bobzy Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 46 minutes ago, The_Steve said: Mitigation was ‘we know we broke the rules but we wanted max profit on Brennan, honest’. Everton have every right to be mad about this. Hrmmmm… I don’t know. As I’ve said before, it depends what FFP/PSR are in place to achieve. Apparently it’s to prevent clubs going bust - if so, it’s entirely reasonable to say “we would’ve got £20m if we had to rush a sale, but instead we got £45m which is much better for the club”. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarnikjak Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 28 minutes ago, desensitized43 said: Reading Forests statement I agree with pretty much everything that say on PSR. The rules are absurd. The cut off date being before the end of the window is ridiculous and just means clubs have to choose between getting less money now or breaching the rules to get more value later. That can’t be in the spirit of the rules. It’s also unarguable that these rules are harming mobility within the football pyramid. That being said, 4 points seems a fair reflection and does take into account their mitigating circumstances around Brennan Johnson. They’ll moan and appeal because it’s risk free to them as the appeals panel won’t increase the deduction for a frivolous appeal so in that way you the statement about how they feel “disappointed and dismayed” is largely for show. They would have thought given what happened to Everton this would be the outcome (4-6 points) and I’d think they fancy their chances of getting 1 point more than Luton over the next 10 games. Well, the cut off date is dictated by your accounting period, so this is not an excuse. The rules are not fair, but they knew them well and still decided to break them...should have no complaints really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoelVilla Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 More proof that FFP is bullshit 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Can't believe how lightly they've got off. Everton getting -10 straight away was incredibly draconian and even going down to -6 is very harsh still I think when you see Forest's punishment. Ultimately FFP still mostly comes down to player trading. Not sure if this was considered but Brennan Johnson played in their 2-1 win over Sheffield United right at the start of the season when he should've been sold much earlier. The rules on this are way too vague and certainly need a re-write. Forest overall strategy is bizarre as what would've happened if Johnson had done his ACL in that game? Suddenly put Gibbs White on the market for 60m at the last minute? Edited March 18 by VillaChris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 hours ago, The_Steve said: Mitigation was ‘we know we broke the rules but we wanted max profit on Brennan, honest’. Everton have every right to be mad about this. What's worse is Everton did comply and sold Richarlison before 1st July 2022 when they could've done a Forest and held onto him into the August to win a few more points at start of that season and then sell him to Spurs on 31st August. I'm sure that mitigation was casually dismissed by the panel who heard that case in November so just like VAR and everything else in Football there's little consistency applied. Nothing to fear for Chelsea if they're charged anytime soon for FFP breaches anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 7 minutes ago, VillaChris said: The rules on this are way too vague and certainly need a re-write. The rules are so vague nobody knew what the punishment was for breaking them. That in itself tells you how bad they are. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 4 points isn’t much, but it could still easily be the difference between relegation or staying up Edited March 18 by mikeyp102 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAZZAM Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 27 minutes ago, mikeyp102 said: 4 points isn’t much, but it could still easily be the difference between relegation or staying up When they stay up by 1 point over Everton there's gonna be a one hell of a holy shit show. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 37 minutes ago, VillaChris said: What's worse is Everton did comply and sold Richarlison before 1st July 2022 when they could've done a Forest and held onto him into the August to win a few more points at start of that season and then sell him to Spurs on 31st August. I'm sure that mitigation was casually dismissed by the panel who heard that case in November so just like VAR and everything else in Football there's little consistency applied. Nothing to fear for Chelsea if they're charged anytime soon for FFP breaches anyway. Everton’s points deduction (already in place) was for the period before, wasn’t it? So not selling Richarlison. That’s for the next period… where they’ve failed again Edit: On no, that was the period in question. They must have been **** even with that transfer then. Edited March 18 by bobzy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 7 hours ago, Stevo985 said: Supposedly an appeal wouldn't be settled until after the season ends. So they could potentially be relegated, but then win an appeal and stay up. (Or vice versa I guess if it got increased) Don't know where you've heard that, but it isn't right, or if it is right it would be announced *right after* the season ended (I don't think this is likely). The reason I can say this with confidence is the Premier League hold their big meeting to ratify the next season's membership very shortly after the end of the season (I think it's the week following the playoff final). If you recall the urgent rush to get Chelsea sold, this was the deadline they were working to, and it still exists. EDIT: I should check more carefully, and it seems like you are mostly