Leicester face questions about FFP

Log in to stop seeing adverts

The attitude of the club just stinks doesn't it? Bang goes any leniency for compliance and if they throw the book at us then all anger needs to be directed at the owners & board. The last few years was never all Rodgers, him being such an easy to dislike **** kept most of the eyes off the bellends at the top.
 
From the best run club in the land to one of the worst. The owners kertowed to Brendan's bitching, showed some ambition but backed the wrong horse......
 
Fox Fan said:
The Premier League is going to be a mess next season. We'll be starting on negative points (should we go up) and if rumours are to be believed, Chelsea and Forest are about to fail FFP for this season.

They'll probably be others that we're not yet aware of too. Could easily be 4-5 teams starting on negative points.
Click to expand...
We aren’t going to be in the premier league next season. I’m sorry to say that we have ****ed it again. The momentum is going one way.
 
And we are ****ing up promotion.

It’s death by a thousand ****ing cuts with this club.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brown Nose said:
What a statement that is.

You clearly don't have any concept of what your role should be. You are supposed to represent supporters and the clubs best interest, not the current custodians.

Prawn sandwiches over fans every time isn't it?
Click to expand...
I have read it several times. Where does it say in this article/statement that the FT doesn’t support or represent the supporters and the clubs best interests? Alternatively, where does it say that they represent the best interests of KP?

In terms of direct interaction with the club, and what the FT is currently seeking from the club, these appear to be the relevant passages:-

“we have robustly challenged the Club to explain the current situation to the Trust.

We will be meeting with the Club during next week to discuss the 22/23 accounts just prior to their publication and will again raise questions about the financial consequences of relegation from the EPL, compliance with Profit & Sustainability Rules (PSR) and the likely impact across the 23/24 and 24/25 seasons”.

I have in the past been critical of the trust, but let’s not allow our automatic reaction to anything they post (or do) be completely negative for the sake of it.

 
SilverFox said:
I have read it several times. Where does it say in this article/statement that the FT doesn’t support or represent the supporters and the clubs best interests? Alternatively, where does it say that they represent the best interests of KP?
Click to expand...

Congratulations for being able to read the statement several times. That took a lot of endurance considering its banality.

My problem is in what wasn't said rather than what was. I've defended the FT on here before and recognise that there needs to be an organisation that can speak up when required. The problem is that the FT don't speak up when they should. And when they do make a statement, it is one littered with nothingness except a desperation to stay onside with King Power.

If ever there was a time when the FT needed to be relevant, it was now. They've failed because they're scared and/or in the pocket of the clowns. Which is why I don't think that they're representing supporters or the best interests of the club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

Championship

P Pld Pts
1Leicester4494
2Leeds Utd4590
3Ipswich4389
4Southampton4484
5West Brom4472
6Norwich City4472
7Hull City4469
8Coventry City4363
9Middlesbro4463
10Preston 4463
11Cardiff City4462
12Bristol City4459
13Sunderland4456
14Swansea City4456
15Watford4453
16QPR4553
17Millwall4453
18Stoke City4450
19Blackburn 4449
20Plymouth 4448
21Sheffield W4447
22Birmingham4446
23Huddersfield4444
24Rotherham Utd4424

Latest posts

Top