Article by Sky Sports:

POINTS DEDUCTION IMMINENT?

Birmingham City unhappy at being singled out by EFL with potential 12-point deduction.

It is understood Birmingham will tell a Disciplinary Commission in the next fortnight that they are being treated like 'guinea pigs' and should not be singled out for harsh treatment, after breaching the EFL's new financial rules.

Neither side is commenting at present, but SSN have been told the EFL is pushing for a 12-point deduction for what they feel have been repeated breaches of their laws.

In the Championship table, a 12-point deduction would immediately move Birmingham from eighth place, five points off the play-offs, to 18th, eight points above the relegation zone.

The punishment will be the first under the League's new Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules that were introduced at the start of the 2016/17 season, and so would be seen as a landmark ruling, and one that will set a precedent for any future punishments for other clubs who fall foul of the EFL's rules.

As a result, Birmingham's sanction is likely to be an initial six-points deduction for exceeding the £39m allowable losses over a three-year period, with an additional points deduction for "aggravating factors". This could mean reducing Blues' total by up to six more points.

That would mean the EFL would establish a precedent for the smaller penalty, which would be used as a standard for any similar punishment in the future.

It is thought Birmingham's hierarchy feel they are being made an example of, when other clubs have faced much more lenient settlements, and feel they are already being hamstrung by draconian EFL restrictions. For example, Birmingham remain under a transfer embargo, so they cannot negotiate a new contract for captain Michael Morrison, whose current deal expires in the summer.

SSN has learned that Birmingham's accounts show the club spent more than double its total income on players' wages for the 12 months up to June 2018. It had a total income for that financial year of £18.8m, according to the Price of Football website. The club spent £38m on wages in that same year which was 202 percent of their total income.

Whilst this does not directly breach EFL rules, which state a Championship club cannot lose more than £39m over any three-year period, the overall figures show Birmingham lost around £37.5m in a single year, and displays what the EFL believes has been a blatant disregard for the principles of sustainability.

Birmingham had previously agreed to comply with a business plan, agreed with the EFL, designed to move the club to compliance with the Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) rules.

Whilst the EFL will recommend an appropriate sanction, based on the guidelines previously agreed by the EFL Board, the ultimate decision will be taken by a three-person Disciplinary Commission. That is made up of a professional accountant, one representative acting for the EFL, and another representing Birmingham.

SSN understands the aggravating factors that are being taken into consideration by the EFL include the purchase of Kristian Pedersen in June for more than £2m, when Birmingham were under a "soft embargo" where all major financial issues had to be agreed in advance by the EFL.

Birmingham are also accused with allegedly misleading football authorities over the club's plans to reduce their debts.

More Murdoch nonsense, close this thread down.

.......

This has been coming for some time - the authorities in this country have been tightening up on FFP (backed by supporter groups and public/political opinion after a raft of clubs just bailing themselves out with administration and leaving local businesses, people and HMRC deeply out of pocket. they are further emboldened by the new leaders within UEFA.

It will be interesting to see if the final judgement is swayed by the apparent refusal to do business in Jan with Che Adams

Talking to some Blues fans down here this is mainly down to the agreed spending plan being, to all intent and purpose, a complete fabrication. As part of the arrangement, for instance, they say that Birmingham City had promised that they would cut their wage budget by at least 25% and then actually spent more than they had been doing before the deal.

Sorry for the fans in one way. They have no control over the dodgy people who bought the club nor the even more dodgy people it was then sold on to. However, as usual in all these cases, they were happy enough to downplay the question marks about the owners as long as they could see money being spent.

Should have sold their player to us!

Has anybody got a link to all cases where a club has been deducted points due to FFP?

FactualFrank wrote:Has anybody got a link to all cases where a club has been deducted points due to FFP?

Here

Frank this is the first under the Profit and Sustainability rules (won't be the last) and if they learn from FFP will use this to set the tone - it is telling that clubs are definitely cutting the cloth more to the rules across the board - Wolves look like being the last to get away with a large spend - though they were very clever with it.

This season all the crazy clubs (Leeds, Forest, Derby, Villa even Boro) have been more restrictive in their approach financially and if Stoke and West Brom don't achieve promotion this season watch them cut back and/or sell.

