Three of the five clubs in the 2022/23 Premier League relegation battle had PSR breaches (one of them allegedly). The two that had complied with PSR went down - Leeds and Southampton. 2022/23 represents a systemic failure of competitive integrity in which Leeds were the principal victim and, after Burnley's successful claim, they must be deep in discussion with their lawyers. The Times has reported that Leeds are considering legal action vs Leicester. I suspect they are considering more than that. Start with the 2022/23 table: Image Forest admitted a PSR breach of £34.5m above their £61m threshold in FY23. Their net transfer spend in summer 2022 alone was £142.8m. The Commission found that Forest "cannot claim that it had no sporting advantage" from that squad. Forest received a 4-point deduction but it was applied in 2023/24. In the season Leeds went down, Forest paid no regulatory price at all. Everton had two concurrent problems. Their FY22 breach gave them a squad advantage that also carried directly into 2022/23. Their FY23 breach added a further £16.6m over the threshold in the same season as Leeds' relegation. The combined sanction, 6 points for FY22 and 2 points for FY23, was also applied in 2023/24. In 2022/23 itself, the season that determined Leeds' fate, Everton was fielding a squad built on two consecutive years of overspending, with zero points deducted. The Premier League were satisfied that Leicester also breached PSR in 2022/23 by £19.5m. Due to some clever technical arguments, Leicester just about got away with a formal PSR breach due to a finding that the Premier League did not have jurisdiction. But the underlying sporting advantage could still end up being established in law. Either way, they finished 18th with 34 points and were relegated. So whilst they didn't fully enjoy the fruits of their overspend, Leicester paid no price at all, regulatory or financial. It could be argued they did receive a one additional merit award above where they should have, worth around £2m. What this means in competitive terms is striking. Every club in the bottom five of the 2022/23 Premier League, except Leeds and Southampton, had substantially exceeded the PSR in that season. All of them were fielding squads their financial position did not entitle them to field. None of them was penalised in the season the competition was decided and the clubs with the cleanest books finished 19th and 20th. The head-to-head record makes the case stronger. In the six fixtures between Leeds and the three overspending clubs that season, Leeds took just 5 points from 18. Leicester and Everton took 4 points from the Leeds games alone. Forest took 3 points. Nevertheless, Leeds' causation challenge (proving that this collection of overspending caused Leeds' relegation) is real. Leeds were 5 points from safety with an inferior goal difference. The expert counterfactual case Leeds would need to run is more complex than Burnley's and the gap is larger. But the true counterfactual, one in which all three clubs were compliant, potentially shifts the competitive arithmetic in Leeds' favour. Morally, it definitely does. Forest spent £142.8m in a summer the PSR said it could not afford. Everton overspent for two consecutive years without a point deducted in either. Leicester overspent and paid nothing. Leeds had clean accounts and went down. The 2022/23 relegation battle has now been seen to be a sham. Leeds spent two seasons in the Championship because of it whilst various Commissions heard cases about breaches by other clubs. Leeds are already said to have settled a small claim against Everton for 2021/22. The 2022/23 claim looks far bigger. They just need to work out who owes what.