right: 'They can now appeal against the punishment with a backstop date for a decision five days after the end of the season. A further appeal (in “exceptional circumstances”) could take the whole process up to 8 June, with a final call on who actually gets relegated potentially delayed to that point.' from: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/mar/18/supporters-should-blame-club-owners-not-the-rules-for-points-deductions I assume 'backstop date' means 'that's the date it must be decided, but it could be decided before' which would be better for everyone. Would be a terrible look for the league if the final round of games still has this hanging over it. The Championship playoff final is May 27th, so I assume if June 8th is the backstop-to-the-backstop date the Premier League meeting must be right after that, but I don't understand what 'exceptional circumstances' could possibly mean. Edited March 19 by HanoiVillan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) “By the end of September 2022, it was clear that PSR was a real issue to Forest, yet it continued to acquire players in the January 2023 window.” Link The sheer arrogance of Forest. The deduction should be bigger tbh. What did they think would happen?! Edited March 19 by The_Steve 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted March 19 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19 I feel the PL were on the right track with FFP when they gave Everton a 10 points deduction. The punishment needs to have teeth if they want it to be taken seriously. The 4 points for Forest is a bit of a joke. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 (edited) Forest spent £20m in Jan 2023 knowing full well they were having serious problems meeting sustainability rules months earlier. Think they signed about 6 names that window - including some free signings. Should add that Forest knew in September 2022 they breached PSR rules by £6.9m Edited March 19 by The_Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, The_Steve said: Forest spent £20m in Jan 2023 knowing full well they were having serious problems meeting sustainability rules months earlier. Think they signed about 6 names that window - including some free signings. Should add that Forest knew in September 2022 they breached PSR rules by £6.9m Navas was probably on 200k a week alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, The_Steve said: “By the end of September 2022, it was clear that PSR was a real issue to Forest, yet it continued to acquire players in the January 2023 window.” Link The sheer arrogance of Forest. The deduction should be bigger tbh. What did they think would happen?! Of fleeting interest in that link, looking for mentions of us, I see that Forest were actively touting Johnson for sale and we were one of the parties they offered him to: '12.28 Forest was aware that Player A was in the process of changing agents (which was completed only on 4 July 2023), which made an early deal more difficult. However, Forest continued to seek out buyers for Player A in June 2023, engaging with Unique Sports Management (Player A’s new agents), Brentford, Spurs, Manchester United, Aston Villa, Manchester City, and Atlético. Forest submitted that by 30 June 2023, it had made every effort to generate a formal offer for Player A but none had been received at that stage that were capable of being completed in time.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted March 19 Moderator Share Posted March 19 How much trouble would Forest be in if they don't stay up? They have a huge wage bill, a bloated squad and a limited income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyjavfc Posted March 19 VT Supporter Share Posted March 19 Seems like Forest knew what they were doing and gambled that the PSR punishment would be worth the squad building that cheating would allow. Given they have only suffered to the tune of 4pts and they will probably stay up ahead of Luton I would say they were correct. If they get relegated though it will be a disaster. Bet they shit themselves when they saw Everton get 10pts initially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: How much trouble would Forest be in if they don't stay up? They have a huge wage bill, a bloated squad and a limited income. Huge trouble I'd say. A sale of Gibbs white would be immediate and even then you'd imagine they would be in a lot of bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 25 minutes ago, villa89 said: Huge trouble I'd say. A sale of Gibbs white would be immediate and even then you'd imagine they would be in a lot of bother. Would he get that many bids? They will be wanting at least what they paid and has not stood out that much in the Premier League. Not sure who would be even interested in him Spurs paid 40 million for Maddison who was better and more established Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post HKP90 Posted March 19 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted March 19 On 18/03/2024 at 18:18, bobzy said: Hrmmmm… I don’t know. As I’ve said before, it depends what FFP/PSR are in place to achieve. Apparently it’s to prevent clubs going bust - if so, it’s entirely reasonable to say “we would’ve got £20m if we had to rush a sale, but instead we got £45m which is much better for the club”. So FFP is in place to prevent clubs going bust, but the only teams to have been punished so far are those for whom relegation is a possibility, and if they are relegated, their finances will be in an almost terminal state? Regardless of the right or wrong of punishment with respect to the rules, FFP is either fundamentally flawed, or worse, actually there for another purpose- to protect the elite from any challengers. Until we see Man City punished, I will continue to argue that those rules are bullshit. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts