Leicester 'could face points deduction next season'

[Spudulike]

6 hours ago, don_danbury said:

why is he banging on about the title win?  

Man after my own heart. I'm always banging on about the title win as well. 

[Ric Flair]

27 minutes ago, Mr Weller 2 said:

But making a poor decision isn’t a punishable offence.

Unless the poor decisions lead to breaches that are punishable. The decisions that were made in 2021/22 and that have likely caused it being almost impossible for us to comply with PSR in 2022/23 was not because of poor transfer incomings but because the strategy was off kilter. 

 

As I've pointed out, if we've breached PSR by more than £35m having sold both Fofana (and cleared £40m + profit and Maddison £40m - nearly all profit on the remaining book value) when we hadn't planned to sell either then there's absolutely no scenario in 2022/23 where we could have complied. Even if we'd won the league again the additional revenue would unlikely have covered it.

 

 

[The_77]

9 hours ago, filbertway said:

Pretty spot on and not contradicted himself in the slightest.

 

Thinks the rules could be improved. - Check

Leicester have broken the rules that are there and should be punished - Check.

 

He's spot on as well, we say we want the whole process out in the open yet terrified of publishing our accounts until the very last moment.

 

We're coming across as the footballing equivalent of a petulant toddler to be fair.

We haven’t even had our day in court yet. We likely broke the rules, yeah, but the number of people who are willingly accepting punishment based on charges is astounding. We’re talking charges here, not verdicts. The process has only just started with the PL and we still haven’t submitted our final accounts for our Championship season. 

[Mr Weller 2]

2 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Unless the poor decisions lead to breaches that are punishable. The decisions that were made in 2021/22 and that have likely caused it being almost impossible for us to comply with PSR in 2022/23 was not because of poor transfer incomings but because the strategy was off kilter. 

 

As I've pointed out, if we've breached PSR by more than £35m having sold both Fofana (and cleared £40m + profit and Maddison £40m - nearly all profit on the remaining book value) when we hadn't planned to sell either then there's absolutely no scenario in 2022/23 where we could have complied. Even if we'd won the league again the additional revenue would unlikely have covered it.

 

 

That’s my point. Poor judgement is part of the game (any game) but the punishment is that it might lead to losing a point/goal/ race/match etc. There shouldn’t also be an additional punishment imposed by the ruling authority.

 

i.e you don’t punish a poor pass by giving the opposition a penalty 

[dannythefox]

We’ve know for a good couple of years the way the clubs transfers in/out is a shambles. When you get Perez for 30m which is double his valve we’ve only got ourselves to blame. Look at what we’ve let go for cheap or free! And it’s about to happen again with nacho, ndidi etc a club like Leicester can’t have players walking out for free who are worth 40m. This is what happens when we are paying top wages and are trying to break in to the top 6 it’s not affordable when it goes tits up.

Edited 27 March by dannythefox

[Claudio Fannieri]

10 hours ago, lcfc_forever said:

Fully agree on not selling players whose contracts were running down. Seems like the board starting thinking like fans who got carried away rather than custodians of the club and clearly trusted Rodgers too much - so many fans wanted Youri to stay for example but in hindsight, better to have sold him earlier. 

If we cast our minds back to when KP first took over, very similar mistakes were made, the hiring of Sousa and then Sven plus the crazy levels of spending for a Championship club, until Pearson returned and has to try and repair the damage, we were a mess, now if I recall correctly Vichai was not as involved or didn’t appear to be at the very beginning, therefore you have to ask the question, does Top have enough acumen and financial control to be the head of a football club, as it seems to me are in a very similar position to where we were and making very similar mistakes, which makes me question if the current ownership and its team are genuinely fit for purpose without Vichai. 

