this is dyche this is at
home
this is liverpool who wipe the floor with everyone
so it’s a scrapped of to me
this is dyche this is at
home
this is liverpool who wipe the floor with everyone
so it’s a scrapped of to me
Agreed but if Everton were reinstated at 10 points and Leicester and Forest went unpunished/had their points back they wouldn't give a flying one. In fact they'd laugh and go back to calling us cheats. They can go and swivel.
I used to think that you might be an @davek multi. Clearly, you are a bigger man.
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
The legal proceedings they talk about is Arbitrtion.
The EFL are predicting that Leicester will exceed the PSR limits in 23/4 and in accord with their rules ( a panel of the EFL) wanted in late 23 LCFC to produce a business plan to show how they would mitigate the anticipated overspend.
LCFC said that the EFL didn’t have the right to ask for one at that date and on appeal won that argument but not that come March they didn’t have to produce one.
We are now in March . The first crucial date was 1/3 when all sorts of accounts and projections became due another key one is 31/3.
Meanwhile LCFC based on everything I have read should have by 1/3 /24 submitted accounts to the PL in respect of the 22/23 season not based on the 23/24 rulebook but by the 22/23 one during which they were a member and even though at the time of the charges they were not in the PL again my reading of both the PL &EFL rules the PL rules apply.
The EFL embargo is to do with their PSR regulations and I can only think it’s around non submission of PSR projections for 23/24 which I think had to be filed by 1/3
Stop bullshi%(ing. The RS don't spend big.
Obvs, I was joking but surely Torres to Chelsea was bigger. Didn't Carroll get signed to replace Torres?
Yeah nothing like double standards eh..
If its a bigger breach than Everton, it will be a smaller deduction, standard the bar has been set every breach deduction must be less than Evertons
Thanks mate!
Surely the EFL have a right and jurisdiction to ask for 23/4 business plan. sounds to me there is much to hide, if Al, they were asked for is how they planned to meet a short fall before the end of the financial year.
So in essence, the EFL feel if Leicester are in breach for in the PL for 22/23, then they are going to be in breach for 23/24 based on their submission.
One thing that doesn’t make sense to me is if Leicester are in breach for 22/23, why aren’t they being tried in the same season. We were found in breach of 21/22 and that charge - we procedurally were able to delay, the PL then changed the rule that these breaches had to be dealt with in the same season, so both we and Forest have/had our charges for 22/23 - dealt with this season, this doesn’t see, the case with Leiescter for their breach in the same 22/23.
Again as far as I can see, Leicester are playing for time and hoping to delay charges either by dragging out proceedings to get promoted and possibly hoping at least one won’t apply to them for Bruno g in a different league, wasn’t it Wolves a few years back that got away with breach of EFL PAS, by getting promoted.
Do you know what jurisdiction legal arbitration might have, if their recommendation or agreement trump the PAS procedure and recommendation.
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
The new process that you are dealt with quicker in the season after a breach was passed after Leicester were relegated, so they have never agreed to be governed by it. So although it applies to us and Forest for 22/23 it doesn't apply to them. So they have to be done according to the older rules which governed our first charge.Thanks mate!
Surely the EFL have a right and jurisdiction to ask for 23/4 business plan. sounds to me there is much to hide, if Al, they were asked for is how they planned to meet a short fall before the end of the financial year.
So in essence, the EFL feel if Leicester are in breach for in the PL for 22/23, then they are going to be in breach for 23/24 based on their submission.
One thing that doesn’t make sense to me is if Leicester are in breach for 22/23, why aren’t they being tried in the same season. We were found in breach of 21/22 and that charge - we procedurally were able to delay, the PL then changed the rule that these breaches had to be dealt with in the same season, so both we and Forest have/had our charges for 22/23 - dealt with this season, this doesn’t see, the case with Leiescter for their breach in the same 22/23.
Again as far as I can see, Leicester are playing for time and hoping to delay charges either by dragging out proceedings to get promoted and possibly hoping at least one won’t apply to them for Bruno g in a different league, wasn’t it Wolves a few years back that got away with breach of EFL PAS, by getting promoted.
Do you know what jurisdiction legal arbitration might have, if their recommendation or agreement trump the PAS procedure and recommendation.
Marius57
Player Valuation: £50m
Funny how all the clubs that were threatening to sue us are all decided to drop the case shortly before they had to submit their accounts……
bernie inn
Player Valuation: £6m
Our statement to the PL when forests penalty was was confirmed should have been we’ll see you in court. Nothing more Nothing less. Instead we thanked them and asked for our belly to be tickled when they gave us 4 points back.
agree but again we’ve got no leadership the clubs in turmoil
Wat Tyler
Player Valuation: £70m
Who the hell at Everton allowed that stupid statement thanking the commission for giving us a 6 point deduction to go out?
Must be Dave Prentice
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
Thanks mate!
Surely the EFL have a right and jurisdiction to ask for 23/4 business plan. sounds to me there is much to hide, if Al, they were asked for is how they planned to meet a short fall before the end of the financial year.
So in essence, the EFL feel if Leicester are in breach for in the PL for 22/23, then they are going to be in breach for 23/24 based on their submission.
One thing that doesn’t make sense to me is if Leicester are in breach for 22/23, why aren’t they being tried in the same season. We were found in breach of 21/22 and that charge - we procedurally were able to delay, the PL then changed the rule that these breaches had to be dealt with in the same season, so both we and Forest have/had our charges for 22/23 - dealt with this season, this doesn’t see, the case with Leiescter for their breach in the same 22/23.
Again as far as I can see, Leicester are playing for time and hoping to delay charges either by dragging out proceedings to get promoted and possibly hoping at least one won’t apply to them for Bruno g in a different league, wasn’t it Wolves a few years back that got away with breach of EFL PAS, by getting promoted.
Do you know what jurisdiction legal arbitration might have, if their recommendation or agreement trump the PAS procedure and recommendation.
1) Leicester won a basic argument in front of an appeal ( well sort of appeal more a review) it’s extremely complicated but revolves around what counts as to what is deemed to be T1 ( the applicable ) year when clubs are relegated to or promoted into the EFL. The right to ask for a plan isn’t in dispute it’s the date upon which one has to be furnished. EFL wanted one in October but didn’t win the argument . Not quite sure why Leicester took the course they did you’d think they would have some sort of documentation cash flow
2) Leicester aren’t party to the 23/24 PL rule book but can only be charged and processed in accord with the 22/23 rules which didn’t allow for fast track hence which is why it’s not in season . Simply because the accounts now have to be in weeks earlier than the 1/3 date in that 22/23 rulebook . ( On the face of it they missed that filing date)
3) Leicester will be asking for a panel set up in exactly the same way as the ICs that heard the PSR cases , to be honest I am a little confused as to what they are trying to get a ruling on because for me I would have expected that to be a defence in the hearing
