A blunt opinion of all things Leeds
Elland road
- Tweets 2,278
- Following 783
- Followers 512
- Likes 5,729
LS11 Honesty Box retweeted
Guilty, guilty, sham and shame. How on earth can Manchester City appeal a verdict as devastating and damning as the one passed down by the independent commission investigating breaches of financial regulations? City will appeal, of course, and it’s their right under Premier League rules. They clearly will appeal, claiming the verdict is “unsafe” but they are surely simply delaying the inevitable punishment, making themselves even more unpopular, damaging their club and the game further.
For justice to truly prevail in this case, punishment has to be swift. For City to start the long journey back on the road to redemption, they have to take their medicine. These are dark days in the history of the Premier League and they are darkest at the Etihad. City's owners have to see the light, accept their guilt and begin the process of rehabilitation.
An appeal involving deny, deny, delay, delay, shreds any sporting integrity this season has. The thought of this taking years to resolve – doubtless via the High Court - feels potentially ruinous, certainly deeply damaging, for the sport. How many people will be turned off by a league stained by a constantly updated asterix, by a sport effectively run by lawyers. City have to take their medicine now.
For sporting competitions to survive and thrive, there has to be a willingness on all parties to play fair on and off the field. That may sound naive, an outdated purist principle, but it matters to many. A few engaged in the game will take short-cuts but one of the reasons why the Premier League is so followed around the world is because of the perception of its essential honesty.
Players give everything from first minute to last. Promoted teams can occasionally trouble the established order. But industrial-level cooking of the books highlighted in the independent commission’s report, effectively allowing City, regular champions, to spend more on players will shake confidence in the competition.
City’s owners have to think very carefully, not least about their own and their famous club’s reputational damage. Read the room. Read the statement. How can they possibly answer the powerful, damning language used in detailing the offences devised to circumvent FFP. Others were playing by the rules, City were bending them, the commission found. City fans can argue that FFP/PSR/SCR rules are anti-competitive, and protect the “cartel” as they see it, but City signed up to the rules.
And, then, in the words of the Premier League CEO Richard Masters, “systematically broke” those rules for “nearly a decade”. Masters deserves to feel vindicated for his quiet, firm leadership of the league in this long, tense case against such a wealthy, self-confident member.
Many of the 40 pages of findings in the "core decision" contain blow after blow to City. If the Premier League versus Manchester City were a boxing bout, the referee would have stepped in. “Sham contracts”, “misstated accounts”, “concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators”. “Egregious acts of non-cooperation”. Basically, deception writ large.
A phrase that will now pass into the annals of footballing infamy is the “Disguised Funding Scheme” whereby companies “were only required to pay a portion of the relevant sponsorship fees. The remainder was funded by Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd”. ADUG. City’s owners. The “Disguised Funding Scheme” basically overstated sponsorship income by £830.69m. A staggering amount.
This is now not about Manchester City the club, but Manchester City the ownership, including the chief executive Ferran Soriano. They have to stop embarrassing the club and the sport. They have to stop letting down their fans. City’s owners have to consider the relentless abuse coming the way of fans, players and coaching staff in games to come, starting when entering what will be a bear-pit at Anfield on October 11.
Soriano, assuming he attends, can expect a particularly uncomfortable afternoon in his seat and in the Liverpool boardroom. It’s hard to see how he keeps his job – if City’s appeal fails. Fit and proper person?
In continuing to protest their innocence, City claim they have “irrefutable evidence” to defend themselves. If so, why weren’t three independent judges persuaded? City have had long enough, employed exceptional briefs, and still lost.
Having been found guilty of doing the wrong thing, City now have to do the right thing and that is accept the inevitability of sanctions and seek some form of settlement with the Premier League. They will not, of course: too proud, too defiant, still too convinced of their innocence despite the weight of this report. They will become outcasts even without yet being cast out. That is to come.
City's owners have to acknowledge the impact their activities had on other clubs, and accept the considerable compensation claims flooding their way from other clubs they pipped to trophies, possibly even from players. If they’re sensible they will look for a settlement that includes substantial compensation, running into hundreds of millions of pounds, to aggrieved clubs who missed out on trophies, on prize money. Maybe that £830.69m should be the figure considered in any settlement. Fitting.