Edited 27 March by Claudio Fannieri

[Sly]

6 minutes ago, Claudio Fannieri said:

If we cast our minds back to when KP first took over, very similar mistakes were made, the hiring of Sousa and then Sven plus the crazy levels of spending for a Championship club, until Pearson returned and has to try and report the damage, we were a mess, now if I recall correctly Vichai was not as involved or didn’t appear to be at the very beginning, therefore you have to ask the question, does Top have enough acumen and financial control to be the head of a football club, as it seems to me are in a very similar position to where we were and making very similar mistakes, which makes me question if the current ownership and its team are genuinely fit for purpose without Vichai. 

A lot of truth in this. You could liken what Enzo is doing to the job Pearson and Puel did. Putting the pieces back together. 
 

The reality is:
 

We’ve overpaid on wages significantly compared to our level of income.

 

We’ve got a bloated squad, that is unbalanced. How many goalkeepers and strikers do we need? Did we really need Souttar when we had Soyuncu, Vestergaard, Amartey, Evans and Nelson? 

 

We’ve made bad investments, then not sold, or been unable to sell players to balance the books. Allowing Soyuncu, Tielemans, Perez, Evans etc leave in a free was poor business. Allowing players to leave on a free and not selling them with 2+ years left if criminal in hindsight. 
 

Commercially we’ve never capitalised as reportedly our advertising via King Power etc was amongst the lowest in the Premier league. 

 

We haven’t utilised our stadium for other events, so it’s sits empty half the time. That’s largely due to the fact it’s made of cheese and was built without additional features to accommodate other events I’d imagine. I’m not sure if the plan was to ever address this with the expansion. 
 

We’ve expanded merchandise sales, however we don’t have the pull of the big six, so trying to compete was always a challenge. We tried to break into strange markets, like our ill fated tour to Thailand this season. What a farce that was. 
 

It’ll annoy people, however when the stadium is full, in reality a business should raise its prices to capitalise on it. Reality is, someone will pay to attend. 
 

Hospitality is similar, packages were always sold out really quickly, even this season. I tried to get a box pre season and they’d all gone! Obviously sold them too cheap! 
 

We’ve made plans to improve on some of these areas with the expansion etc, however what’s happening? The communication from within is about as painful as watching our capitulation last season. 
 

We’ve all known this was on the cards for some time. The question is how far and what approach the legal action takes, as fundamentally we’ve likely broken the rules (even if they are anti competitive). Are we challenging that we haven’t, or are we challenging that we can sustain these losses and still remain a profitable business with outside investment and future business ventures?

[Number 6]

16 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

This is it, nobody has been removed from their post. Simon Capper resigned to go to Newcastle but other than that there's been little change at director or board level to suggest the club think catastrophic mistakes have been made.

 

The internal review after relegation and at that point the financial implications must have formed part of that and once again it was business as usual. 

 

Concerning more than comforting that is.

On the face of it, some of our recent dealings make me think we either didn't fully understand our position in relation to the rules, or had no intention of complying with the rules anyway. Both would be concerning.

[Spudulike]

6 hours ago, The_77 said:

We haven’t even had our day in court yet. We likely broke the rules, yeah, but the number of people who are willingly accepting punishment based on charges is astounding. We’re talking charges here, not verdicts. The process has only just started with the PL and we still haven’t submitted our final accounts for our Championship season. 

The issuing of legal proceedings against the PL/EFL at least shows the club has some fight left in it. Our fan base is so passive. I thought this might lite a fire under us but no sign of that, so far. 

[CosbehFox]

42 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

The issuing of legal proceedings against the PL/EFL at least shows the club has some fight left in it. Our fan base is so passive. I thought this might lite a fire under us but no sign of that, so far. 

That's because not everyone agrees with the club's actions or rather could foresee it happening. 

 

There's a cracking article on Fosse Way - https://www.thefosseway.net/viewpoint/leicester-city-emotional-rollercoaster and on the Mercury website - https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-failed-harness-ffp-9189091 - (tip use reading mode to get rid of the adverts). 

 

This line is absolutely on the money - This failure is the pay-off for years of disconnect between a club and its supporter base, but it also gives those in charge an easy ride. There are pockets of real anger but there won’t be any mass protests.

