would you have preferred that scenario? In hindsight we went down anyway so it probably would have been the better option, but I bet most fans wouldn't have been happy with that? 

 

We did what we did to try and stay up. We're back in the Premier League now anyway and I'm looking forward to the season ahead. 

The spending in January 2023 had no impact in the grand scheme of things on any FFP or PSR. It was years of mismanagement of not creating a conveyor belt, that meant signings were on affordable contracts and to be able to be sold for fees. You only have to look at the number of free transfers we have given to players, who we have signed for over 10 million, to realise we have not operated responsibly, for a very long time. Then, asking for silly prices for people like Iversen, despite having four goalkeepers, has ultimately caused us to break the rules.

[Corky]

Not that I agree with it but we don't play the game enough. A real lack of savvy about us.

[Viva]

2 minutes ago, westernpark said:

The spending in January 2023 had no impact in the grand scheme of things on any FFP or PSR. It was years of mismanagement of not creating a conveyor belt, that meant signings were on affordable contracts and to be able to be sold for fees. You only have to look at the number of free transfers we have given to players, who we have signed for over 10 million, to realise we have not operated responsibly, for a very long time. Then, asking for silly prices for people like Iversen, despite having four goalkeepers, has ultimately caused us to break the rules.

I'm not denying that mistakes were made. However, the spending in January 2023 and the sacking of Rodgers and his team certainly had a big impact on PSR.

[FoxinNotts]

43 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

If they are going to then I hope they get a shift on, only got 1 week left!

Exactly. Been saying this for weeks, and now there’s little time left

[Dahnsouff]

Time to setup an East Midlands transfer cartel.

[kingfox]

Looking forward to KDH going to Brentford for £40 million, with Romeo Beckham coming to us for £20 million. 

[Foxin_Mad]

2 hours ago, Wortho said:

I’m of the same opinion. What other industry limits the amount of investment you want to make? 
During the 70/80’s Liverpool and United had the biggest investors. Whatever system you have some clubs will always have larger incomes. 

It's pure stupidity. The American owners of the red cartel don't want the risk of another team breaking into the big 6. It's bad enough City and Chelsea (and spurs somehow) are there but they don't want any other challengers. The American owners want guaranteed positions, income so they can load clubs with debt like Man Utd. They don't want Leicester or Newcastle challenging. 

 

The rules are anti competitive and I actually hope it's proven so.

 

I don't know how any fan can sit there and say these shit rules implemented by complete idiots can possibly be good for the game.  To me complying with PSR doesn't necessarily make a well run club either, top many stupid loopholes. 

 

I have a feeling we might just ignore psr and we are of the opinion our court cases (and citys) are quite strong.

 

Whatever people think of our owners, at no point have they ever given the impression they aren't willing to fund the club for the long term, if they wish to lose money, as with any business, that's their choice or risk. In business you have to speculate to accumulate, continually selling your best assets to the big six is the exact opposite of sustainable football. 

[Dahnsouff]

31 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

…

The rules are anti competitive and I actually hope it's proven so.

 

I don't know how any fan can sit there and say these shit rules implemented by complete idiots can possibly be good for the game.  To me complying with PSR doesn't necessarily make a well run club either, top many stupid loopholes. 

…

But this is a sporting competition, it’s anti-competitive to not place restrictions on spending, otherwise it becomes about who has the biggest wallet. Do we really want that?  To focus on the “we should all be allowed to spend more” is badly missing the point in my opinion.

[Foxin_Mad]

6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

But this is a sporting competition, it’s anti-competitive to not place restrictions on spending, otherwise it becomes about who has the biggest wallet. Do we really want that?  To focus on the “we should all be allowed to spend more” is badly missing the point in my opinion.

But currently it is about whoever can generate the biggest revenue and profit. Obviously the cartel are in a position to make a lot more revenue than a provincial club from the Midlands, due to historic success during times of unrestricted spending. So these rules don't help this either, especially when a number of clubs a blatantly doing dodgy but 'legal' deals to comply, with idiotic rules created by morons.

