Leicester City and PSR – Everything you need to know on EFL dispute, player sales, and what next

[Viva]

Just now, Ric Flair said:

I think you've misunderstood what our original formula was. It was being progressive enough to know when to cash in on players that we've flipped for a profit or who were at risk of running their contract down. 

 

We never sold more than one key asset a summer but neither did we sell other players regularly enough and slowly but surely if you either stop doing that and/or increase the wage bill at an unsustainable then it goes bang. We are paying the price for that for years to come.

 

That was not the nature of the beast, winning the FA Cup and bottling top 4 twice was not because we let things get out of control. There's a misplaced notion that we should be careful what we wish for and the fall out of all this is the price we had to pay for winning things. Bollocks.

The wages spiralled when we were trying to break into the top 4. During this period we won the FA Cup. We wouldn't have signed players like Tielemans or kept giving Vardy a new contract if we were keeping the wages low. Yes we also made some poor signings which obviously didn't help the situation. 

[Ric Flair]

36 minutes ago, Viva said:

The wages spiralled when we were trying to break into the top 4. During this period we won the FA Cup. We wouldn't have signed players like Tielemans or kept giving Vardy a new contract if we were keeping the wages low. Yes we also made some poor signings which obviously didn't help the situation. 

Not quite. Whilst we paid the likes of Vardy and Kasper £100k + a week on their 2nd / 3rd contract with us, we were paying the likes of Perez and Vestergaard straight off the bat £80-90k a week, tripling the wages of the likes of Castagne, Praet and Soumare etc.

 

It culminated in a totally unsustainable wage bill. What we needed to do better was recognise the wage structure of new players and the wage structure of players who succeeded with us and were offered better terms. This is what we did in the early years but as we became more established we did push it to the max. 

 

I still think our ambition wouldn't have diminished by being more sustainable on wages of new players and to have been willing to cash in on more players. Eduardo Macia was a fantastic head of recruitment but that fell apart when he went and Congerton came in.

[CosbehFox]

2 hours ago, PaulW said:

Errr...there's only one other club our size that has achieved the success that we have in the lifetime of the Prem.  Also , whilst I'm no admirer of Rudkin, who are the "certain clubs" that won't deal with him?

Well exactly - how can clubs with less revenue continually post better financial results? Decision making. 

 

Well Manchester United and Chelsea went complete over his head on the Fofana and Maguire deals. Whelan had to come in for the negotiations. 

Rudkin also sat down with the agents of both Bowen and Olise - both came away miffed and signed elsewhere. 

Edited 5 June by CosbehFox

[Chelmofox]

25 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Not quite. Whilst we paid the likes of Vardy and Kasper £100k + a week on their 2nd / 3rd contract with us, we were paying the likes of Perez and Vestergaard straight off the bat £80-90k a week, tripling the wages of the likes of Castagne, Praet and Soumare etc.

 

It culminated in a totally unsustainable wage bill. What we needed to do better was recognise the wage structure of new players and the wage structure of players who succeeded with us and were offered better terms. This is what we did in the early years but as we became more established we did push it to the max. 

 

I still think our ambition wouldn't have diminished by being more sustainable on wages of new players and to have been willing to cash in on more players. Eduardo Macia was a fantastic head of recruitment but that fell apart when he went and Congerton came in.

Did Castagne take a salary cut to join Fulham? 

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, Chelmofox said:

Did Castagne take a salary cut to join Fulham? 

Not sure, doubt they'd be chuffing up £70-80k a week though on full backs.

[OldBob]

The clubs set up was slowly being chipped away since Pearson left. We were lucky we still had good recruitment for many years (apart from the 2016 summer). Can’t blame the club for going for it in the market and on wages when the top four was in reaching distance. In my opinion the notion we were successful in the league under Rodgers, is complete rubbish. That was the time the top four (fourth position) was at its weakest and we bottled it twice. Club would have gone on strength to strength had we secured a finish in there

[happy85]

 

[UniFox21]

2 minutes ago, happy85 said:

 

"However, the case will not be fast tracked, with the independent commission yet to set a date for a hearing. 

 

The delay is said to be Leicester's fault due to the 'aggressive' approach they have taken to fight the charges. 

 

The club announced they had launched 'urgent legal proceedings' against the Premier League and EFL after being charged with breaching Profit and Sustainability Rules. 

