HAPPY MONDAY!. FOREST, points deduction?

[ClaretTony]

The weasel in charge at Notts Forrest will try every trick in the book to get out of this one.

Had they accepted Brentford's £30 million offer for Brennan Johnson there would have been no case to answer. They waited a month and got double that from Spurs but went past the accounting period. I'm not sure there are many tricks there.

[Goliath]

We should br comfortably clear of relegation this season then, its really frustrating.

[distortiondave]

Regarding the johnson situation - it does seem a bit rum that Forest are being punished for breaching profit rules by selling a player for more money during the same transfer window.

[aggi]

Different panels might affect it but from what I can understand the Forest situation was nothing like as bad as Everton. And if they can persuade a panel to understand the Johnson situation then they could win their appeal.

Reference was made to the appropriate benchmark being the EFL deduction of six points though.

I can see the Johnson argument but it's a hard sell. It wasn't just a deal that needed a little bit of extra time to formalise, Johnson was still starting for Forest at the start of the season

[mickleoverclaret]

Regarding the johnson situation - it does seem a bit rum that Forest are being punished for breaching profit rules by selling a player for more money during the same transfer window.

They knew the rules though when they overspent in the season before.

[claretdj]

Game on now with this, I can see this going to the final day now of winner of our game stays up!

[Roosterbooster]

Had they accepted Brentford's £30 million offer for Brennan Johnson there would have been no case to answer. They waited a month and got double that from Spurs but went past the accounting period. I'm not sure there are many tricks there.

Amd as a result should face the consequences

[claretonthecoast1882]

Wolves knew they had to sell players this summer so they did so.

Forest knew they had to but decided they should wait and get more money, weak as p**s punishing them 4 points.

Newcastle could be thinking let's go spend 300m this summer and lose 4 points in a couple of years.

[Goody1975]

They knew the rules though when they overspent in the season before.

The issue with all of this is that the Premier League were seen as so toothless, that any possible sanctions were ignored.

They all knew the rules but chose not to adhere to them, nobody forced Everton to go on a massive spending spree, or Forest to sign thirty players last season.

[Wokingclaret]

Will be reduced to 2 points on a Emma Peel

[jlup1980]

Four points... what sort of deterrent is that!? And let's be honest here, it'll get reduced to 2 on appeal. The PL really is a shambles.

[agreenwood]

Don’t think it makes much difference to our plight, but it might mean Forest come to us on the last day needing a result to stay up.

If you’re a Forest or Everton fan you have to ask how you’ve exceeded the allowed spending limits and found yourself in annual relegation scraps.

[Billyblah]

I'm not sure I've seen a published report which fully explains/justifies Evertons ten point deduction (subsequently reduced to 6 pts) and now Forests deduction.
If it's just a few old dodderers discussing it over beer and sandwiches a few smart barristers will pick holes all over the place.
They have yet to discuss the charges against Man City. If there are as many charges as suggested, it could yet see them relegated.

[Mansfield claret]

I'm not sure I've seen a published report which fully explains/justifies Evertons ten point deduction (subsequently reduced to 6 pts) and now Forests deduction.
If it's just a few old dodderers discussing it over beer and sandwiches a few smart barristers will pick holes all over the place.
They have yet to discuss the charges against Man City. If there are as many charges as suggested, it could yet see them relegated.

City won't be relegated, but the reasons given will be interesting, many years still to run in that one

[It Is What It Is]

Four points... what sort of deterrent is that!? And let's be honest here, it'll get reduced to 2 on appeal. The PL really is a shambles.

I really can't see any appeal being successful. 4 points deduction is really the minimum the PL can give if only to save it's reputation and 4 points is a fair deterrent.
Anything less would be a mockery and the PL know that.

[The Shire Claret]

I really can't see any appeal being successful. 4 points deduction is really the minimum the PL can give if only to save it's reputation and 4 points is a fair deterrent.
Anything less would be a mockery and the PL know that.

I agree, but imagine if they went down - they will certainly throw the bus at it if that happens !

