Leicester City. Points deduction?

[Red-Robbo]

If they've bent the rules in the Championship it doesn't seem fair to benefit their Premier League rivals by docking them points in that division.

Surely easier just to get them to forfeit some of their last games in the second tier. starting, oh I don't know, next Friday perhaps... 

[Hxj]

16 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

1st March is irrelevant then here?

Yes that's the actual relevant date.

[exAtyeoMax]

 

 

[ExiledAjax]

1 minute ago, exAtyeoMax said:

 

 

De Marco will be very good...but he also just finished representing Forest so paying his rates definitely doesn't guarantee Leicester a clean slate.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Surely the rules are fairly clear no.

They appear to have put in a P&S Calculation in excess of limits and their ducks appear to not have been lined up in a row by the deadline.

Edited March 22 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting, Nixon seems to think the Embargo pertaining to last season's Accounts.

Not sure he is right but I'll agree to disagree.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Unless the League have- incredibly unlikely- got the reason incorrect, the Rule accused of breaching incorrect then contrary to what Nixon says..

A) It isn't a failure to submit Accounts. That is 16.2.

B) Nor is it a failure to submit P&S data. That is 2.1.3.

It is an alleged excess of the Upper Loss limit, ie Rule 2.10.1. Or perhaps it is a compliance that is forecast but only on the basis of raising £x by the end of June.

[Bar BS3]

On 21/03/2024 at 21:40, W-S-M Seagull said:

Of course clubs are going to cheat when the benefits of cheating far outweigh the punishment. 

There needs to be solid harsh penalties so that the punishment is worse than the benefits. 

In my opinion the punishment should be very severe. For example if a club cheats to get promoted then make their promotion void and take away any parachute payments. 

If a club chests to qualify for Europe, make them forfeit their European place. 

If a club just about stays up due to cheating, relegate them and deny them parachute payments. 

Yes these options are extreme but whilst there is 100s of millions on the line, clubs will take the risk so the consequences need to be extreme to act as a deterrent. A few poxy points deducted just makes these clubs laugh at us all. 

Ultimately this cheating is undermining the sporting integrity of our leagues and that integrity needs to be maintained at all costs. 

I'd argue that your suggestions are nowhere near harsh enough.

It's all very well taking away their benefits from cheating - but that's not even a punishment for the cheating itself.

It needs a clear & simple rule, along the lines of ANYONE found guilty of blatent & avoidable financial cheating should be demoted by 2 divisions.

They won't have the balls to chuck Man City down to League 1 - they are too valuable an asset to the Premier league. But I bet they'd have little hesitation in using it as a way of getting rid of the likes of Luton - who ironically have suffered their financial plight in recent years & still battled their way back to the top table.

I've always disliked Luton - but I love how they have battled this season & now I really hope they stay up for another season.

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Another day another moaning MP. Ooh is it an Election year.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Another day another moaning MP. Ooh is it an Election year.

The process might be opaque to some extent, but so is each club’s response to being transparent.

[Mr Popodopolous]

33 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The process might be opaque to some extent, but so is each club’s response to being transparent.

Exactly. None of them have released their Accounts for last year into the public domain for one (fwiw).

Technically don't have to until the end of March sure but..transparency it isn't.

Neither have Bournemouth and Fulham both of whom I still wonder on if Promotion Bonuses are no longer excludable as the Nottingham Forest case deemed to stipulate. They went up in the same year so.. 

Edited March 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

I've looked again at the case earlier this year.

Leicester were absolutely correct that 'T' is this season but having established that fact, given that the Period assessed is pursuant to T, T-1 and T-2 then they have surely put in submissions that exceed the 3 y3ar P&S Calculation hence the triggering of an Embargo under 2.10.1.

Edited March 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

As we can see, T is indeed this year and I don't understand their Argument, the Rule such as it is, is Crystal clear. This verdict reinforces that point.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I'm not on FoxesTalk. There is someone explaining some key bits but he is getting something vastly wrong. Maybe @BristolFox who sometimes reads here will pick this up.

