We’ve been charged
- Thread starter ClaphamFox
- Start date
Andrewsfoxes
Roofer
We're in the shit big time
Paddysfoxes
Registered
Leicester City is surprised at the actions the Premier League has taken today. The Club is extremely disappointed that the Premier League has chosen to charge LCFC now, despite the Club’s efforts to engage constructively with the Premier League in relation to the matters that are the subject of this charge, even though LCFC is not currently a Premier League club.
LCFC remains willing and eager to engage constructively with the Premier League and the EFL to seek the proper resolution of any potential charges, by the right bodies, and at the right time. The Club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.
LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent
success that the Club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition. As we continue to represent the Club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement.
The Club thanks its supporters for their understanding in this matter and for their continued support for our team, whose success on the pitch during the final weeks of the season remains our primary focus.
LCFC remains willing and eager to engage constructively with the Premier League and the EFL to seek the proper resolution of any potential charges, by the right bodies, and at the right time. The Club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.
LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent
success that the Club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition. As we continue to represent the Club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement.
The Club thanks its supporters for their understanding in this matter and for their continued support for our team, whose success on the pitch during the final weeks of the season remains our primary focus.
foxesneverquit
Member of the lark around club.
Even bigger shit when 10,000 season ticket holders don't renew due to being misled by a load of financial tossers at the club
jackieguaccamo
Flat Earther
They don’t like us do they?
FoxinRutland
Roofer
I understand if we have done wrong then we should be punished, but christ, how have they ruined football. There will be a lot of non top 6 clubs selling major assets in the summer to stay within the limits.
DagenhamFox
Blue Roofer
Loads of them.
And all before 30th June.
I saw a headline from an article by The Athletic that references why Wolves haven’t been charged. Can someone with a subscription please read it and post a copy if it’s worth reading?
There’s a couple of ways to look at it really.. we could take the denial route and just go ‘but but Man City’.
We can look at other clubs and come up with excuses until we are blue in the face but the reality is the club has been run dreadfully for a few seasons now and this is the culmination of it.
Top is barely ever here and he’s left the asylum in the hands of lunatics.
The fucking nerve the club had to be going on about taking legal action against Everton and the likes aswell knowing full well that they’d broke the rules themselves.
I think FFP is generally a scam to keep the big clubs big but if you want to compete you have to be savvy enough to understand the conditions under which you have agreed to and compete in.
Shameful stuff.
We can look at other clubs and come up with excuses until we are blue in the face but the reality is the club has been run dreadfully for a few seasons now and this is the culmination of it.
Top is barely ever here and he’s left the asylum in the hands of lunatics.
The fucking nerve the club had to be going on about taking legal action against Everton and the likes aswell knowing full well that they’d broke the rules themselves.
I think FFP is generally a scam to keep the big clubs big but if you want to compete you have to be savvy enough to understand the conditions under which you have agreed to and compete in.
Shameful stuff.
P45 for Mr Rudkin
TartanFox
Roofer
I like this line:
‘The Club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.’
Imagine through our woeful recruitment we manage to bring down the P&S rules?!?!
‘The Club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.’
Imagine through our woeful recruitment we manage to bring down the P&S rules?!?!
sgt_wilko
Roofer
How did Wolverhampton Wanderers avoid breaching PSR regulations?
WOLVERHAMPTON, ENGLAND - MAY 20: Ruben Neves of Wolves celebrates on the pitch with his family during the Premier League match between Wolverhampton Wanderers and Everton FC at Molineux on May 20, 2023 in Wolverhampton, England. (Photo by Naomi Baker/Getty Images)
By Steve Madeley
Mar 20, 2024
53
Save Article
Just when Wolves thought they were out, they got pulled back in.
Yes, we are talking again about financial fair play, or the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules (PSR) to give the official title.
Having not been charged with breaching the league’s spending limits this year, Wolves thought they had heard the last of the issue — for a few months at least.
Think again.
The report explaining Nottingham Forest’s four-point deduction for a PSR breach dragged the Molineux club back into the picture by stating Forest had alleged Wolves had to sell Ruben Neves in June last year to avoid a breach of their own.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
What is PSR and why do Premier League rules only allow clubs to lose £105m?
Not so, say Wolves, who were both baffled and mildly annoyed to have their name dragged into a case they felt had nothing to do with them. Wolves have worked hard to educate their fans on the realities of the PSR regulations and will not be impressed to have that mission set back by what they regard as misinformation.
So, what do we know?
PSR rulings and their effect on the Premier League
Forest feel aggrieved… yet they know PSR sanction could have been much worse
Forest’s points deduction explained and what it means for Everton and Man City
What was said in the Forest case?