FactualFrank wrote:Has anybody got a link to all cases where a club has been deducted points due to FFP?

I said during all the hooha when it was being discussed on here as FFP was proposed then introduced that it would be a few years before any serious action took place by the authorities. Clubs needed time to realise that this was a long term stricture and so wrist slaps were given at first. Punishments have been getting tougher though and it was only a matter of time before a major penalty was sought.

As has been pointed out earlier, the majority of clubs have now restricted their spending plans so as to comply with FFP. This means that those few who don't even try to comply will become much more obvious and a bigger target. Even with the 3 year rolling targets minor transgressions will still happen, of course, but one would hope they are dealt with in a reasonably minor manner unlike the blatant cheats.

Are there any other clubs who are, say, posting losses exceeding 25 mil over the last two seasons? Surely there are some others coming close to 39 million quid losses over the next year?
Or like a few have said, are most of the rest now complying? Genuine question!

This article is from the end of last season and n particularly highlights the issues at Villa and how Wolves got away with it - it also has a table from the previous seasons financial results showing the profit/loss for the year - 3 of the 4 with biggest loss won promotion (still not sure how brighton got away with it over consecutive years)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... wages.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Does the 12 point deduction mean Blackburn move up one place?

They ought to be properly punished by having Owen Coyle imposed as manager

Because if they had punished Brighton they would have been racist.

Chester Perry wrote:This article is from the end of last season and n particularly highlights the issues at Villa and how Wolves got away with it - it also has a table from the previous seasons financial results showing the profit/loss for the year - 3 of the 4 with biggest loss won promotion (still not sure how brighton got away with it over consecutive years)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... wages.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Absolutely, Birmingham looking like an easy target here.

Looks like the Birmingham City case will be next week and they are starting to fret about it

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... ommission/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Chester Perry wrote:This article is from the end of last season and n particularly highlights the issues at Villa and how Wolves got away with it - it also has a table from the previous seasons financial results showing the profit/loss for the year - 3 of the 4 with biggest loss won promotion (still not sure how brighton got away with it over consecutive years)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... wages.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looking at that table the stand outs are

QPR have finally found a way to stop leaking money

Did Norwich store some dry powder to throw at this season, or are they succeeding on a shoe string

How did Forrest manage to spend so much money, to be so bad

Norwich is about player sales and a suspect a final fling now parachutes have gone - they can stand to lose (if they choose that route) over £50m this season and still avoid FFP

https://twitter.com/swissramble/status/ ... 61?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perhaps we can get that chap cheap, in advance!

IanMcL wrote:Perhaps we can get that chap cheap, in advance!

If you mean Che at Birmingham, the fact they refused to sell him is being used by the EFL/FFP as proof Birmingham are willingly breaking the rules.
Selling him would've shown an intent by the club to get their finances in order etc.

Exactly! At the time, they thought they were going to mount a challenge. Not now! Pre-contract for next season perhaps....if legal. Then they could say they are doing their bit!

Appears that the hearing was yesterday - we await the verdict with interest

https://www.football365.com/news/birmin ... a-spending" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Brum could well get the 12 point deduction; the full range of penalties is 3 to 12 but they seem to have made a serious breach of the rules. Minus 12 points would put them in trouble, a fair bit above the bottom two (Ipswich & Bolton) but in competition with about 4 others to avoid that 3rd relegation spot.
No surprise to see the lovable 'arry involved in the financial decline; not that he has to over-push himself into these situations, people seem happy to invite him in.

They should only deduct the points this season if it sends them down. If they would be safe with the points deduction let them start next season on -12

I think the deduction will be this season unless (unlikely) they get relegated naturally without the deduction- then it applies next season. I recall this is what happened to Southampton at the end of that season where we got a draw at St Marys late in a Championship season and sent them down "naturally" (and their fans got a bit stroppy about that at the end of the game).

LeadBelly wrote:I think the deduction will be this season unless (unlikely) they get relegated naturally without the deduction- then it applies next season. I recall this is what happened to Southampton at the end of that season where we got a draw at St Marys late in a Championship season and sent them down "naturally" (and their fans got a bit stroppy about that at the end of the game).