[Darthlaw]

4 points deduction is really the minimum the PL can give if only to save it's reputation

Anything less would be a mockery and the PL know that.

The PL's reputation is already a mockery. They categorically will not allow any sanctions to influence the end standings of the league due to the legal shitstorm that would follow.

[jlup1980]

The PL's reputation is already a mockery. They categorically will not allow any sanctions to influence the end standings of the league due to the legal shitstorm that would follow.

They're being lenient because they know the big cases are yet to come at City and Chelsea.

[Goody1975]

The PL's reputation is already a mockery. They categorically will not allow any sanctions to influence the end standings of the league due to the legal shitstorm that would follow.

Or their lack of sanctions to influence the end standings of the league as per previous seasons?

[Royboyclaret]

Different panels might affect it but from what I can understand the Forest situation was nothing like as bad as Everton. And if they can persuade a panel to understand the Johnson situation then they could win their appeal.

Let's be clear, the Forest breach was substantially worse than Everton......£34.5m compared to Everton's £19.4m.

All of which, makes the 4 point punishment, compared to Everton's initial 10 points, even harder to understand.

[123EasyasBFC]

Not done by the Premier League. It’s always an independent panel.

Who is it that selects the independent panel? And what qualifies them to make decisions?

Either way it’s a shambles for all clubs to be in false positions and potentially waiting until end of May to know which league you are going to be in

[Goody1975]

I'm not sure I've seen a published report which fully explains/justifies Evertons ten point deduction (subsequently reduced to 6 pts) and now Forests deduction.
If it's just a few old dodderers discussing it over beer and sandwiches a few smart barristers will pick holes all over the place.
They have yet to discuss the charges against Man City. If there are as many charges as suggested, it could yet see them relegated.

Some of the charges will be thrown out and they'll end up getting 30 points and just be put on the naughty step for a season.

[123EasyasBFC]

Glimmer of hope for us but out goal difference might also have a massive impact on the ending of the season

[Goody1975]

Glimmer of hope for us but out goal difference might also have a massive impact on the ending of the season

Like has been said on here a few times, we are probably going to have to get a win against a team we aren't expected to beat.

[Darthlaw]

Some of the charges will be thrown out and they'll end up getting 30 points and just be put on the naughty step for a season.

Exactly, although I foresee their punishment to be 12 points reduced to 8 on appeal. The only positive is that it will be confirmed that Man City's success is built upon financial doping.

[ClaretTony]

4 points deduction is really the minimum the PL can give if only to save it's reputation and 4 points is a fair deterrent.
Anything less would be a mockery and the PL know that.

It's not a PL decision and they have the same rights of appeal as do Forest.

[Goody1975]

Exactly, although I foresee their punishment to be 12 points reduced to 8 on appeal. The only positive is that it will be confirmed that Man City's success is built upon financial doping.

They'll probably argue it was their only way of muscling into the closed shop at the top of the table. The same characters are petrified that Newcastle can work their way in as well.

[morninbob]

It was a 6 point deduction reduced by 2 for pleading guilty and cooperation.

[Anonymous Claret]

There should be strict rules that if a club deliberately cheats such as Forest, Everton or potentially City the minimum punishment should be automatic relegation.
If Forest and Everton stay up because they have cheated it makes a complete mockery of the PSR rules.
I know that it has been pointed out several times that it is an independent panel and not the PL that makes the decision around the punishment but ultimately the PL should be held accountable.

[FCBurnley]

GAME ON

[Taffy on the wing]

A bit of a let down........thought the punishment would be greater.

[ClaretTony]

A bit of a let down........thought the punishment would be greater.

3 point deduction for a significant breach of the rules
3 point deduction for circumstances and scale of the admitted breach

Less 2 points for mitigation and cooperation

[123EasyasBFC]

Like has been said on here a few times, we are probably going to have to get a win against a team we aren't expected to beat.

A couple of positive results against teams not expected

[Anonymous Claret]

They'll probably argue it was their only way of muscling into the closed shop at the top of the table. The same characters are petrified that Newcastle can work their way in as well.