 

If you fail to engage your supporters and at times downright alienate them, don't expect them to come running to your aid but equals it silences criticism. 

 

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Number 6 said:

On the face of it, some of our recent dealings make me think we either didn't fully understand our position in relation to the rules, or had no intention of complying with the rules anyway. Both would be concerning.

If we've failed this window (which looks a near certainty), this has to be the case. We could have pushed for the Barnes sale earlier and it doesn't explain where we resisted originally with Fofana. You compare with Wolves who worked their arse off to do player trading. 

[Claridge]

3 hours ago, dannythefox said:

We’ve know for a good couple of years the way the clubs transfers in/out is a shambles. When you get Perez for 30m which is double his valve we’ve only got ourselves to blame. Look at what we’ve let go for cheap or free! And it’s about to happen again with nacho, ndidi etc a club like Leicester can’t have players walking out for free who are worth 40m. This is what happens when we are paying top wages and are trying to break in to the top 6 it’s not affordable when it goes tits up.

£40 mill for those pair Nach worth nothing because of his wage demands and Wilf maybe £5 million because of his injury record and his useless performances for the last couple of years in the prem. Unless Leicster are bidding i suppose. People used to waffle that people like Caglar etc... were worth millions. madrid couldn't get rid quick enough and he was free

[davieG]

We can't sell because better teams don't want them and lesser teams can't afford the wages. Bottom line even though we're trying to compete we can't pay big wages. Unfortunately the wage levels were set with the title winning team.

[Babylon]

11 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Unless the poor decisions lead to breaches that are punishable. The decisions that were made in 2021/22 and that have likely caused it being almost impossible for us to comply with PSR in 2022/23 was not because of poor transfer incomings but because the strategy was off kilter. 

 

As I've pointed out, if we've breached PSR by more than £35m having sold both Fofana (and cleared £40m + profit and Maddison £40m - nearly all profit on the remaining book value) when we hadn't planned to sell either then there's absolutely no scenario in 2022/23 where we could have complied. Even if we'd won the league again the additional revenue would unlikely have covered it.

 

 

I'd imagine we were planning on that; we'd been talking about the importance of player trading again in the programme notes etc. We were probably planning on selling at the end of the season for both. 

[ClaphamFox]

3 hours ago, Spudulike said:

The issuing of legal proceedings against the PL/EFL at least shows the club has some fight left in it. Our fan base is so passive. I thought this might lite a fire under us but no sign of that, so far. 

Sometimes supporting a football club means you have to choose heart over head. It is possible to be unhappy with the mistakes the people running the club have made while wholeheartedly backing their efforts to defend us from hostile forces. Irrespective of the poor decisions the club may have made, the fact is that we're now fighting against authorities that will happily fvck us up good and proper if we allow them to. We need everybody united off the pitch for this fight against the PL and EFL as well as on the pitch for the final nine games of the season. After that, an honest dialogue between the club and supporters about our future direction will be required.

Edited 27 March by ClaphamFox

[CosbehFox]

44 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Sometimes supporting a football club means you have to choose heart over head. It is possible to be unhappy with the mistakes the people running the club have made while wholeheartedly backing their efforts to defend us from hostile forces. Irrespective of the poor decisions the club may have made, the fact is that we're now fighting against authorities that will happily fvck us up good and proper if we allow them to. We need everybody united off the pitch for this fight against the PL and EFL as well as on the pitch for the final nine games of the season. After that, an honest dialogue between the club and supporters about our future direction will be required.

I'll happily back down from that then thanks. There's a good percentage probably 70 to 80% of the footballing pyramid that has complied - these clubs of variety of sizes. There's awful lot of punching up going in the FFP debate without any consideration to the food chain of football below. 

 

You have clubs like Wolves who appropriately cut their cloth in the PL. You have teams within the Championship trying to sustainably improve their squad to achieve promotion. 

 

Equally we aren't unique in the 'fight'. The use of language about hostile forces and a fight is proof of the LCFC's communications working wonders. Akin to the sort of spiel Liverpool come out with or Arsenal more recently. 

