The Premier League will still be in a losing position even if it successfully appeals against the latest decision in Leicester City’s profit and sustainability (PSR) case.
That is the view of finance expert Stefan Borson, who exclusively told Football Insider the governing body will have to hand the club a points deduction and rubbish its own appeal board if the verdict is overturned.
Leicester were charged in March with a breach of the Premier League’s PSR rules for 2022-23 after reporting losses of £89.7million for that year alone, with top-flight sides only permitted to lose £105million over a rolling three-year period.
But they argued they were no longer a Premier League club when they submitted their accounts on 30 June last year following their relegation to the Championship.
An independent commission dismissed those claims in July and ruled they could be charged by the Premier League.
But Leicester confirmed in a statement on 3 September their appeal against that ruling had been successful, handing them a significant boost in their bid to avoid a points deduction.
The Lawyer reported on 16 October the governing body is now readying its legal teams to submit an appeal against the decision.
But Borson told Football Insider the Premier League has likely already appealed against the ruling.
Premier League will have to hand Leicester points deduction
“The Premier League may not agree with the decision, but it’s much more than that,” Borson told Football Insider.
“They have to show that no reasonable panel could have agreed with the appeal board. It seems very unlikely to me.
“The problem the Premier League have got is, even if they win here, they are going to lose because winning for the Premier League in this case means they have to prosecute Leicester, deduct them points, and they rubbish their own appeal board.
“They would basically be saying the appeal board that they had on that case was so incompetent that it came up with a decision that no reasonable panel could have come up with.
“That undermines the quality of its processes to me and the quality of its judicial panel.”
Leave a Reply