The report published by the Premier League on the findings of an independent commission ran to over 50 pages yet was only a summary of the hearing that was held into Forest’s PSR breach.
Forest’s argument against receiving a punishment was that they had breached PSR’s maximum losses limit by not selling forward Brennan Johnson in June last year, instead waiting until September to achieve a higher transfer fee (when he joined Tottenham Hotspur), which was then included in the following financial year’s accounts.
Johnson did not join Spurs from Forest until September (Visionhaus/Getty Images)
One section, on page 30, states: “The commission did note Forest’s submission that Wolves had managed to sell a player in the same two-week period to avoid a PSR breach, although no evidence of these facts was put before the commission at the Hearing or in the documents.
“But it also noted Mr Bonser’s (Thomas Bonser, Forest’s finance director) admission at the hearing that ‘not many’ players are sold in that part of the summer transfer window.”
The only Wolves player sold in the two-week period that was crucial to Forest, from the opening of the transfer window to their PSR deadline of June 30, was Neves, who left for Saudi Pro League side Al Hilal on June 23 for £47million ($59.8m at the current exchange rate).
Forest have been approached for comment.
What do Wolves think?
There was surprise and a little aggravation at Molineux to see Wolves drawn into the Forest case, given that club officials are adamant the sale of Neves had no bearing on them avoiding a PSR breach for the three-year period that ended last summer.
Wolves say that, while Forest choose to calculate their annual accounts to end on June 30, their own accounting periods run from June 1 to May 31. So they say the accounts for 2022-23, which had to be submitted to the Premier League in December to be checked against PSR rules, covered a period that ended more than three weeks before the Neves transfer.
Neves joined Al Hilal from Wolves in June 2023 (Francois Nel/Getty Images)
That means the income from Neves’ sale, which will be significant in PSR terms as the Portugal international had a low ‘book value’ by the time of his departure, will be included in the 2023-24 accounts, which will include all business up to May 31 this year.
Wolves have the option of adjusting their accounting period to end on June 30, which other clubs including Aston Villa have chosen to do and which would bring it into line with players’ contracts, which usually run to the end of June.
But they are expecting to continue filing accounts up to May 31. The advantage of that date is the summer transfer window, which usually opens in mid-June, then falls entirely into one accounting period.
What is Wolves’ overall PSR position?
Officials at Molineux were never unduly worried about breaching the limit — Premier League clubs are not permitted to lose more than £105million over a rolling three-year period — for the seasons from 2020-23 and so join Everton and Forest in being referred to an independent commission this year.
There has long been an acceptance, however, that Wolves were more at risk of a breach in the 2021-24 period, for which clubs who do so will be punished next season. They are confident at present, though, that they will stay within the £105million limit then, too.
A forecast drawn up by the club’s financial team this year predicted they would end up £2.7million inside the PSR threshold, and those figures were based on a 17th-place finish this season with a minimal number of their league games being selected for live television broadcast in the UK.
A better-than-expected season means Gary O’Neil’s side are likely to achieve a much higher league position than that, and appear on TV more frequently than expected. The additional prize money and broadcast income from those televised matches means they should be further away from the PSR tripwire.
Coatsworth
Registered
So it appears now that Leicester City Football Club have royally fucked up.
Theres no point comparing our situation to Man City, Chelsea, Everton or Forest, it’s matter of simple economics. If you don’t have the finances or if you’re not confident of making enough to cover your expenditure, don’t spend it in the first place.
Don’t be greedy, live within your means.
We’ve been part of the elite in the last 10 years.
Would I swap any of that ? Not a chance mate.
Been there done that.
Bigger clubs will always get bigger, the rest survive on the scraps.
We need to reboot and come back again.
Well we wanted to mix it with the big boys unfortunately it's come back to bite us.
Bittfox
Roofer
Agreed, but who will buy them apart from the Saudis?
Surely any sales puts the buying clubs into the same situation?
That or wages and transfers are about to get a lot lower.
Bit of a fuck up all this I reckon
SantiagoFox
Registered
The whole thing is a farce. Punishments apply ages after any transgressions. The PL don’t have a set formula, but act like judges ( e.g. Forest get less point’s deducted because they were more helpful than Everton). They don’t seem to take into account what advantage was gained. Our advantage can only have been a couple of positions in the league, so we should give back the money you get for league position.