Edited 27 March by CosbehFox

[Trav Le Bleu]

I have a great idea.

 

A chain of LCFC branded Turkish barbershops!

 

 

[MPH]

4 hours ago, Number 6 said:

On the face of it, some of our recent dealings make me think we either didn't fully understand our position in relation to the rules, or had no intention of complying with the rules anyway. Both would be concerning.

 

 

Neither of them are good enough excuses, especially when so much is spent on legal fees and consultancy fees on a yearly basis..

[filbertway]

10 hours ago, Mr Weller 2 said:

That’s my point. Poor judgement is part of the game (any game) but the punishment is that it might lead to losing a point/goal/ race/match etc. There shouldn’t also be an additional punishment imposed by the ruling authority.

 

i.e you don’t punish a poor pass by giving the opposition a penalty 

It's like taking performance enhancing drugs, it doesn't matter if you made the most of the advantage you gave yourself, you still get punished for breaking the rules.

 

Just because we were sh*t onthe pitch as well as off it doesn't excuse us breaking the rules.

[kenny]

41 minutes ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

I have a great idea.

 

A chain of LCFC branded Turkish barbershops!

 

 

I think the whole chain of these are in blaby already.

[Ian S]

11 hours ago, The_77 said:

We haven’t even had our day in court yet. We likely broke the rules, yeah, but the number of people who are willingly accepting punishment based on charges is astounding. We’re talking charges here, not verdicts. The process has only just started with the PL and we still haven’t submitted our final accounts for our Championship season. 

As a matter of interest, how many clubs have been charged and subsequently found innocent so far.?

[ClaphamFox]

1 hour ago, CosbehFox said:

I'll happily back down from that then thanks. There's a good percentage probably 70 to 80% of the footballing pyramid that has complied - these clubs of variety of sizes. There's awful lot of punching up going in the FFP debate without any consideration to the food chain of football below. 

 

You have clubs like Wolves who appropriately cut their cloth in the PL. You have teams within the Championship trying to sustainably improve their squad to achieve promotion. 

 

Equally we aren't unique in the 'fight'. The use of language about hostile forces and a fight is proof of the LCFC's communications working wonders. Akin to the sort of spiel Liverpool come out with or Arsenal more recently. 

Of course it's true that other clubs have been better at cutting their cloth according to FFP/PSR. And it's also true that we aren't unique in seeking to take the authorities on.

 

None of which changes the fact that the alternative to seeking the best outcome for ourselves - whatever form that might take - is to sit back and just hope the EFL and PL treat us fairly and proportionately. I'm not remotely convinced they will. The EFL has already had a hissy fit because we didn't agree to submit an early business plan. If we fail to get promotion, they will very likely try to make an example of us. And even if we do get promoted while breaching again this season, it would not surprise me if they ask the PL to impose an additional points deduction on top of that which we receive for 2020-23. There is no precedent for this (clubs that have previously been promoted while breaching have only received financial penalties), but I would not put it past them to try it.

 

This is why I'm glad we've got Nick De Marco fighting our corner for us. Whatever we've done, I don't want us to be treated unfairly. Any excessive actions from the authorities against us could cast us back into the wilderness for years. We just can't stand aside and let that happen.

[coolhandfox]

2 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

I'll happily back down from that then thanks. There's a good percentage probably 70 to 80% of the footballing pyramid that has complied - these clubs of variety of sizes. There's awful lot of punching up going in the FFP debate without any consideration to the food chain of football below. 

 

You have clubs like Wolves who appropriately cut their cloth in the PL. You have teams within the Championship trying to sustainably improve their squad to achieve promotion. 

 

Equally we aren't unique in the 'fight'. The use of language about hostile forces and a fight is proof of the LCFC's communications working wonders. Akin to the sort of spiel Liverpool come out with or Arsenal more recently. 

Likely going to have to sell big in the summer to prevent themselves from breaching as they have little head room.

