Yup, it's a complete farce.
Forest docked 4 points for FFP breaches
- Thread starter SilentWitness
- Start date
I mean... you know why. It's a farce, to an extent, but it's a farce created by City - not by the PL or the independent commission. And it's got nothing to do with Forest or Everton's situations.
How is it a farce?
Bending!
Even if City get punished (which I think they will eventually) it’ll be much milder than they deserve because they have to balance optics and keeping rich people happy.
The general reaction to the punishment from Forest fans is that it's less than they were expecting and they seem happy to accept it and move on. A complete contrast to the reaction by Everton fans!
Last edited:
Not really in regards to shock/outrage. There wasn't anything to compare to for us aside from other charges for other cases like administration which was less than our original 10 points. Now for this charge there is something to compare it to (our original 10 points), yet Forest go ~31m over and we only go ~19m yet their charge is purely related to player trading...the nuances of how to handle this is a learning on the job process.
Let's also not pretend there isn't shock/outrage with how some criminal cases are dealt with in regards to lenient/harsher than expected sentencing.
It doesn't work to have different people deciding different interpretations of rules in this scenario.
4 points puts them below Luton town doesn't It? It all feels so arbitrary.
I can't help feeling that these punishments should ALL be dealt with pre season, and not in the middle of one. The one bonus being I expect this plays absolute chaos in the betting companies. feck them
I can't help feeling that these punishments should ALL be dealt with pre season, and not in the middle of one. The one bonus being I expect this plays absolute chaos in the betting companies. feck them
Interesting that the written reasons suggest Atletico Madrid offered £42.7m for Johnson on 30th June which was the financial deadline. Forest countered for £55.6m and discussions went no further.
Brentford then made 3 lower offers of £32.5m, £35m and £40m weeks after!
Brentford then made 3 lower offers of £32.5m, £35m and £40m weeks after!
Back in the race? @Dirty Schwein
Haha not quite my friend. They still have a much more favourable run in (we have Spurs, Arse, City away in the next four) and we also have like 10 players injured, playing with a RWB in LCB etc plus our captain and top scorer out for the season, both DMFs injured etc. It'll still take a lot of effort to avoid the drop.
Honest question (just curious)… would you back rules that said something like;
- Break the threshold AT ALL = 4 points
- Every £10m above the threshold = 1 point
I looked at a deal for a football club a while ago and it had a detailed cash flow and various assumptions (cup runs, promotion, play offs, players in/out, timings). All the stuff I’d expect to see for any club (actually any (well run) business) … a base cash flow, assumptions, milestones, triggers and Plan Bs/Cs/Ds if it goes wrong. It’s literally business basics
Last edited:
They’re never the games that decide 16th-20th though (.I.m.o)… home or away, points v those aren’t really expected. But you have Bournemouth, Fulham, Everton, Brentford, Wolves too.. a few at home.
Didn’t know about the injuries though, that might be a killer. That said, we played a right winger at LB and a 10 at CH yesterday
Good point! Hopefully we just get one of the DMFs back, that's been the biggest issue.They’re never the games that decide 16th-20th though (.I.m.o)… home or away, points v those aren’t really expected. But you have Bournemouth, Fulham, Everton, Brentford, Wolves too.. a few at home.
Didn’t know about the injuries though, that might be a killer. That said, we played a right winger at LB and a 10 at CH yesterday
Yes, as long as there is a clear cut system of how points are docked.
Sorry but the appeal IC didn’t say that at all. What they said was that the Commission was wrong when it said that Everton had been ” Less than Frank” indeed in the aggravating factors it , the appeal board , referred to the submission of “incorrect information “
The relevance was that a further charge would have had to be made by the PL (B15) but it wasn’t so the appeal concluded that the IC should not have even used the phrase let alone factored it in when determined the sanction
The Everton appeal basically has given a template which it seems that the Forest IC relied heavily on .in effect the entry point is 3 points deduction with a further 3 for a substantial breech ( north of £105 million) and that can be increased or decreased by way of mitigating factors and increased by aggravating factors .
Forest , it seems did nothing to delay the matter and had fully co operated even admitting the charge within days of it being issued.If you cast your mind back to the Everton case they initially denied .
Basically ever other of Forests claims to mitigation ( like Evertons ) were dismissed
It was clearly after his high quality coverage of the 2016 Euro riots in france
https://www.pscp.tv/w/1djGXwbMNXVKZ
If you break the threshold it is already an automatic 3 points.
