Football

FORMER England boss Lee Carsley is in the running to replace Ruud van Nistelrooy at Leicester, according to reports.The club’s relegation to the Championship was confirmed on Sunday, having picked up just 18 points all season.Lee Carsley is a candidate to take over at LeicesterCredit: PARuud van Nistelrooy is set to hold talks with Foxes chiefs this weekCredit: GettyVan Nistelrooy, who penned a two-and-a-half-year deal when he replaced the sacked Steve Cooper in November, has been unable to improve performances and results.Sky Sports claim he is “likely” to leave Leicester at the end of the campaign and a list of possible replacements has been drawn up.Carsley is one of the names in contention after his interim spell in charge of England.The current Three Lions Under-21s boss managed the senior side for six Nations League games between the departure of Gareth Southgate and arrival of Thomas Tuchel.READ MORE IN FOOTBALLRussell Martin is also a candidate for the Leicester job after he was axed by Southampton in December, just seven months after leading them to promotion to Premier League.Sheffield Wednesday boss Danny Rohl is also on the Leicester shortlist.The German has impressed in his two seasons at Hillsborough, guiding them to safety last term before a mid-table finish this campaign.Van Nistelrooy is set to meet with King Power chiefs this week to discuss his future.Most read in FootballBEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERSHe reportedly does not want to quit without receiving compensation.And the Foxes supposedly cannot sack him now as it could cause Profit and Sustainability problems in the current financial year. Leicester fans spotted streaming out just 35 minutes into Newcastle clash as hopeless Foxes hurtle towards relegationRussell Martin is also on the club’s shortlistCredit: GettySheffield Wednesday boss Danny Rohl is also being looked at by LeicesterCredit: Rex More

MANCHESTER CITY have been handed a date for their latest legal battle against the Premier League.But the Etihad outfit will have to wait another SIX MONTHS before their attempt to overturn the rulebook is heard.City’s legal battle with the Premier League is set to rumble on for at least the rest of this yearCredit: GettyCity lawyers are arguing that the latest version of the Prem’s Associated Party Transaction rules are invalid.Those rules were brought in after a contentious decision of the 20 top flight clubs in November, when Chelsea and Manchester United were among those switching sides to back the League as the new measures went through by 16 votes to four.And despite the significant ramifications, if the final ruling goes against the Prem, the matter has been listed for an arbitration hearing in October – meaning no ultimate decision is likely until Christmas if not later.Prem boss Richard Masters announced City were challenging the new regulations in February, just a week before they won a major victory over the previous set of rules that had been introduced in 2023.READ MORE IN FOOTBALLAn arbitration panel of three senior former Judges determined the “unlawful” rules – relating to sponsorship and other deals with companies related to a club’s owners – could not be fixed by a series of “discrete” tweaks.That came after City accused Masters of making “misleading” statements and asking rival clubs if they could trust the League leadership.Despite the Panel ruling, Prem legal advisers have told the clubs that issues in the regulations have been fixed by the November revisions.City, though, remain convinced that a decision not to look retrospectively at the “shareholder loans” to clubs – money lent by the owner and often at low or zero interest rates – is not legally viable.Most read in FootballBEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERSLord Pannick KC, who has led City’s fight against the “115” allegations of rule breaches between 2009-10 and 2022-23 has also represented them on the APT challenge.Both sides and English football as a whole are still in the dark over when the verdict of the 12-week hearing that started in October will be announced.Pep Guardiola gives Jack Grealish update as Man City star ‘slapped’ after Manchester derby Despite the second APT case being heard by the same legal trio who ruled in City’s favour in February, which was expected to expedite matters, it could be eight months or more, and certainly deep into next season, before clubs will know if their rulebook is legitimate. More