The Embargo is not for non-Submission of info. Be it Accounts or P&S.

There are specific offences or Regulation Breaches there, which would be stated as such.

16.2 is about Accounts and non-Submission.

2.1.3 of the P&S Regs is about P&S Calculations and non-submission.

2.10.1 is expressly about the P&S Calculations exceeding the Upper Loss Limit- had Leicester not submitted then 16.2, 2.1.3 or both would appear- see Burnley a year ago.

Edited March 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[PHILINFRANCE]

14 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

I'd argue that your suggestions are nowhere near harsh enough.

It's all very well taking away their benefits from cheating - but that's not even a punishment for the cheating itself.

It needs a clear & simple rule, along the lines of ANYONE found guilty of blatent & avoidable financial cheating should be demoted by 2 divisions.

They won't have the balls to chuck Man City down to League 1 - they are too valuable an asset to the Premier league. But I bet they'd have little hesitation in using it as a way of getting rid of the likes of Luton - who ironically have suffered their financial plight in recent years & still battled their way back to the top table.

I've always disliked Luton - but I love how they have battled this season & now I really hope they stay up for another season.

 

 

Hopefully, at the expense of Forest.

[Bar BS3]

1 minute ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Hopefully, at the expense of Forest.

I'm hoping Everton go down, finally..!

[Mr Popodopolous]

Was it literally the case that the Rules changing Post Relegation meant Leicester didn't need to submit? The Rule is quite clear on the Fast Track for PL sides..

E.50.2

"Or in the event that the Club is relegated following the relevant Season, to the EFL".

It is not well written. T possibly has different meanings in the 2 Leagues 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Ah quoted on FoxesTalk :laugh:.

I can only speak for myself but I'm mainly interested from an FFP angle albeit Pearson was held in high regard here by the fans.

This is a possible real interesting Test case though I'd say. Because no club has been referred in these circs or Embargoed at least based on an excess of P&S limits in March.

[Sir Geoff]

In case I missed it on this thread Leicester still have not produced accounts for year ending May2023.

Therefore they are whining about rules they signed up to as a PL club.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

In case I missed it on this thread Leicester still have not produced accounts for year ending May2023.

Therefore they are whining about rules they signed up to as a PL club.

To the best of my knowledge..

*EFL have will have received said Accounts otherwise they would be under Embargo for this..

*EFL will also have P&S Calculations for this season ie the Forecast otherwise they would be under Embargo for that.

*PL appear not to have received the actual Accounts for last year directly. Maybe the CFRU or the PL have shared with the PL Idk.

*Or at the very least the PL didn't receive them in their ideal timeframe. Hence the accusation there.

PL Rules stipulate that the EFL should receive them by 31st December if the Club is a Relegated one and I guess that will apply moving forward but I dunno whether they were caught in a no man's land.

However the EFL Embargo is due to an alleged breach of the Upper Loss Limit to this season based on Leicester and their own submissions.

[Mr Popodopolous]

There is some odd reporting going on here. I've found the relevant Rules and Embargoable offences.

Had they not submitted Accounts to the Football League for last year that is 16.2.

Had they not submitted their P&S Returns for this year ie the Forecast plus last 2 years actual that is 2.1.3.

As we can see the Embargo was pertaining to 2.10.1. Which can only mean a) A submission that shows an excess of the limits or b) Within limits but based on future Receipts ie most likely players sales by end of June.

It couldn't be clearer provided the EFL haven't put the wrong one up..

The failure to submit to the PL is a separate alleged offence and the PL don't publish Embargo stuff, I don't even know if they use Embargoes particularly.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sir Geoff]

16 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

To the best of my knowledge..

*EFL have will have received said Accounts otherwise they would be under Embargo for this..

*EFL will also have P&S Calculations for this season ie the Forecast otherwise they would be under Embargo for that.

*PL appear not to have received the actual Accounts for last year directly. Maybe the CFRU or the PL have shared with the PL Idk.