 

Sources with knowledge of the case have told Mail Sport that Leicester's breach is 'significant,' which based on previous PSR hearings would trigger a six-point sanction, while the club's combative approach means it would not be reduced on the basis of their co-operation."

 

Once again I don't see why we've been deemed to be aggressive, when on both occasions the EFL were acting outside of their own rules and boundaries 

[Viva]

9 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Not quite. Whilst we paid the likes of Vardy and Kasper £100k + a week on their 2nd / 3rd contract with us, we were paying the likes of Perez and Vestergaard straight off the bat £80-90k a week, tripling the wages of the likes of Castagne, Praet and Soumare etc.

 

It culminated in a totally unsustainable wage bill. What we needed to do better was recognise the wage structure of new players and the wage structure of players who succeeded with us and were offered better terms. This is what we did in the early years but as we became more established we did push it to the max. 

 

I still think our ambition wouldn't have diminished by being more sustainable on wages of new players and to have been willing to cash in on more players. Eduardo Macia was a fantastic head of recruitment but that fell apart when he went and Congerton came in.

When you are paying Schmeichel and Vardy £130-£140k a week, the agent of a new player you are paying £20-£30m for is not going to settle for a third of that.
Then when you start paying £60-£80k a week for new players, it makes the situation more unsustainable. 
It’s highly likely we wouldn’t have had that second crack after the league success under Rodgers of the FA Cup win and mixing with the top 4 (I know we bottled it) without overspending on wages. 
So while mistakes have obviously been made, I still wouldn’t have swapped some of the success we had. We have managed to get back into the Premier League and if we can survive this year, we can hopefully build the squad up more sustainably from here. 

Edited 6 June by Viva

[Parker Pen]

Aside from how things have unfolded for us, It would be good to be a fly on the wall at today’s Premier League meeting that’s for sure. Especially to see where lines in the sand are drawn on this topic and VAR.

[LcFc_Smiv]

Man City supposedly have some backing from prem clubs, I imagine we will be one of them?

 

I get the impression, they know they are about to get some ridiculously heavy punishment (I’m all here for it). The legal case against the prem, De Bruyne and Pep already making noises about being off at the end of year, could they be in the know of some severe punishment. 

[st albans fox]

39 minutes ago, LcFc_Smiv said:

Man City supposedly have some backing from prem clubs, I imagine we will be one of them?

 

I get the impression, they know they are about to get some ridiculously heavy punishment (I’m all here for it). The legal case against the prem, De Bruyne and Pep already making noises about being off at the end of year, could they be in the know of some severe punishment. 

Chelsea

everton

Newcastle 

forest

i reckon we would have been on the list if we’d have been a PL club 

 

if there’s some momentum building then I reckon you can add villa to that list 

 

but can’t see them getting anywhere near 14 so doubt villa will break cover - the current arrangement places them ahead of the ‘other 13’ with their CL qualification.  A bit like us a few years ago where we were comfortable to be able to spend more than our natural competition in the league under the existing rules 

 

Edited 6 June by st albans fox

[LcFc_Smiv]

1 minute ago, st albans fox said:

Chelsea

everton

Newcastle 

forest

i reckon we would have been on the list if we’d have been a PL club 

 

Assumed that we’d be involved in those discussions already, my bad!

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, LcFc_Smiv said:

Assumed that we’d be involved in those discussions already, my bad!

We may have been sounded out but because we didn’t have a vote at the time we couldn’t be included in any docs 

[Terraloon]

2 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

"However, the case will not be fast tracked, with the independent commission yet to set a date for a hearing. 

 

The delay is said to be Leicester's fault due to the 'aggressive' approach they have taken to fight the charges. 

 

The club announced they had launched 'urgent legal proceedings' against the Premier League and EFL after being charged with breaching Profit and Sustainability Rules. 

 

Sources with knowledge of the case have told Mail Sport that Leicester's breach is 'significant,' which based on previous PSR hearings would trigger a six-point sanction, while the club's combative approach means it would not be reduced on the basis of their co-operation."

 

Once again I don't see why we've been deemed to be aggressive, when on both occasions the EFL were acting outside of their own rules and boundaries 

For me the word aggression isn’t perhaps the correct word it’s more like naivety 

 

Not wanting to split hairs, as it may seem I am doing, the first matter around producing a business plan by 31/12/ 23 the EFL believed that the rules as written allowed them to make such a request the arbiter didn’t dismiss that as being in correct basically he said Leicesters interpretation of the rule was reasonable. Irrespective Leicester knew that they would have no choice but to supply information by 31/3/24 and as was pretty obvious the 23/24 numbers indicate that there will be a breech hence the embargo and as we know that almost certainly post 1/7/24 there will be an EFL charge incoming and I believe the two leagues will agree under PL rules that they set up and conduct the hearing. 