Coatsworth
Registered
Another quick aside, if we’d received the Fofana money in one payment would we still be in this mess ?
sgt_wilko
Roofer
Leicester City referred to commission by Premier League for alleged PSR breach
LEICESTER, ENGLAND - FEBRUARY 25: A general view outside the stadium as fans arrive prior to the Premier League match between Leicester City and Arsenal FC at The King Power Stadium on February 25, 2023 in Leicester, England. (Photo by Marc Atkins/Getty Images)
By Rob Tanner and Luke Bosher
31m ago
27
Save Article
Leicester City have been referred to an independent commission by the Premier League for an alleged breach of profit and sustainability rules (PSR).
The alleged breach comes in the three-year reporting period which ended in the 2022-23 season, which saw Leicester relegated from the Premier League after a nine-season stay.
It has been anticipated that Leicester were facing a charge for their alleged breach since earlier this month.
Leicester say they are “extremely disappointed” with the Premier League’s decision to charge them over their alleged PSR breach.
The Leicestershire club say they have “repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period”, adding that the club is taking “careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities”.
“The alleged breach relates to the assessment period ending Season 2022-23, when the club was a member of the Premier League,” a league statement said on Thursday.
“Leicester City were relegated to the EFL Championship prior to the introduction of the Premier League’s new Standard Directions, which prescribe a timeline within which PSR cases should be heard.
“Therefore, the proceedings will be conducted in accordance with a timetable to be set by the independent commission, and its final decision will be published on the Premier League’s website.”
Leicester were relegated last season (DARREN STAPLES/AFP via Getty Images)
Leicester are the third team to be charged by the Premier League over PSR breaches this season.
Everton were initially deducted 10 points for a breach relating to the three-year reporting period which ended in the 2021-22 season, with that later reduced to six after an appeal. The Merseyside club also face a second charge relating to the three-year reporting period ending in the 2022-23 campaign, which has not yet been resolved.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Everton's second PSR breach: What are the implications of the appeal verdict?
Nottingham Forest were hit with a four-point deduction on Monday for a PSR breach relating to that period. Forest have not yet confirmed whether they will appeal that sanction.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Nottingham Forest and alleged PSR breaches: What are rules? When will punishment be known?
Leicester lost top spot in the Championship to Leeds United before the international break but remain on course to get promoted at the first time of asking, sitting one point ahead of third-placed Ipswich Town. Enzo Maresca’s side have only won one of their last four league games.
Leicester statement in full
“Leicester City is surprised at the actions the Premier League has taken today. The club is extremely disappointed that the Premier League has chosen to charge LCFC now, despite the club’s efforts to engage constructively with the Premier League in relation to the matters that are the subject of this charge, even though LCFC is not currently a Premier League club.
“LCFC remains willing and eager to engage constructively with the Premier League and the EFL to seek the proper resolution of any potential charges, by the right bodies, and at the right time. The club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.
“LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent success that the club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition.
“As we continue to represent the club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement.
“The club thanks its supporters for their understanding in this matter and for their continued support for our team, whose success on the pitch during the final weeks of the season remains our primary focus.”
How did we get here?
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Leicester will face financial charges - but will the EFL or Premier League punish them?
When Leicester were relegated nine and a half months ago, chief executive Susan Whelan sent all employees an email giving assurances that, for the club as a whole, it would be business as usual. There were no redundancies. On the playing side, however, there had to be deep cuts.
James Maddison (to Tottenham Hotspur), Harvey Barnes (Newcastle United) and Timothy Castagne (Fulham) were sold for a combined £83million. George Hirst was also sold to Ipswich Town for £1.75m. High earners Youri Tielemans, Jonny Evans, Ayoze Perez, Caglar Soyuncu, Ryan Bertrand, Daniel Amartey and Nampalys Mendy left at the end of their contracts, while the remaining players received substantial pay cuts.
However, having posted losses, which were heavily adjusted for the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, of £67.3million in 2020, £31.2m a year later and a club record £92.5m in 2022, Leicester find themselves under the microscope.
The EFL’s move to try to impose a business plan immediately after they submitted financial information on request was unusual and a clear indication that, despite the cuts, the league and many of their Championship rivals believe they didn’t go far enough to avoid a financial advantage.
At the end of this month, Leicester will release their accounts for 2022-23, the relegation season. While they pumped the brakes on their transfer spending, to then manager Brendan Rodgers’ annoyance, and sold Wesley Fofana to Chelsea for £75million, another significant loss is anticipated.
What about this season?
This season — i.e. the three-year reporting period ending with the 2023-24 campaign — also presents a potential PSR issue, as Leicester are on track for another breach unless they sell more players before the end of June.