Talking to a Brum fan at work it seems that they are going to get a 12 point deduction but that it won’t be ratified until the summer and will be applied from the start of next season.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:They should only deduct the points this season if it sends them down. If they would be safe with the points deduction let them start next season on -12

Clever thinking.

got to feel sorry for them after Rovers , QPR ,and many others never had points deducted

posted this on the Magic Money tree thread but it has as much relevance here

Interesting thoughts from Andy Holt re those that have lost out either by missing promotion or being relegated by those who have breached FFP - surprised it has not happened really given the potential income involved - can only think of Sheff Utd in the Tevez saga - not that it helped them really

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/ ... l-16000699" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

spoken before about him and his column in the Telegraph and his twitter account really pulls no punches

https://twitter.com/andyhholt?lang=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As we await the verdict from the EFL - Harry Redknapp has got in early and denied all responsibility for the mess at Birmingham City - t wasn't me I tell yer guv

behind a paywall at the Telegraph - so here goes

Harry Redknapp has defended his role in the huge spending spree which has left Birmingham City facing a potential 12-point deduction.
Redknapp has broken cover and claimed he was never in control over player signings and recruitment during his brief spell at the Championship club, insisting he cannot be blamed for the financial crisis.

While Redknapp was in charge at St. Andrew’s, Birmingham signed 14 players in the summer before the start of the 2017/18 season which led to a significant increase in wages.

Though he managed to keep the club up on the final day the season before, he was sacked early in the campaign after six straight defeats.
Redknapp and his predecessor Gianfranco Zola have since been targeted by some Birmingham supporters for the club’s financial plight, after recent accounts revealed losses of £37.5million in the 12 months to the end of June 2018.

Birmingham are facing punishment by the English Football League over breaching profitability and sustainability rules, with the club bracing themselves for a deduction of up to 12 points which would plunge them into a relegation battle.

But Redknapp has revealed he was never warned about the club breaking rules and said he had no involvement in transfers. “It’s surely down to the people who run the club, like the chief executive and the chairman, or whoever, to know if we’ve got any money to spend,” he told The Daily Telegraph. “I didn’t know anything about Financial Fair Play. I was never warned by anyone at the football club that there was going to be a problem with that.

“There were three lads from Brentford that came in [Jota, Harlee Dean and Maxime Colin] – they were all good players but they weren’t on my shopping list. “I’d never even see any of them play, they were brought in by other people above my head. “We bought in Isaac Vassell for £1m [from Luton Town], and he will be worth massive money in my opinion. He was an absolute bargain, but I can’t even take credit for that because he was nothing to do with me, to be truthful.

“I don’t think any of the signings were mine. I was taking John Ruddy on a free transfer from Norwich and instead they brought in David Stockdale from Brighton. The director of football [Jeff Vetere] wasn’t brought in by me either.”

Birmingham were punished with a transfer embargo last summer for exceeding the permitted losses of £39m in a three-year period, and manager Garry Monk has been forced to operate under a business plan agreed with the EFL.

The club is owned by Trillion Trophy Asia, a sports holding company based in Hong Kong, with daily operations at the club led by Xuandong Ren, the chief executive.

Club officials and the EFL appeared before a disciplinary commission on Monday, and the panel are expected to deliver a verdict within the next ten days. Birmingham’s sanctions are set to be announced before their game at West Bromwich Albion a week on Friday. A 12-points deduction would drag them towards the bottom three, only two points above Rotherham who are currently 22nd in the table.

“Of course I’d be disappointed if they got points deducted,” said Redknapp. “Birmingham is a smashing club and I enjoyed my time there. The fans were fantastic. “I was only in there for 13 games and keeping them up on the last day of the season at Bristol City was a massive moment. I’ll never forget that afternoon. “All of the players that were brought in have turned out to be very good. Every one of them is worth every penny that was paid for them. They wouldn’t lose any money on them as a group, that’s for sure.”

Norwich appointed a German Manager

Sounds like Arry is just regurgitating the same excuse from his other jobs.

Not his fault blah blah blah

Sounds like the owners had a plan!