The second matter really did show the club’s naivety because they reacted to a letter between the PL & the EFL re the 22/23 period. Rather than letting matters run its course and the challenge the imposition of a penalty ( which is going to happen)  albeit now in the PL as opposed to the EFL or simply writing a letter to the two leagues questioning their contention that any sanction handed down by the PL could be implemented in the EFL Leicester went all guns blazing commencing pro against the leagues. That was considered aggressive by the arbiter who questioned why Leicester didn’t just issue a letter prior and I can see why some refer to it as such but I call it naive.

 

What we do know is that the PL had issued a charge for 22/23 yet nothing seems to have progressed ( well nothing further  has been put into the public domain) 

 

Ok hindsight is a wonderful thing but I do wonder if it would have been wiser to let the PL charge run its course and had the league position in the EFL indicated that promotion was either confirmed or just about when a sanction was decided take it on the chin to get it out of the way maybe that would have resulted in not winning the league but using the process to your advantage in a way just like Everton did would have been the far savvy approach 

 

 

 

Edited 6 June by Terraloon

[Ric Flair]

Are the EFL points deductions dished out in previous years harsher than what the PL/IC have done? I know the allowable losses maybe different but the amount over that, is it treated differently by the two? 

 

That'll be 480 points please our lord.

[HankMarvin]

5 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Are the EFL points deductions dished out in previous years harsher than what the PL/IC have done? I know the allowable losses maybe different but the amount over that, is it treated differently by the two? 

 

That'll be 480 points please our lord.

I wonder if the Fatty deal will be added to 23/24 spending, either way for those saying selling a player would help balance the books it probably won’t.

If it’s 24/25 you would imagine it’s quite a chunk of our proposed budget.

[TheGoldenGod]

Genuine question here: Say we get an unprecedented sanction of 12-15 points (something almost certain to be insurmountable considering our squad, a new manager, and player sales before we've even started), what's stopping us taking a stand against the league and essentially throwing every game, score OGs, don't attempt to try etc. It would never happen but I believe it'd diminish the product of the Premier League and as a form of protest, could assist us in an appeal or a reduction in the sanction? Granted we'd obviously not be getting points anyway if we were throwing the games but we'd be down anyway in my opinion.

Edited 6 June by TheGoldenGod

[ClaphamFox]

9 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

Genuine question here: Say we get an unprecedented sanction of 12-15 points (something almost certain to be insurmountable considering our squad, a new manager, and player sales before we've even started), what's stopping us taking a stand against the league and essentially throwing every game, score OGs, don't attempt to try etc. It would never happen but I believe it'd diminish the product of the Premier League and as a form of protest, could assist us in an appeal or a reduction in the sanction? Granted we'd obviously not be getting points anyway if we were throwing the games but we'd be down anyway in my opinion.

Are you feeling unwell?

[TheGoldenGod]

Just now, ClaphamFox said:

Are you feeling unwell?

Didn't expect it to go down well but IF we were to get 15 point sanction for arguments sake, they'd have buried us before we've even started. Futile even trying, has to be a way to protest against PSR, its nonsense!

[Permafrost]

Here's one reason why not... 2007/8.

 

[HankMarvin]

14 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

Genuine question here: Say we get an unprecedented sanction of 12-15 points (something almost certain to be insurmountable considering our squad, a new manager, and player sales before we've even started), what's stopping us taking a stand against the league and essentially throwing every game, score OGs, don't attempt to try etc. It would never happen but I believe it'd diminish the product of the Premier League and as a form of protest, could assist us in an appeal or a reduction in the sanction? Granted we'd obviously not be getting points anyway if we were throwing the games but we'd be down anyway in my opinion.

More fines, bans, probably end up in the 4th division for match fixing 

[TheGoldenGod]

1 minute ago, Permafrost said:

Here's one reason why not... 2007/8.

 

We're challenging that at present regardless of throwing games.

[StanSP]

PSR loss cap increasing to £135m.

[HankMarvin]

7 minutes ago, StanSP said:

PSR loss cap increasing to £135m.

If it does increase it wouldn’t be that amount for us, more like £103m

Edited 6 June by HankMarvin