by From Despair To Where? » 16 Aug 2024 15:05
16 Aug 2024 15:05by Winston Biscuit » 20 Aug 2024 18:12
20 Aug 2024 18:12But the farcical stupidity of it is that those penalties should be being applied within the season the rules were broken rather than years later! Still better late than never, looking forward to Chelsea fans everywhere bellyaching that it's not fair and that the PL are being vindictive etc.Winston Biscuit wrote:Result of investigation into Chelsea's dodgy payments under Abramovic apparently going to be heard sometime soon.
Football finance matey on Talksport reckons a points penalty may well happen.
He said when FFP is decided they look at whether a club gained a sporting advantage, and if they did then a sporting penalty is dished out, i.e a points penalty. This issue with Chelsea is not around FFP (although there is an outside chance a knock on effect of the dodgy payments is that they took Chelsea over the FFP line) but the same rule should really apply, and Chelsea fully admit they made these under the table payments to players in order to sign them, so there is clear sporting advantage gained.
Whilst in theory that is true, it's often not feasible is it esp if the facts come out a few months/years down the line.Sutekh wrote:But the farcical stupidity of it is that those penalties should be being applied within the season the rules were broken rather than years later! Still better late than never, looking forward to Chelsea fans everywhere bellyaching that it's not fair and that the PL are being vindictive etc.Winston Biscuit wrote:Result of investigation into Chelsea's dodgy payments under Abramovic apparently going to be heard sometime soon.
Football finance matey on Talksport reckons a points penalty may well happen.
He said when FFP is decided they look at whether a club gained a sporting advantage, and if they did then a sporting penalty is dished out, i.e a points penalty. This issue with Chelsea is not around FFP (although there is an outside chance a knock on effect of the dodgy payments is that they took Chelsea over the FFP line) but the same rule should really apply, and Chelsea fully admit they made these under the table payments to players in order to sign them, so there is clear sporting advantage gained.
Brogue wrote:Leicester avoid points deductions because they were relegated. Exploiting a loop hole and making a mockery of PSR
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... g54xkqnzlo
An independent panel found the Premier League did not have the jurisdiction to punish the club.
It’s because they submitted their accounts on the 30th June. By which time they were no longer a premier league club.Sutekh wrote:Brogue wrote:Leicester avoid points deductions because they were relegated. Exploiting a loop hole and making a mockery of PSR
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... g54xkqnzloAn independent panel found the Premier League did not have the jurisdiction to punish the club.
So the Premier League do not have the jurisdiction to punish a Premier League club for offences incurred during their time in the Premier League. This is absolutely ****** stupid. Guess Man City will be getting off pretty much scot free then (as if we don't know that already).
by Winston Biscuit » 04 Sep 2024 08:11
04 Sep 2024 08:11Looking forward to PSR/FFP being dropped sometime soon for the salary capped squad approach, and all the shenanigans that'll bring.Winston Biscuit wrote:What I don't understand is that this loop hole used is all about timing as Leicester say they were already relegated so not a PL club anymore, but that just isn't true. The season runs to 11:59:59 on 30th June, 1 second later and you are into the new season where they were then an EFL club. Whether you confirmed your relegation status in May or even April, the season is still ongoing until 1st July.
Maybe I am just misunderstanding something about Leicester's claim. Are they saying that the moment they were relegated they should no longer have been considered a PL club?
aren't they also in trouble if they are relegated as this decision means they were an EFL club so that loss goes against their EFL numbers which would be worse?
by Winston Biscuit » 04 Sep 2024 08:41
04 Sep 2024 08:41by From Despair To Where? » 04 Sep 2024 14:36
04 Sep 2024 14:36The EFL notes the decision of the independent Appeal Board in respect of Leicester City’s appeal regarding the Premier League’s jurisdiction over the Club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules.
We are currently reviewing the decision in full and will reserve any further substantive comment until any possible appeal process initiated by the Premier League has concluded, and or any action is taken by the EFL.
We share the frustrations of the Premier League. It cannot be right that Clubs potentially escape the scrutiny of the agreed rules and sanctions due to movement across the divisions.
Cost control rules have been agreed by the member clubs of the Premier League and EFL, and it is incumbent on the Leagues to apply the rules as intended to uphold the integrity of competitions, with Clubs required to act in utmost good faith towards one another for the benefit of all Clubs and their supporters.
I can't imagine other clubs are too happy about the stupidity of this independent panel's decision. These rules are there to protect them as much as penalising offenders. Leicester could find themselves becoming the latest pariah in a league with already more than it's fair share of clubs hated for questionable dealings.Brogue wrote:Efl release a statement about Leicester
The EFL notes the decision of the independent Appeal Board in respect of Leicester City’s appeal regarding the Premier League’s jurisdiction over the Club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules.
We are currently reviewing the decision in full and will reserve any further substantive comment until any possible appeal process initiated by the Premier League has concluded, and or any action is taken by the EFL.