 

Add to that Villa, Newcastle, Chelsea and Man City if they can get stuff to stick.

 

That's 7 clubs breaking or struggle to meet FFP in the PL. 

 

PL is in a mess right now!

 

How many club in the pyramid are losing money? 

 

Across Europe clubs especially France and Spain clubs are struggling financial.

 

Football in general is in a mess and FFP isn't fixing the problem.

Edited 27 March by coolhandfox

[CosbehFox]

Just now, coolhandfox said:

Likely going to have to sell big in the summer to prevent themselves from breaching as they have little head room.

 

Add to that Villa, Newcastle, Chelsea and Man City if they can get stuff to stick.

 

That's 7 clubs break or struggle to meet FFP in the PL. 

 

PL is in a mess right now!

 

How many club in the pyramid are losing money? 

 

Across Europe clubs especially France and Spain clubs are struggling financial.

 

Football in general is in a mess and FFP isn't fixing the problem.

There’s three separate points though. 
 

1/ Leicester’s failure to keep within FFP while others can 

 

2/ Are the FFPs rules fit for purpose? 
 

3/ Does there need to be some form of financial control to help keep football sustainable? 
 

1 - if other clubs can make it work with similar revenues (before we get to our record revenue intake in 20-23), why can’t we? 
 

2 - No. I’m baffled as to why clubs haven’t spoken up soon or were they just hoping after the COVID concessions they could still keep spending. 

 

3 - Yes. The sport needs to sort out the inequality gap between the levels  

 

 

[CosbehFox]

42 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Of course it's true that other clubs have been better at cutting their cloth according to FFP/PSR. And it's also true that we aren't unique in seeking to take the authorities on.

 

None of which changes the fact that the alternative to seeking the best outcome for ourselves - whatever form that might take - is to sit back and just hope the EFL and PL treat us fairly and proportionately. I'm not remotely convinced they will. The EFL has already had a hissy fit because we didn't agree to submit an early business plan. If we fail to get promotion, they will very likely try to make an example of us. And even if we do get promoted while breaching again this season, it would not surprise me if they ask the PL to impose an additional points deduction on top of that which we receive for 2020-23. There is no precedent for this (clubs that have previously been promoted while breaching have only received financial penalties), but I would not put it past them to try it.

 

This is why I'm glad we've got Nick De Marco fighting our corner for us. Whatever we've done, I don't want us to be treated unfairly. Any excessive actions from the authorities against us could cast us back into the wilderness for years. We just can't stand aside and let that happen.

See this is where I differ and I don’t feel the need to make grand calls about fans becoming defiant to the leagues.

 

The hypocrisy of some Leicester fans in particular has been in part hilarious and in part personally maddening because it displays tribalism over all. 
 

This is going to be played out in the courts or as good as court proceedings. With intelligent people of legal status, the leagues don’t get any say in the eventual punishments when it comes to PSR. Rather they seek and an independent board declare their verdict. As seen with the EFL business plan everything is going to be played out neutrally rather than pushing for this grand conspiracy. The PL are correctly within their rights to allege the PSR failure - that’s now not unusual. The EFL transfer embargo isn’t either. As a result of the legal manner it’s all conducted in, a lot will be said of what’s contained with the rules and how they plays out into punishment. 
 

The club has a case on additional charges we haven’t seen before. Yet this won’t change the first PSR allegation which we have seen proven correct and guilty in every example brought by the authorities. We are quite aware of the likely penalty on that too. That’s why my anger stems from the failure to adhere to the rules.  
 

My personal opinion is the counter-suing is a delay tactic to hopefully push this off into when the FFP rules alter (which those tabled we were pushing the extreme when in European competition as well). 
 

All this noise, business plans, and counter claiming wouldn’t happen if the club complied to the rules in the first instance. 
 

Alongaide this, part of me is embarrassed that it’s the fourth occasion I can think of in my lifetime as a Leicester fan that we are in some form of financial rule breaking