Therefore 460 points deduction for City ?
The bottom 7 teams in the league have 4 wins total in the last 35 games...So any team putting any kind of run together can stay up... Including Forest, even with the points deduction.
I don' think the bottom teams in the league used to all be this bad?
I don' think the bottom teams in the league used to all be this bad?
I was just replying to Silents post about varying punishments… not trying to suggest I should set/change the PL/committee standards
I don't agree with punishments that take away points. I think it leaves room for corruption and fixing championships.
In defense of the EPL, other leagues, such as Serie A in Italy, do the same thing. But I think it enables corruption.
They could make alternative punishments, like forcing Forest to play more under-21s, for example.
In defense of the EPL, other leagues, such as Serie A in Italy, do the same thing. But I think it enables corruption.
They could make alternative punishments, like forcing Forest to play more under-21s, for example.
PL table is basically snakes and ladders; who’s next?
Looks like they have lived up to their Tricky Trees nickname
They will be awarded additional points for the inconvenience caused
Point deduction is the only way to get clubs to take notice. However I would have them start the next season they play in the PL with the deduction so that they know from the start what they need to do. I don’t think it’s fair to upset them at this stage of the season
In theory i like that idea because this will just change too many things for many teams during an ongoing season. But is that fair to the other teams? It could be that during this season Forest will be able to use a player that they could only get by breaking the rules. That player scores the goal that keeps them in the Premier League this year. Another club that didnt break the rules will relegate because of that goal by that player. Forest will get another year of PL money while that other club has to slog it out for atleast 46 matches in the Championship.
Its bizarre that their deduction is less than Evertons despite them being a lot more over the allowed losses than Everton were.
Because there isn't a clear cut rule which says you go over this limit you get this deduction, it's all based on recommendations. Hopefully the regulator introduces a rule or rules which changes this so it's fairer and reduces as much subjectivity as possible which I think is what Everton fans currently feel aggrieved by in each case.
It wouldnt suprise me if the FA exercised tgeir right of appeal as 4 seems too lenient, Newcastle might as well just forget FFP and go and spend a billion in the summer window if all they are going to get is a 4 point deduction which would hardly affect them.
To be fair it`s probably far down the pecking order with Mount back as possible cover for Bruno. I am however one of those with the opinion that as long as Bruno is our sole nr 10, as much as he contributes to our present form of play, we will struggle to truly dominate games the way Liverpool, City and Arsenal have been doing.
But why is subjectivity, notably with regards to cooperation with the authorities, a bad thing?
Absolutely all regulators work on that basis - BNPP got a 9bn USD fine 10 years back because they tried to obfuscate and hide things from the regulator, in the same way that companies with similar infringements got more lenient sanctions because of their cooperation.
It's absurd to think a system with "objective criteria" would be a better thing, it's a fallacy and from a practical view, it's impossible.
Because it's not just impacting Everton or Forest but it's impacting the other clubs who could be relegated, winning titles, getting into Europe, other financial deals etc etc. It means that you have consistent appeals and ongoing cases throughout seasons which go from 10 point deductions and then reduced to 6 points deductions etc., and a big cycle of sueing and arguing. If you have a cut and dry rule which states if you break this rule you get an -insert number here- point deduction, it makes everything a lot simpler and easier to navigate the follow on.
You could have people arguing that Forest didn't cooperate with authorities or the PL though since they knew that not selling Johnson before 30th June would be a problem and therefore knew they were likely to break rules yet did it anyway so not exactly acting in good faith, but yet we are then arguing they acted in good faith by admitting guilt of stuff and being up front about it. It's all just really weird and it's much simpler in footballing terms and for the leagues to reduce subjectivity as much as possible.
If you truly believe this to be the case, and believe this is a possibility, then there's really no point on carrying on discussing this, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I think they have to translate everything he says on Talksport too, which coincidently is also usually nonsense.
The timing isn't great by any means...no doubt Forrest will appeal and the season will be over in no time, leaving everyone at the bottom in the lurch.
There is something to be said for punishing teams from the start of the following season, or have a limit on the appeal timeframe or something.
There is something to be said for punishing teams from the start of the following season, or have a limit on the appeal timeframe or something.
Every town has its ups and downs, sometimes up outnumber the downs,
Not in Nottingham
Not in Nottingham
Sounds like they're gonna Rock the Boat