The club were predicted to be on course to exceed that threshold in November and were asked by the English Football League (EFL) to submit a business plan to demonstrate how they would comply with the spending limits. However, an independent panel ruled the club did not have to submit a business plan, which would have led to sales in the January window.
The EFL’s failed attempt to force Leicester to adhere to a business plan would have led to sales in the January window.
The club successfully argued that the EFL did not have the right to enforce this demand this season, as the rulebook states clubs new to the Championship, via promotion or relegation, only have to file their accounts by the end of March. This meant the league was being too hasty in making assumptions about the club’s ability to comply with the rules.
In a statement, the club said it was “pleased” with the ruling but expressed concern that the league’s FFP unit had tried to act “outside the established rules”.
It added that the club was “in discussions with the football authorities regarding its profitability and sustainability calculations” and “remains committed to seeking an appropriate overall outcome in this matter”.
Whether this reassures worried fans or not is hard to say, as the club must get under the £83million threshold by July or risk facing the same fate as Everton, who have been hit with two PSR charges in one season.
What are profitability and sustainability rules?
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
What is PSR and why do Premier League rules only allow clubs to lose £105m?
All Premier League clubs are assessed for their adherence to the competition’s PSR each year.
Their compliance with said rules is assessed by reference to the club’s PSR calculation, which is the aggregate of its adjusted earnings before tax for the relevant assessment period.
Under the PSR, clubs are allowed to lose a maximum of £105m over three seasons (or £35m a season) but certain costs can be deducted, such as investment in youth development, infrastructure, community and women’s football.
There were also specific allowances relating to COVID and, to help clubs, the league combined the two pandemic-hit seasons into one, turning the three-year accounting period into four years.
LEICESTER, ENGLAND - FEBRUARY 25: A general view outside the stadium as fans arrive prior to the Premier League match between Leicester City and Arsenal FC at The King Power Stadium on February 25, 2023 in Leicester, England. (Photo by Marc Atkins/Getty Images)
By Rob Tanner and Luke Bosher
31m ago
27
Save Article
Leicester City have been referred to an independent commission by the Premier League for an alleged breach of profit and sustainability rules (PSR).
The alleged breach comes in the three-year reporting period which ended in the 2022-23 season, which saw Leicester relegated from the Premier League after a nine-season stay.
It has been anticipated that Leicester were facing a charge for their alleged breach since earlier this month.
Leicester say they are “extremely disappointed” with the Premier League’s decision to charge them over their alleged PSR breach.
The Leicestershire club say they have “repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period”, adding that the club is taking “careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities”.
“The alleged breach relates to the assessment period ending Season 2022-23, when the club was a member of the Premier League,” a league statement said on Thursday.
“Leicester City were relegated to the EFL Championship prior to the introduction of the Premier League’s new Standard Directions, which prescribe a timeline within which PSR cases should be heard.
“Therefore, the proceedings will be conducted in accordance with a timetable to be set by the independent commission, and its final decision will be published on the Premier League’s website.”
Leicester were relegated last season (DARREN STAPLES/AFP via Getty Images)
Leicester are the third team to be charged by the Premier League over PSR breaches this season.
Everton were initially deducted 10 points for a breach relating to the three-year reporting period which ended in the 2021-22 season, with that later reduced to six after an appeal. The Merseyside club also face a second charge relating to the three-year reporting period ending in the 2022-23 campaign, which has not yet been resolved.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Everton's second PSR breach: What are the implications of the appeal verdict?
Nottingham Forest were hit with a four-point deduction on Monday for a PSR breach relating to that period. Forest have not yet confirmed whether they will appeal that sanction.
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Nottingham Forest and alleged PSR breaches: What are rules? When will punishment be known?
Leicester lost top spot in the Championship to Leeds United before the international break but remain on course to get promoted at the first time of asking, sitting one point ahead of third-placed Ipswich Town. Enzo Maresca’s side have only won one of their last four league games.
Leicester statement in full
“Leicester City is surprised at the actions the Premier League has taken today. The club is extremely disappointed that the Premier League has chosen to charge LCFC now, despite the club’s efforts to engage constructively with the Premier League in relation to the matters that are the subject of this charge, even though LCFC is not currently a Premier League club.
“LCFC remains willing and eager to engage constructively with the Premier League and the EFL to seek the proper resolution of any potential charges, by the right bodies, and at the right time. The club continues to take careful advice about its position and, if necessary, will continue to defend itself from any unlawful acts by the football authorities, should they seek to exercise jurisdiction where they cannot do so, as occurred earlier this year.
“LCFC has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to the P&S rules through its operating model over a considerable period, achieving compliance while pursuing sporting ambitions that are entirely credible given the consistent success that the club has achieved in that time, both domestically and in European competition.