There is the tiniest part of me that has a little sympathy with City, Chelsea, Newcastle, Everton and Forest etc spending above their means to try and achieve success.
IMHO the FFP/PSR rules were not set up to protect clubs such as ourselves or others who abide by the rules they were introduced to protect the old guard of long established global commercial brands such as Man Utd, Liverpool, Real Madrid and AC Milan etc. Those clubs and others have massive worldwide fanbases that generate hundreds of millions through their global support giving them an unfair competitive edge over their rivals. They didn't like it when clubs such as Chelsea and City came on the scene and they have done everything possible to stop their success because ultimately it means less money for them.
However the rules were in place and Forest and Everton shouldn't have broken them and should have been severely punished for that instead of receiving a punishment that come the end of the season may only end up being tokenistic.

[Royboyclaret]

There are suggestions that Forest have been offered a softened penalty (reduced) if they do not appeal - which should affect the credibility of the Premier League to my mind. The stories also suggest Everton are going to get a similar offer

The reasons being offered for this are that it makes the run in more certain for all clubs involved in the relegation fight.

What it actually shows is that the Premier League is still playing catch-up on the issue of firm penalties for rule breaches - this is in large part not down to Premier League administration, but to the fact that Premier League members (the clubs) were not prepared to agree to such penalties

The evidence suggests, not for the first time, that Chester Perry may well have nailed it.

The next seven days, in that respect, will tell us all we need to know.

[ClaretFelix]

3 point deduction for a significant breach of the rules
3 point deduction for circumstances and scale of the admitted breach

Less 2 points for mitigation and cooperation

It's this that irks me the most.
Much like the criminal justice system, credit given for basically playing along, regardless of the original intent to commit the offences.
Truth of the matter is, if they hadn't been caught, they wouldn't exactly have come forward to admit anything.

[Vegas Claret]

Wolves knew they had to sell players this summer so they did so.

Forest knew they had to but decided they should wait and get more money, weak as p**s punishing them 4 points.

Newcastle could be thinking let's go spend 300m this summer and lose 4 points in a couple of years.

exactly

[alboclaret]

The evidence suggests, not for the first time, that Chester Perry may well have nailed it.

The next seven days, in that respect, will tell us all we need to know.

If this is correct and I can personally believe some sort of version like that then it surly plays into our legal teams hands if we were to sue, as noises have been made.

[Tricky Trevor]

How ironic that the two shocking VAR decisions against Forest and Luton made a 3 point difference to both individually but overall us -4 and both of them +1.
Different look to the table then.
Luton T. 21…-19
Burnley 21..-32
Forest. 20..-17
Sheff U. 14..-50

[Goody1975]

It's this that irks me the most.
Much like the criminal justice system, credit given for basically playing along, regardless of the original intent to commit the offences.
Truth of the matter is, if they hadn't been caught, they wouldn't exactly have come forward to admit anything.

Exactly, it should be a standard punishment but extras added on for not complying.

[kevinlasagne]

I have to say i have some sympathy for forest here - they've been mugged off by the fact the premier league accounting period isnt aligned with the transfer window. I cant think of a good reason why the rules are like this.
In this case its led to a situation where forest should have sold Johnson for 35 mil instead of 47.5 mil, thereby staying within the rules but actually incurring bigger losses overall.
It also now occurs to me that this is a loophole that could be exploited by bigger clubs? If City etc wait till towards the end of the window to make all their big money signings then they're spreading losses out to the next season even though they're still bringing players in for that season right?

[elwaclaret]

Think the Premier league table needs a two new columns… current financial deductions and potential appealed deductions.

To give the fans a chance of knowing where the club is in the league. Complete farce.

[morninbob]

I have to say i have some sympathy for forest here - they've been mugged off by the fact the premier league accounting period isnt aligned with the transfer window. I cant think of a good reason why the rules are like this.
In this case its led to a situation where forest should have sold Johnson for 35 mil instead of 47.5 mil, thereby staying within the rules but actually incurring bigger losses overall.
It also now occurs to me that this is a loophole that could be exploited by bigger clubs? If City etc wait till towards the end of the window to make all their big money signings then they're spreading losses out to the next season even though they're still bringing players in for that season right?