*Or at the very least the PL didn't receive them in their ideal timeframe. Hence the accusation there.

PL Rules stipulate that the EFL should receive them by 31st December if the Club is a Relegated one and I guess that will apply moving forward but I dunno whether they were caught in a no man's land.

However the EFL Embargo is due to an alleged breach of the Upper Loss Limit to this season based on Leicester and their own submissions.

PL have not recieved them which is why Leicester have been charged with an alleged breach.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

PL have not recieved them which is why Leicester have been charged with an alleged breach.

Thanks I'll go back and re-read but the EFL seem a lot more with it.

They used the term alleged breach about the first charge for Everton too, as they did for Man City- alleged breach(es) having just checked.

Still looking for the PL Statement on the January charges for Everton and Nottingham Forest.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

The journalists are not reporting it very well though, these are two separate offences/alleged offences and schedules of such.

It isn't all about the PL stuff as the EFL Embargo reason doesn't pertain to that.

Well it does in so far as the last 2 years Accounts feed into this. However the Embargo and maybe more isn't for breaching to last season as the Rules make clear and nor is it seemingly for failing to submit to the EFL.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

EFL should if at all possible call Leicester's bluff and refer to the CFRP for adjudication.

This body can adjudicate on more than one matter at once. They could e.g. adjudicate on jurisdiction and the alleged offence itself. Varied P&S Regs are a Reserved matter for them.

One bit says they can decide matters as to their own jurisdiction.

Lastly, it suggests you cannot invoke FA Rules to decide matters, or override the Arbitration Agreement.

I question therefore their purported use of FA Rule K.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

I also have a horrible feeling that Aston Villa may wriggle off the hook yet again.

If Rules change this summer then it us possible that there is no PSR Test to 2024-25, occurring in 2025-26 which is when Aston Villa could be at most risk.

[Mr Popodopolous]

In respect of the Embargo, it basically means what the League deems appropriate to the circs.

Renewal of high earners, probably not unless you can encourage them to take a drastic cut in their new terms.

E.g. Vestegaard, Ndidi, Praet, Iheanacho, probably Vardy couldn't be renewed or be registered as such on existing terms. Depending on wages Albrighton too.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

So my take on all this is -

1.  The EPL have charged LCFC for not submitting the accounts for 2022/23 in time - two questions arise -

1. Are the EPL entitled to them?  It appears not.  The EPL are entitled to information from 'Clubs' being members of the EPL and not 'clubs' who are not - see the definitions in the EPL handbook and for example B.18, E.3 W.1 and W.2 in the same document.  W.2 makes it clear that it is not a breach of the rules for a Club to not produce information.
2. Were they submitted on time?  LCFC can answer that.

2.  As to any EPL disputes or disciplinary action these can only be transferred to the EFL from the EPL if they were in existence as at the date of relegation, see E.72 and E.74.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

What of the EFL Embargo @Hxj ?

Surely the 2.10.1 follows on logically to 2.10.3?

3 Year P&S Calculation submitted March 1 2024

If in excess, an Embargo it is

And,

CFRU refer the breach/P&S Calculation overspend to the CFRP?

On the PL stuff, there is a suspicion in some quarters that the EFL sent the Accounts data to the PL. Maybe just forum posts.

Edited March 24 by Mr Popodopolous

[Hxj]

26 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

What of the EFL Embargo ?

The EFL Embargo will be based upon an a predicted breach for year 'T' (2023/24).

Again the problem is in the wording.  My reading is that there actually has to be a predicted breach in 'T' see 2.10.  This should be compared with a predicted breach in 'T+1' or 'T+2' where it is in the EFL's reasonable opinion whether there is a breach.

So for 'T' if LCFC show a predicted loss of -£38 million then there is no breach, even if this includes profits from player receipts of £50 million in June 2024.

LCFC might be charged later if they have knowingly provided incorrect information, by which time they will potentially be a member of the EPL, so potentially outside the jurisdiction of the EFL.

Edited March 24 by Hxj