 

Obviously clubs like United, Arsenal and Liverpool don't want a level playing field. Man Utd have more debt than half the football league, yet that's fine (sustainable allegedly). Liverpool can poach young talent and pay peanuts, thats fine, to meet the rules we have to sell our best academy products? Honestly wtf?

 

The solution probably needs to be global wage restrictions, the only way to make it truly fair is to make it a genuine level playing field. Anything restricted to size of club makes gaps bigger. I don't think the PSR rules are helping. You have Sheff Utd sell their best players last year and stink the league out to comply. People say recruit better and have better academies but all that is at risk from cartel poaching and them being able to afford to pay and spend more on the best players under the dumb rules. You basically have big 6 clubs sucking up any talent, loaning them out and flogging what doesn't make the grade. People say well Leicester should use the loan market, I disagree - loan players are never going to be as committed as a player on the clubs books and that's an issue too.

 

Football is broken currently, PSR is not helping. It shouldn't necessarily be unrestricted but it needs to give smaller clubs a means to compete. 

[Dahnsouff]

4 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

But currently it is about whoever can generate the biggest revenue and profit. Obviously the cartel are in a position to make a lot more revenue than a provincial club from the Midlands, due to historic success during times of unrestricted spending. So these rules don't help this either, especially when a number of clubs a blatantly doing dodgy but 'legal' deals to comply, with idiotic rules created by morons.

 

Obviously clubs like United, Arsenal and Liverpool don't want a level playing field. Man Utd have more debt than half the football league, yet that's fine (sustainable allegedly). Liverpool can poach young talent and pay peanuts, thats fine, to meet the rules we have to sell our best academy products? Honestly wtf?

 

The solution probably needs to be global wage restrictions, the only way to make it truly fair is to make it a genuine level playing field. Anything restricted to size of club makes gaps bigger. I don't think the PSR rules are helping. You have Sheff Utd sell their best players last year and stink the league out to comply. People say recruit better and have better academies but all that is at risk from cartel poaching and them being able to afford to pay and spend more on the best players under the dumb rules. You basically have big 6 clubs sucking up any talent, loaning them out and flogging what doesn't make the grade. People say well Leicester should use the loan market, I disagree - loan players are never going to be as committed as a player on the clubs books and that's an issue too.

 

Football is broken currently, PSR is not helping. It shouldn't necessarily be unrestricted but it needs to give smaller clubs a means to compete. 

Agree with this, the competitive nature of the sport is so slanted to the benefit of those with historic success, it undoes any capability of sporting integrity. Limiting spending for the many with no special cases, rather than making spending free for the many is the true answer (in my opinion) but as you point out, those of historic significance do not want to see this and gold enough sway to prevent the majority pursuing it either.

[Spudulike]

1 hour ago, Corky said:

Not that I agree with it but we don't play the game enough. A real lack of savvy about us.

Savvy enough to issue legal proceedings and then beat them at a hearing (twice).

[Jazzy_Jeff]

I think we’re either decided to take the hit or have found another way around it

[orangecity23]

14 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

But currently it is about whoever can generate the biggest revenue and profit. Obviously the cartel are in a position to make a lot more revenue than a provincial club from the Midlands, due to historic success during times of unrestricted spending. So these rules don't help this either, especially when a number of clubs a blatantly doing dodgy but 'legal' deals to comply, with idiotic rules created by morons.

 

Obviously clubs like United, Arsenal and Liverpool don't want a level playing field. Man Utd have more debt than half the football league, yet that's fine (sustainable allegedly). Liverpool can poach young talent and pay peanuts, thats fine, to meet the rules we have to sell our best academy products? Honestly wtf?

 

The solution probably needs to be global wage restrictions, the only way to make it truly fair is to make it a genuine level playing field. Anything restricted to size of club makes gaps bigger. I don't think the PSR rules are helping. You have Sheff Utd sell their best players last year and stink the league out to comply. People say recruit better and have better academies but all that is at risk from cartel poaching and them being able to afford to pay and spend more on the best players under the dumb rules. You basically have big 6 clubs sucking up any talent, loaning them out and flogging what doesn't make the grade. People say well Leicester should use the loan market, I disagree - loan players are never going to be as committed as a player on the clubs books and that's an issue too.

