Embarrassing official Premier League statement – In disarray after Leicester win PSR appeal | OneFootball

What a shambles at the top of the Premier League.

Tuesday night’s news leaving them in disarray.

Leicester City winning their appeal against breaking Premier League PSR (Premier League and Sustainability Rules) and so set to avoid any sanctions, particularly any points deduction.

The incompetence of those running the Premier League, their executive team, quite astonishing.

Maybe the first thing to point out though, is that this isn’t something that changes the PSR situation for Newcastle United, or indeed most other Premier League clubs, unless you get relegated, then if things aren’t changed NUFC could ‘benefit’, or indeed any other relegated club.

Basically, a loophole has been exploited, the badly drawn up Premier League rules allowing Leicester City to escape without punishment.

It appears perfectly clear that Leicester City’s PSR allowed losses for the three Premier League seasons of 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23 were beyond the £105m limit.

However, the independent appeal board upheld Leicester’s appeal due to this loophole below.

As pointed out by the embarrassing official Premier League statement (see below), which includes this line:

‘That appeal has been upheld by an independent Appeal Board on the grounds that the club’s accounting period which ended on 30 June 2023, came after the point the club had ceased to be a member of the League.’

Amateur hour at the Premier League.

A name very familiar with Newcastle United fans acting on behalf of Leicester City with this appeal…

Yes, the excellent Nick De Marco, the one Leicester City have to thank, for exposing the incompetence at the top of the Premier League.

The equally excellent football finance expert Kieran Maguire weighing in afterwards, giving another knockout blow.

Kieran pointing out that the average cost of employing each person working at the Premier League is £141,000 per year.

Nice work if you can get it.

In the official Premier League statement below, I have highlighted a couple of parts, where the Premier League hierarchy are keen to talk about ‘ensure fairness among all clubs’ and ‘maintain the principle of fairness’…

You couldn’t make it up!

Try telling that to the likes of Everton and Forest who have been deducted points, the likes of those two clubs and others such as Villa, Newcastle United and many more, forced to sell players they didn’t want to sell, due to PSR put in place by the Premier League.

Meanwhile, these ‘rules’ have meant that Chelsea are somehow able to spend £1.5billion+ on signing players in just over two years, from summer 2022 onwards! These ‘rules’ reportedly allowing one or more of the following to help them avoid any punishment – allegedly Chelsea selling two hotels they own to themselves AND/OR Chelsea selling their own training ground to themselves AND/OR even selling their own women’s team to themselves!

Then we have Manchester United.

Another club that lead a very charmed life, when it comes to the Premier League seeing them as supposedly not breaking PSR.

Last month we reported on football finance expert Stefan Borson who said that the latest three-season period (2021/22, 2022/23 and 2023/24) would/should have seen Man U break the PSR rules.

However, Borson saying that Manchester United were allowed two special allowances that made the difference.

The football finance expert stating that these allowances are ‘relatively exceptional’ when it comes to what is allowed.

Stefan Borson speaking to Talksport about Manchester United and PSR – 7 August 2024:

“Manchester United is very interesting because we do have quite a lot of information about Manchester United because of their quarterly report in the US and so we know that they’ve told us that the end of year results will have a £660million top line and about £140m EBITDA.

“It also tells us certain things about their costs. Bottom line is when you drag that down on the three-year assessment, Manchester United would have failed PSR for the season just gone, save for two things.

“One, they were given, it appears, an exceptional allowance of £40m for Covid in 2022, which no other club had.

“The most any other club had was about £1m in that year. We dont know how they got it.

“On top of that it seems they’ve been given allowance for around £35m of exceptional costs relating to the share sale to (INEOS CEO Sir Jim) Ratcliffe which to be honest, the Glazers should have paid that themselves anyway given they were the main beneficiary.

“But we know from the numbers that it was £35m and the only way in which they can make the 23/24 PSR numbers and this is not just my view but the view of multiple people who run the numbers, is by having these allowances.

“The allowances are relatively exceptional in the game.”

Good luck to Leicester City on getting away with this one and exposing the incompetence at the top of the Premier League.

When I saw ‘getting away’ with it, it doesn’t even touch the sides with what the likes of Chelsea, Manchester United and others are getting away with.

How PSR operates in its current form, quite clearly means those with all the money (and power…) currently, are made even more untouchable. With those trying to close the gap finding it ever more difficult, severe punishments if trying too hard.

Meanwhile, the usual six reinforce their power and finances ever more

This is the same six who tried to steal all the Premier League power forever more, with an attempt to award themselves extra voting rights, meaning they could force through whatever changes in perpetuity, even if the majority of other PL clubs voted against them.

Then trying it on again, even worse, when the same six clubs tried to ruin football forever, by forming a European Super League that would mean they wouldn’t even have to qualify for the top European competition each season, instead awarding themselves automatic places in that proposed set-up, along with other shameless clubs on mainland Europe.

Their punishment for all of this? Agreeing to pay a fine that amounted to a week’s wage bill for each of the six.

In both instances, in my opinion, all six should have been relegated as a punishment and banned from all European competitions for five to ten years. Especially Liverpool and Man U who were the prime movers on both occasions.

There should be a clearout at the top of the Premier League, Richard Masters and all the rest need to resign, be replaced by a credible management team not tainted by what has gone on for so many years.