They were over by 34.5m.

[dougcollins]

I'm still not convinced that staying up is the best thing that can happen to us.

Not that I think we will.

[CoolClaret]

If it stays at 4 I genuinely think we can do it - will be a ginormous ask but this news should galvanise the lads... we literally have nothing to lose.

[ClaretTony]

Statement from Nottingham Forest




Nottingham Forest is extremely disappointed with the decision of the Commission to impose a sanction on the Club of four points, to be applied with immediate effect.

Notwithstanding our disappointment, we thank the Commission for agreeing to deal with this matter on an expedited basis. The Club considers it to be essential for the integrity of the league to have charges resolved in the season in which they are issued.

We were extremely dismayed by the tone and content of the Premier League’s submissions before the Commission.

After months of engagement with the Premier League, and exceptional cooperation throughout, this was unexpected and has harmed the trust and confidence we had in the Premier League.

That the Premier League sought a sanction of eight points as a starting point was utterly disproportionate when compared to the nine points that their own rules prescribe for insolvency.

We were also surprised that the Premier League gave no consideration at all to the unique circumstances of the Club and its mitigation. In circumstances where this approach is followed by future PSR commissions, it would make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for newly promoted clubs without parachute payments to compete, thus undermining the integrity and competitiveness of the Premier League.

Whilst the Premier League may have called into question the Club’s business plan, the Club maintains that it responsibly balanced compliance with PSR with important investment into the squad to give us the ability to compete in the league for the first time in over 20 years.

Even after the Club had missed the PSR reporting deadline, it still took steps to ensure Brennan Johnson was sold before the end of the transfer window. That was a clear demonstration of our respect and support for PSR.

The Commission's decision raises issues of concern for all aspirant clubs. The player transfer market is a highly specialised trading environment that cannot be compared to the sale of normal products and services.

There will be occasions when a player transfer cannot be completed in the first half of a transfer window and can only be completed at the end of that window. This should not be a reason for the condemnation of a club. For this not to be recognised by the Commission or the Premier League should be a matter of extreme concern for all fans of our national game.

Of wider concern for all aspirant clubs is the disturbing effect this decision will have on the operation of the player trading model. This is the only model by which clubs outside of the small group at the very top end of the Premier League can realistically advance up the football pyramid.

The rationale of the Commission is that clubs should only invest after they have realised a profit on their player development. This reasoning destroys mobility in the football pyramid and the effect of the decision will be to drastically reduce the room for manoeuvre for all such clubs, leading to the stagnation of our national game.

We believe that the high levels of cooperation the Club has shown during this process, and which are confirmed and recorded in the Commission's decision, were not reciprocated by the Premier League.

[Rileybobs]

It’s heart-warming that Nottingham Forest have such a concern for the welfare and future of our national game.

[kevinlasagne]

They were over by 34.5m.

yes so if they had sold Johsnson in June for 35 million they would have had losses of around 60 mil for the 3 year period (1 mil below the max allowed).
But instead they sold 2 months later for a greater amount and as such have made a smaller loss during those same 3 years (around 48 mil).
The current system has actually punished them for making smaller losses, this is whats bothering me. I think if something similar happened to us we'd definitely expect the club to appeal.

[Cirrus_Minor]

yes so if they had sold Johsnson in June for 35 million they would have had losses of around 60 mil for the 3 year period (1 mil below the max allowed).
But instead they sold 2 months later for a greater amount and as such have made a smaller loss during those same 3 years (around 48 mil).
The current system has actually punished them for making smaller losses, this is whats bothering me. I think if something similar happened to us we'd definitely expect the club to appeal.

Maybe it is 4 points because of this.

[DAVETHEVICAR]

Points deduction imo are pointless otherwise Manchester City Chelsea Spurs WHU would all be playing in League 2
There is no way on earth that when City’s case comes to a conclusion that City will be deducted points
The billionaire City owners as well as buying big names with big fees and wages have spent millions providing secure jobs around the Stadium for the community