“As we continue to represent the club’s position, we will continue to fight for the right of all clubs to pursue their ambitions, particularly where these have been reasonably and fairly established through sustained sporting achievement.
“The club thanks its supporters for their understanding in this matter and for their continued support for our team, whose success on the pitch during the final weeks of the season remains our primary focus.”
How did we get here?
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
Leicester will face financial charges - but will the EFL or Premier League punish them?
When Leicester were relegated nine and a half months ago, chief executive Susan Whelan sent all employees an email giving assurances that, for the club as a whole, it would be business as usual. There were no redundancies. On the playing side, however, there had to be deep cuts.
James Maddison (to Tottenham Hotspur), Harvey Barnes (Newcastle United) and Timothy Castagne (Fulham) were sold for a combined £83million. George Hirst was also sold to Ipswich Town for £1.75m. High earners Youri Tielemans, Jonny Evans, Ayoze Perez, Caglar Soyuncu, Ryan Bertrand, Daniel Amartey and Nampalys Mendy left at the end of their contracts, while the remaining players received substantial pay cuts.
However, having posted losses, which were heavily adjusted for the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, of £67.3million in 2020, £31.2m a year later and a club record £92.5m in 2022, Leicester find themselves under the microscope.
The EFL’s move to try to impose a business plan immediately after they submitted financial information on request was unusual and a clear indication that, despite the cuts, the league and many of their Championship rivals believe they didn’t go far enough to avoid a financial advantage.
At the end of this month, Leicester will release their accounts for 2022-23, the relegation season. While they pumped the brakes on their transfer spending, to then manager Brendan Rodgers’ annoyance, and sold Wesley Fofana to Chelsea for £75million, another significant loss is anticipated.
What about this season?
This season — i.e. the three-year reporting period ending with the 2023-24 campaign — also presents a potential PSR issue, as Leicester are on track for another breach unless they sell more players before the end of June.
The club were predicted to be on course to exceed that threshold in November and were asked by the English Football League (EFL) to submit a business plan to demonstrate how they would comply with the spending limits. However, an independent panel ruled the club did not have to submit a business plan, which would have led to sales in the January window.
The EFL’s failed attempt to force Leicester to adhere to a business plan would have led to sales in the January window.
The club successfully argued that the EFL did not have the right to enforce this demand this season, as the rulebook states clubs new to the Championship, via promotion or relegation, only have to file their accounts by the end of March. This meant the league was being too hasty in making assumptions about the club’s ability to comply with the rules.
In a statement, the club said it was “pleased” with the ruling but expressed concern that the league’s FFP unit had tried to act “outside the established rules”.
It added that the club was “in discussions with the football authorities regarding its profitability and sustainability calculations” and “remains committed to seeking an appropriate overall outcome in this matter”.
Whether this reassures worried fans or not is hard to say, as the club must get under the £83million threshold by July or risk facing the same fate as Everton, who have been hit with two PSR charges in one season.
What are profitability and sustainability rules?
go-deeper
GO DEEPER
What is PSR and why do Premier League rules only allow clubs to lose £105m?
All Premier League clubs are assessed for their adherence to the competition’s PSR each year.
Their compliance with said rules is assessed by reference to the club’s PSR calculation, which is the aggregate of its adjusted earnings before tax for the relevant assessment period.
Under the PSR, clubs are allowed to lose a maximum of £105m over three seasons (or £35m a season) but certain costs can be deducted, such as investment in youth development, infrastructure, community and women’s football.
There were also specific allowances relating to COVID and, to help clubs, the league combined the two pandemic-hit seasons into one, turning the three-year accounting period into four years.
Listened to Andy Burnham ( Mayor of Manchester)on talksport ( Everton fan) this morning about the points deduction
He said Everton were docked 6 points straight off then 1 point per £10 million overspend ( 4 points) however the Premier League didnt use the same calculation with Forest because they cooperated!
What sort of rule is that!
Ours will be 2 points per £10 million and 12 points for pissing them off for winning the League !!
He said Everton were docked 6 points straight off then 1 point per £10 million overspend ( 4 points) however the Premier League didnt use the same calculation with Forest because they cooperated!
What sort of rule is that!
Ours will be 2 points per £10 million and 12 points for pissing them off for winning the League !!
foxesneverquit
Member of the lark around club.
Adumass
Bentleys Roofer
Did the club ever say anything about that? I know there were stories about the three relegated clubs considering action , but I'm not sure the club ever said anything publicly.
Did the club ever go on about suing Everton? Or was it just more journo bollocks.....