Get new rules (PSR or otherwise) drawn up that look to bring more ‘fairness’ to the Premier League, allow more clubs to try and compete at the top, both financially and on the pitch. Stop the likes of Man U and Chelsea finding ways to dance around and avoid punishments as they are currently doing.

I am hoping for the best BUT fearing the worst.

Official Premier League statement – 3 September 2024:

The Premier League is surprised and disappointed by the independent Appeal Board’s decision to uphold an appeal lodged by Leicester City FC regarding the League’s jurisdiction over the club’s alleged breach of its Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs) when the club was a member of the Premier League.

In March this year, the Premier League referred Leicester City to an independent Commission for an alleged breach of PSRs relating to the assessment period ending financial year 2022/23. Once submitted, the club’s financial results demonstrated that it had exceeded the permitted £105million threshold for the relevant period.

Leicester City subsequently challenged the Commission’s authority to hear the case on the grounds of jurisdiction. This challenge was dismissed by the independent Commission (click here to read in full), a decision which Leicester City appealed.

That appeal has been upheld by an independent Appeal Board on the grounds that the club’s accounting period which ended on 30 June 2023, came after the point the club had ceased to be a member of the League. The Appeal Board’s decision effectively means that, despite the club being a member of the League from Seasons 2019/20 to 2022/23, the League cannot take action against the club for exceeding the relevant PSR threshold in respect of the associated accounting periods. Click here to read the full written reasons.

The Premier League is very disappointed with the Appeal Board’s decision, and the limited reasons provided for it. The League remains of the view that the original Commission took the right approach in interpreting the rules in a practical and workable way that gives effect to their intended purpose. In overturning the original Commission’s findings, the Premier League considers the Appeal Board’s decision fails to take into account the purpose of the rules, all relevant parts of the PSRs and the need for effective enforcement of alleged breaches to ensure fairness among all clubs.

If the Appeal Board is correct, its decision will have created a situation where any club exceeding the PSR threshold could avoid accountability in these specific circumstances. This is clearly not the intention of the rules.

It is of critical importance that the Premier League is able to enforce its rules consistently to maintain the principle of fairness. The League will now consider what further action it can take to ensure this is the case.

Appeal Boards are independent of the Premier League and member clubs and are appointed by the independent Chair of the Premier League Judicial Panel.

Profitability and Sustainability Rules (see Premier League Handbook Section E)

– All Premier League clubs are assessed for their compliance with the Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSRs) each year. – Compliance 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. – A club’s Adjusted Earnings Before Tax figure for each season takes account of its profit or loss after depreciation and interest, but before tax, and then applies a series of “add backs” – These “add backs” are costs that the Premier League and its clubs recognise to be in the general interest of the club and football, for example investment in infrastructure, community, women’s football, youth development and depreciation of tangible fixed assets Exceptionally, in relation to years 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22 COVID-19 costs were also permitted to be included as “add backs”. – Ordinarily, a club’s PSR Calculation is the aggregate of its Adjusted Earnings Before Tax over a three-year period. Following amendments made to the PSRs during COVID-19, the relevant figures for Seasons 2019/20 and 2020/21 are now averaged. In this case, therefore, the relevant period includes Seasons 2022/2023, 2021/2022, and the average Adjusted Earnings Before Tax for Seasons 2020/2021 and 2019/20 – A club will be in breach of the PSRs if its PSR Calculation over the relevant period results in a loss in excess of £105 million (with that threshold reduced by £22million for each season that a club has been in the Championship during the relevant period). – At the 2023 Annual General Meeting (AGM), Clubs agreed to introduce Standard Directions for PSR cases (Appendix 1 to the Rules) that seek to ensure such cases are resolved in the same season the complaint is issued, with any sanction handed down prior to the subsequent Annual General Meeting. (Appendix 1 page 535). – Leicester City were relegated to the EFL Championship before the Premier League’s new Standard Directions, which prescribe a timeline within which PSR cases should be heard, came into force.

Premier League investigations, independent Commissions and Appeal Boards

– The Premier League Board has the power to investigate any suspected or alleged breach of Premier League Rules – There are a number of options available to the Board where it suspects or alleges a breach of the Rules. For PSR cases, the matter will be handed to an independent Commission to determine whether there is a breach and, if so, what the sanction should be. – The League has access to an independent Judicial Panel, comprising a number of legal, financial and other experts. Members of the Judicial Panel are appointed, in accordance with Premier League Rules W.19, W.20 and W.26, by its independent Chair, Murray Rosen KC, an experienced barrister. It is the Chair who selects members of the Judicial Panel to sit on Commissions, which are independent of the Premier League and its clubs. – All proceedings before an independent Commission are confidential and heard in private. This includes the date and location which can’t be announced in advance. – There are a range of sanctions available to the independent Commission which include fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions . – Under Premier League Rule W.82.2, at the conclusion of proceedings, an independent Commission’s final decision will be made public via the Premier League’s website . – A party to the proceedings which wishes to challenge a decision of the Commission may to do so under Section W of the Premier League Rules. – The Appeal Board is also appointed by Mr Murray Rosen KC and must have three members, one of whom should have held judicial office, and would sit as the chair of the Appeal Board. – The proceedings of the Appeal Board are also confidential and heard in private. – The Appeal Board has wide discretion in respect of the appeal, and may allow it, dismiss it, or make any order that it deems fit (including varying the order of Commission). – For further information on the disciplinary process, please see Section W of the Premier League Handbook.