 

Football is broken currently, PSR is not helping. It shouldn't necessarily be unrestricted but it needs to give smaller clubs a means to compete. 

Or alternatively - Liverpool can take our best academy products, play them in the first team and have them actually win medals in a final, and still not have paid anything for them. They'll get round to that Trey Nyoni tribunal eventually, honest, sometime before he retires.

[HankMarvin]

1 hour ago, Corky said:

Not that I agree with it but we don't play the game enough. A real lack of savvy about us.

Trestellar Springs to mind 

[Grebfromgrebland]

Sell kdh for 40m then buy someone for 40m.

 

32m profit?

[Claudio Fannieri]

A question for @st albans fox if Top was to generate additional shares to raise investment could this help us navigate PSR breach if transactioned before end of June? 
 

I remember the owner of Southampton doing something similar IIRC 

[Foxin_Mad]

18 minutes ago, orangecity23 said:

Or alternatively - Liverpool can take our best academy products, play them in the first team and have them actually win medals in a final, and still not have paid anything for them. They'll get round to that Trey Nyoni tribunal eventually, honest, sometime before he retires.

It's an absolute joke. If they really want to make tge game fairer make sure the scouse scum compensate us based on any future success of our talent, say 10 million every year they finish top 4 or whatever. Won't happen but still, you want fair and sustainable that's it, Man Utd with 700million debt isn't. 

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

A question for @st albans fox if Top was to generate additional shares to raise investment could this help us navigate PSR breach if transactioned before end of June? 
 

I remember the owner of Southampton doing something similar IIRC 

Financial input from owners is restricted to a maximum per season - 

 

also ref the rolling three year loss limit (we are now at 83 allowed )

 

That £105m is caveated by the fact that £90m must be covered by "secure funding" from a club's owners.

Secure funding is a fancy way of saying "buying up more shares", rather than an owner simply lending their club money.

That means a club can only lose £15m of its "own" money every three years.

In other words - any loss above £15m but below £105m has to be guaranteed by club owners. If it isn't, or you go above that £105m limit, you are in breach of the rules.

 

[FoxinNotts]

Does the club own Belvoir Drive Training ground still?

 

And if so, how much could it be sold for?

[Foxin_Mad]

7 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

A question for @st albans fox if Top was to generate additional shares to raise investment could this help us navigate PSR breach if transactioned before end of June? 
 

I remember the owner of Southampton doing something similar IIRC 

Surely the best bet is to sell the training ground or some other asset to dome bullshit made up company. To be honest I feel the club miss out on Machday revenue and commercial quite a bit, some people would hate it I'm sure, but why not create a kind of King Power duty free type experience in Leicester, quite unique, have bars selling Thai beer, bit of thai street food, some restaurants etc. They must have the purchasing power. The club seem so bad a being commercial whether they don't really have to be very savy due to Thailand being a bit of a closed shop I don't know but you think these skills were pretty basic. 

[orangecity23]

7 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

It's an absolute joke. If they really want to make tge game fairer make sure the scouse scum compensate us based on any future success of our talent, say 10 million every year they finish top 4 or whatever. Won't happen but still, you want fair and sustainable that's it, Man Utd with 700million debt isn't. 

Won't happen though. Basically everything in the game is tilted towards slurping over the big 6, especially Man Utd and Liverpool. As you say, Man United cutting about with 700 million of debt, companies liking Adidas slinging them 90 million a season, but heaven forbid if a provincial Midland club lost more than 35 million in a year, that wouldn't be faaaair.

 

Football should have kicked out all the Super League clubs, and threatened to ban their players from international football if they didn't leave them. They'll continue to destroy the game, one greedy step at a time, because they don't want a competition, they just want entrenched guaranteed profits and revenue, with free trophies only for them, and will destroy the entire sport to get it if they have to.

Edited 22 June by orangecity23