CHELSEA have somehow managed to burn through an eye-watering £1.291billion over the past decade, and yet, they still look financially fit.According to The Athletic, the west London giants have lost a staggering £354,000 a day, every single day for 10 years.Chelsea have lost a staggering £354,000 a day under co-owners Todd Boehly and Behdad EghbaliCredit: GettySince taking over from Roman Abramovich, who wasn’t shy about splashing the cash either — the new owners have blown over £1bn on players alone.They’re already on their third permanent manager, after binning Thomas Tuchel just three months into the new era. Graham Potter and Mauricio Pochettino have also come and gone, with hefty compensation packages in tow.So how have Chelsea pulled this off?One word: creativity and a bit of financial wizardry.READ MORE IN FOOTBALLThey’ve been dishing out eight-year deals to players, spreading the cost across the contract and keeping things neat on the balance sheet.The Athletic also reports that the club have stayed within the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules by selling assets, to themselves.They flogged the women’s team to another entity within their ownership group, raising £200m and magically booking a £198.7m profit. That cheeky move turned what would’ve been another big loss into a £128.4m pre-tax profit.BEST FREE BETS AND BETTING SIGN UP OFFERSBefore that, they sold two hotels and a car park to a sister company, pulling in £76.5m in 2023 – just in time to help them pass that year’s PSR test.Most read in FootballAdd it all up, and Chelsea turned what could’ve been financial disaster into a £275.2m profit. Technically above board, cleverly within the rules.How Enzo Maresca can transform Chelsea to challenge for Premier League titleWhat the PSR sayThe Prem’s PSR rules are simple, clubs can’t lose more than £105m over three seasons, excluding certain deductions.Did Chelsea really need to sell the women’s team?Let’s assume the hotel sale was accepted in the 2023 accounts. That still left Chelsea with £281.8m in losses over the 2022–2024 PSR cycle-way beyond the £105m limit.However, deductions like depreciation on non-football assets £43.5m and £41.4m spent on the women’s team come off that total. Add in some leeway for community spending and other allowable costs, and suddenly it’s not such a huge gap.On paper, Chelsea are still in the green.But UEFA wont be that friendly. UEFA play by stricter rules.Their version of Financial Fair Play only allows for £68m in losses , and they frown upon sales to sister companies.That wipes away the £275m accounting trick, and leaves Chelsea on shaky ground.UEFA also limit player amortisation to five years – meaning that £100m man Moises Caicedo, who was signed on an eight-year deal, adds £7.5m more per year to the UEFA books.So, while Chelsea might be surviving the Premier League’s scrutiny, they’re in a much tighter spot when it comes to Europe.Where the wage bill stands ?Chelsea’s wage bill for 2023–24 was a whopping £338m, still the fourth-highest in the league, and just £2.2m down on 2021–22.In between, it peaked at £404m, one of only two English clubs ever to go above the £400m mark.That included payouts to Tuchel and Potter, plus their coaching crews. Pochettino’s exit added more.The club are also massive employers – admin staff rose from 646 to 773, making them the third-biggest employer in English football, just behind United and Liverpool.Despite a nine per cent revenue drop, the wage-to-turnover ratio improved slightly to 72 per cent, down from 79 per cent. Strip out Poch’s payoff, and it drops to 70 per cent — still only the 12th best in the league.What do Chelsea need badly to keep going?Read More on The SunChampions League football – urgently.Like many of England’s top clubs, Chelsea need the UEFA money to keep day-to-day losses in check. Without it, the creative accounting may not be enough to keep the lights on.Join SUN CLUB for the Chelsea Files every Tuesday plusin-depth coverage and exclusives from Stamford Bridge More

MYKHAILO MUDRYK has passed a lie detector test in a bid to clear his name as a drugs cheat, it is claimed.The troubled Chelsea star is currently suspended while awaiting a further result on a urine sample which tested positive for the banned substance meldonium.Mykhailo Mudryk has not played for Chelsea since NovemberCredit: APMudryk signed from Ukrainian side Shakhtar Donetsk two years ago and the CEO of his former club says the player underwent a Polygraph test organised by his lawyers.Sergei Palkin said: “I have spoken to Mudryk many times since this doping issue arose.”He doesn’t understand how it could have happened. He has no clue. No idea at all.“So his lawyers organised for him to take a lie detector test, which he passed. It will form part of the evidence showing he didn’t intentionally do anything wrong.READ MORE ON CHELSEA”Mudryk has been clear, it’s not his fault that he tested positive. We now need to find out how this has happened, and who did this. His lawyers are trying to find out.”Unknowingly taking banned substances is no defence and Mudryk faces a ban of up to four years.He has not played since November 28 last year when he scored for Chelsea against Germans Heidenheim in the Conference League.Traces of meldonium were discovered in a routine urine sample submitted while on international duty.Most read in FootballBEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UKPalkin admits his club is on Mudryk’s side because they are still owed money as part of the transfer deal which could rise to £88m with add ons but only if he plays regularly.Mudryk, 24, has disappeared from public view since news broke of him failing a drugs test. He has not been seen at Chelsea’s training ground for months.Chelsea star Mykhailo Mudryk facing FOUR YEAR ban after failing drugs testUkrainian football has been ravaged by the invasion of neighbours Russia in 2022, leaving many clubs in dire financial straits.Palkin told GiveMeSport: “There are still no results from the B-sample, so that remains open. Nobody knows what’s happened. I wish Mudryk all the best. He’s a top professional and a very good person. He should be protected.”Shakhtar also has a vested interest. There are bonuses from his move to Chelsea linked to his performances.“If he’s not playing, it causes problems for us because we could potentially lose €30m (£25m). So Shakhtar, Chelsea and Mudryk, we are in one boat. We all support Mudryk, and hope he is allowed to continue playing football soon.“Selling Mudryk to Chelsea was a crucial deal for us.“Without the Mudryk fee, I don’t understand how we would have settled many, many, many issues.”Join SUN CLUB for the Chelsea Files every Tuesday plusin-depth coverage and exclusives from Stamford BridgeHow long are drugs bans in football?By SunSport’s Joshua JonesMYKHAILO MUDRYK could be banned for up to four years after failing a drugs testBut what are the rules regarding drugs in football?There is a big difference between recreational drugs and performance-enhancing substances.Recreational drugs – such as cannabis, cocaine, heroin, LSD and MDMA – carry a six-month suspension.However, this ban can increase to up to two years if a drug is detected when a player is tested after a match.But performance-enhancing drugs carry a far more severe punishment.And crucially the alleged drug Mudryk tested positive for, meldonium, falls under that category.The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) code’s standard ban is four years.That is how long Paul Pogba was suspended for following his failed drugs test – although it was later reduced on appeal to 18 months by the Court of Arbitration for Sport.The FA follows the UK Anti-Doping code under the WADA authority so will follow their lead and procedures.Should Mudryk’s follow-up secondary ‘B’ sample also test positive, he is likely to be hit with at least an 18-month ban but it could be as high as four years.The only person in football currently banned on the UKAD sanctions list for anti-doping rule violations is Craig Campbell.The former Scottish striker was banned for four years in December 2022 after being convicted of dealing cocaine.  More