City's owners have to see sense. The alternative is years and fortunes spent in the courts. Nobody wins. Except the lawyers. Football loses, because the game remains on hold until City are punished.
824
1,844
10,715
922,317
It's too easy to just simply deduct city X amount of points this year or relegate them.
They should get say a 100 point deduction BUT it's split over say 5/10 years.
That'll be a long lasting, damaging, punishment. They'd have to really get creative then.
81
I just wish that Gabriel prick from Arsenal was around in the late 90s early 00s. He'd get the absolute shit kicked out of him by like likes of Smith, Ferguson, Rooney.
2
127
Should have been home & hosed after the 1st half. Nailed on they'd score after kissing so many.
Would have taken a draw at the start of the game mind.
Game was crying out for some pace up top to just send it over top of Dunk.
1
99
I've seen it all now.
Grown blokes throwing their teddy out the pram because Richalison is avaliable but we're not in for him.
Bloke couldn't get in the Farsley side.
1
5
310
Absolute meltdown about Paxiao when we won't have even been in for him.
Happy clappers getting hard-ons about players when it's agents drumming up interest.
Wild.
1
1
223
I know @BrynLaw is Welsh and definately supports 2 teams but this is absolutely unacceptable from Farke. Bryn is the voice of the club!!
10
17
665
234,343
I mean when you put it like this, it's very astute from the 49ers.
Just looking at the figures and reading between the lines on Piroe’s move to WHU 👇
There’s been plenty of discussion around Leeds United’s decision to let Joel Piroe join West Ham on loan, so let’s break down what the reported figures could actually mean for Leeds.
Using the figures being discussed:
🔹 £4m upfront loan fee
🔹 £8m payable if West Ham win promotion
🔹 £12m potential total return
Above figures based on Zinny Boswell post .
And this is where it gets interesting from a Leeds financial perspective.
Piroe is entering the final year of his original Leeds contract and, based on the current accounting position, his remaining book value is around £2.5m.
That makes the £4m loan fee particularly significant.
If Leeds receive £4m upfront, they would have already received an amount greater than Piroe’s current book value — before even considering the saving on his wages for the season.
So, in very simple terms:
£4m loan fee
– £2.5m remaining book value
= roughly £1.5m accounting gain
And that’s BEFORE taking into account the wage saving Leeds make by West Ham taking Piroe for the season.
Then comes the really interesting part…
If West Ham are promoted, the reported £8m payment becomes payable.
That would take Leeds’ total return from the deal to:
💰 £4m upfront
💰 + £8m promotion payment
💰 = £12m total
So although £12m might look underwhelming compared with some of the £15m+ figures that have previously been discussed for Piroe, the accounting context is important.
Leeds are potentially turning a player with a £2.5m remaining book value into:
➡️ £4m guaranteed income
➡️ A full season of wage savings
➡️ Potentially another £8m if West Ham go up
➡️ A potential £12m total return
And remember, Piroe is entering the final year of his original contract.
That means Leeds were facing a situation where his value could continue to fall, particularly if he wasn’t going to be a regular part of Daniel Farke’s plans.
So from that perspective, the structure could actually represent very good business.
The risk, obviously, is the £8m.
If West Ham don’t get promoted, Leeds potentially receive only the £4m loan fee and Piroe returns.
But if West Ham do go up, Leeds have effectively converted a player with a £2.5m remaining book value into a £12m potential deal, while also getting a season of his wages off the books.
There’s another way of looking at it:
Leeds don’t necessarily need Piroe to be worth £15m today.
They need to maximise the value of an asset who is entering the final year of his contract and isn’t expected to be central to the first-team plans.
If the £4m + £8m figures are accurate, this could be a clever piece of financial management from Leeds.
The headline might be:
“Piroe leaves Leeds on loan.”
But financially, it could actually be:
“Leeds bank £4m now, remove his wages, and potentially turn a £2.5m book-value asset into £12m.”
The big question now?
Can Joel Piroe fire West Ham back into the Premier League and trigger that extra £8m? 👀
#LUFC #LeedsUnited #Piroe #WHUFC #WestHam #MOT
2
211
Leeds will get a Romano 'here we go' on Paxiao or Leao & announce Dan James has signed a 15 year extension.
2
1
52
6,409