Immediate 9 point deduction according to Sky.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47667742" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Leeds got 15 not hard enough to deter I feel and will certainly go to appeal and get watered down I expect - calculated value so they are unlikely to be relegated which would trigger a massive legal case by City

also includes transfer embargo for the summer window

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/20 ... ing-rules/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This was reported today about Rovers on the BBC.

“Championship club Blackburn Rovers have reported a £16.8m net loss for their 2017-18 League One promotion season.

The Lancashire side spent 187% of their £9m turnover on wages - which fell by 24% - with owners Venky's injecting £14m to keep the club afloat.

In all, Blackburn's Indian owners are owed £108m in loans, having invested a further £147m in shares since buying the then Premier League club in 2010.”

Am I reading that right? Venkys have put £253m into them??

As it happens, a 9 point deduction to BCFC will probably have no significant effect.
They are already too far from a play-off place and a 9pt deduction will leave them on 41, a fair bit of breathing space from the 3rd relegation spot (assuming Ipswich & Notlob are doomed). Brum have lost 4 in a row but below them are Rotherham on 36, Reading 37, Milwall 37, Wigan 39.
In all probability, the deduction will just mean a fall from upper mid-table to lower mid-table- big deal, especially with no fines/transfer embargoes.

Have I read it right? You run the club badly with the debts etc they have and at the end of it, you get a 9 point deduction, to effectively stay mid table, and transfer embargo is lifted to carry on running the club badly?

RammyClaret61 wrote:This was reported today about Rovers on the BBC.

“Championship club Blackburn Rovers have reported a £16.8m net loss for their 2017-18 League One promotion season.

The Lancashire side spent 187% of their £9m turnover on wages - which fell by 24% - with owners Venky's injecting £14m to keep the club afloat.

In all, Blackburn's Indian owners are owed £108m in loans, having invested a further £147m in shares since buying the then Premier League club in 2010.”

Am I reading that right? Venkys have put £253m into them??

http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... =2&t=37755" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

...something we'll never have to worry about!

tarkys_ears wrote:...something we'll never have to worry about!

wouldn't be so sure - things are ok for now but can swiftly change for any number of reasons

RammyClaret61 wrote:This was reported today about Rovers on the BBC.

“Championship club Blackburn Rovers have reported a £16.8m net loss for their 2017-18 League One promotion season.

The Lancashire side spent 187% of their £9m turnover on wages - which fell by 24% - with owners Venky's injecting £14m to keep the club afloat.

In all, Blackburn's Indian owners are owed £108m in loans, having invested a further £147m in shares since buying the then Premier League club in 2010.”

Am I reading that right? Venkys have put £253m into them??

That's what I'm seeing, but the last figures I saw showed rovers debt to Venkys at approx £190 million, but that was a couple of seasons ago.

for those seeking to try and understand what has led to all this at Brum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyeFnWt ... e=youtu.be" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What I don't get about the Venkys getting involved down Deadwood is what they're getting out of it.
(Apart from a snowball in the mush).
I know they're mega rich, but it's still a fair wedge.

Unless the kudos of owning an English footy club has
increased their sales somewhat.

got to believe that it is all a matter of pride Electro as nothing else adds up - they were not aware of relegation when they bought the club and now I believe they want to get back there before letting go

claretburns wrote:Have I read it right? You run the club badly with the debts etc they have and at the end of it, you get a 9 point deduction, to effectively stay mid table, and transfer embargo is lifted to carry on running the club badly?

Spot on. Harvey and the league have come up trumps again. No fine, no embargo and a lower points deduction to help them avoid relegation.

Chester Perry wrote:got to believe that it is all a matter of pride Electro as nothing else adds up - they were not aware of relegation when they bought the club and now I believe they want to get back there before letting go

That's not going to happen any time soon. The squad they have now is nowhere near good enough to even reach the play offs. Their main striker Danny Graham is 33 so hasn't many more seasons in him, I can see Dack moving on in the next year or so as he appears to have some potential and someone will take a chance on him. They haven't got much more than that and can't afford to buy better. So it looks like the Venkys are in it for the long haul.

Dack has proper wobbled in recent months.

Looks a shadow of what he was

How are Rovers not getting done as well then?