We share the frustrations of the Premier League. It cannot be right that Clubs potentially escape the scrutiny of the agreed rules and sanctions due to movement across the divisions.
Cost control rules have been agreed by the member clubs of the Premier League and EFL, and it is incumbent on the Leagues to apply the rules as intended to uphold the integrity of competitions, with Clubs required to act in utmost good faith towards one another for the benefit of all Clubs and their supporters.
by From Despair To Where? » 04 Sep 2024 22:13
04 Sep 2024 22:13Won't be the first time their financial chicanery has prompted a change in the regulations.Sutekh wrote:I can't imagine other clubs are too happy about the stupidity of this independent panel's decision. These rules are there to protect them as much as penalising offenders. Leicester could find themselves becoming the latest pariah in a league with already more than it's fair share of clubs hated for questionable dealings.Brogue wrote:Efl release a statement about Leicester
The EFL notes the decision of the independent Appeal Board in respect of Leicester City’s appeal regarding the Premier League’s jurisdiction over the Club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules.
We are currently reviewing the decision in full and will reserve any further substantive comment until any possible appeal process initiated by the Premier League has concluded, and or any action is taken by the EFL.
We share the frustrations of the Premier League. It cannot be right that Clubs potentially escape the scrutiny of the agreed rules and sanctions due to movement across the divisions.
Cost control rules have been agreed by the member clubs of the Premier League and EFL, and it is incumbent on the Leagues to apply the rules as intended to uphold the integrity of competitions, with Clubs required to act in utmost good faith towards one another for the benefit of all Clubs and their supporters.
by Winston Biscuit » 04 Sep 2024 22:19
04 Sep 2024 22:19Was absolutely my first thought too!From Despair To Where? wrote:Won't be the first time their financial chicanery has prompted a change in the regulations
by Snowflake Royal » 05 Sep 2024 08:40
05 Sep 2024 08:40I have a solution. Scrap the Premier League and bring the whole structure back under one body. The football League. Problem solved.Brogue wrote:Efl release a statement about Leicester
The EFL notes the decision of the independent Appeal Board in respect of Leicester City’s appeal regarding the Premier League’s jurisdiction over the Club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules.
We are currently reviewing the decision in full and will reserve any further substantive comment until any possible appeal process initiated by the Premier League has concluded, and or any action is taken by the EFL.
We share the frustrations of the Premier League. It cannot be right that Clubs potentially escape the scrutiny of the agreed rules and sanctions due to movement across the divisions.
Cost control rules have been agreed by the member clubs of the Premier League and EFL, and it is incumbent on the Leagues to apply the rules as intended to uphold the integrity of competitions, with Clubs required to act in utmost good faith towards one another for the benefit of all Clubs and their supporters.
If only it was 1 team and 1 vote.Snowflake Royal wrote:I have a solution. Scrap the Premier League and bring the whole structure back under one body. The football League. Problem solved.Brogue wrote:Efl release a statement about Leicester
The EFL notes the decision of the independent Appeal Board in respect of Leicester City’s appeal regarding the Premier League’s jurisdiction over the Club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules.
We are currently reviewing the decision in full and will reserve any further substantive comment until any possible appeal process initiated by the Premier League has concluded, and or any action is taken by the EFL.
We share the frustrations of the Premier League. It cannot be right that Clubs potentially escape the scrutiny of the agreed rules and sanctions due to movement across the divisions.
Cost control rules have been agreed by the member clubs of the Premier League and EFL, and it is incumbent on the Leagues to apply the rules as intended to uphold the integrity of competitions, with Clubs required to act in utmost good faith towards one another for the benefit of all Clubs and their supporters.
by From Despair To Where? » 23 Sep 2024 15:06
23 Sep 2024 15:06by Pepe the Horseman » 07 Oct 2024 14:56
07 Oct 2024 14:56Following today’s publication of the Rule X Arbitral Tribunal Award, Manchester City Football Club thanks the distinguished members of the Arbitral Tribunal for their work and considerations and welcomes their findings:
- The Club has succeeded with its claim: the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules have been found to be unlawful and the Premier League’s decisions on two specific MCFC sponsorship transactions have been set aside
- The Tribunal found that both the original APT rules and the current, (amended) APT Rules violate UK competition law and violate the requirements of procedural fairness.
- The Premier League was found to have abused its dominant position.
- The Tribunal has determined both that the rules are structurally unfair and that the Premier League was specifically unfair in how it applied those rules to the Club in practice.
- The rules were found to be discriminatory in how they operate, because they deliberately excluded shareholder loans.
- As well as these general findings on legality, the Tribunal has set aside specific decisions of the Premier League to restate the fair market value of two transactions entered into by the Club.
- The tribunal held that the Premier League had reached the decisions in a procedurally unfair manner.
- The Tribunal also ruled that there was an unreasonable delay in the Premier League’s fair market value assessment of two of the Club’s sponsorship transactions, and so the Premier League breached its own rules.
Users browsing this forum: Jammy Dodger, Sutekh and 20 guests