|
|
Post by londonranger on Mar 18, 2024 18:43:14 GMT
Facing points deduction which could see them relegated.
They have spent too much money according to FA rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on Mar 19, 2024 8:02:50 GMT
Total nonsense it should have been 12 points minimum . They effectively bought promotion and survival in the PL buying more players than we have signed free in the last 5 seasons which is saying something
As stated on BBC:
"Everton breached by £19.5 million = 10-point deduction but no sporting advantage found.
Forest breached by £34.5 milllion and bought lots of players = four-point deduction. Make it make sense."
"Charges to clubs breaking the financial rules should be automatic five points penalty. The severity of the rule breaks, then determines how many extra points the charged club accumulates. Forest and Everton charges seem to be played out in front of the world, yet we hear nothing of Manchester City. The authorities need to stick to their guns when dishing out punishment because what's the point in reducing punishment on appeal? They have to back their own decisions."
"The Premier League need to take a long hard look at it and say 'this is clearly not working.'
There must be a better system we can put in place to stop clubs overspending in the first place.
You're talking about lawyers deciding football matches or appeals, it's nonsense."
All I can say is can we have our fine back?
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Mar 19, 2024 10:08:02 GMT
It really is a joke. Relegations being decided by committees, appeals / lawyers reducing initial decisions. No consistency. Prem and EFL do not want to upset the wealthy clubs. Manchester City and Chelsea operating to different rules it seems. It is an insult to the fans who trot along to watch football. If Forest appeal a ridiculously light decision, it only makes an even bigger joke. I wonder how this one will play out... www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68602074 |
|
|
|
Post by hitmanrangers on Mar 19, 2024 11:42:42 GMT
Having read through the 52 page report, I had to laugh at some of the mitigating factors the executives of the club tried to explain why they breached the rules! Unbelievable how they could even put these arguments forward given their seniority in the business!!
- They wanted c£20m of one-off costs linked to promotion (i.e. - promotion bonuses paid to players/management team - performance related pay) to be excluded!!! WTF - that is a cost you bear to then reap the rewards of an enormous jump in revenue next year when in the Premier League. Following their logic, then they should have excluded the extra TV money from being in the Premier League!
- c£12m of COVID related costs to be excluded???
- They didn't sell Johnson in time to account for sale in 22/23 accounts - oh dear! That is non-sense and a smoke screen for the real issue - they purchased a whole new squad that they should have reeled back in.
- They don't feel a sporting advantage was realised??!! - you stay in the Premier League due to the large investment in player purchases (c£140M) + wages.
Their income jump from c£30m to over £150M and yet they still managed a material loss in first year of Premier League - unbelievable really when you chew through the numbers.
They knew there was an issue and likely breach before January 2023 and yet they still purchased more players and did not sell off any of their prized assets in that January transfer window because it would have disadvantaged them on the pitch and likely lead to relegation - again, a clear sporting advantage over their opponents gained through overspending.
Essentially the owners were unwilling to adopt the approach taken by Luton, and other clubs in previous seasons (e.g. - Norwich and Burnley) and live within their means/financial rules because they didn't want the immediate relegation - well tough. I agree, the rules need changing, which they are, but unfortunately you need to stick to them or suffer the consequences as they are doing now. I am sure Luton would have loved to spend over £100m on new players but they didn't because they can't afford to break the rules.
Remember, the rules state you can't make a large "loss" over 3 years to be considered "sustainable" - they are not asking for a profit or break even, teams can still "spend" c£35m/season more than their income to stay within the rules! Any other business permitting that loss would be bankrupt and executives out the door.
Anyhow, I expect an appeal but unlikely to be successful. 4 points feels about right to me as interesting this was after getting 2 points back due to their co-operation and speediness when dealing with the investigations - because they knew they were in the shite!
Luton and also Burnley have a chance now!
|
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on Mar 22, 2024 9:08:58 GMT
Now Leicester are under simultaneous investigations from the PL for their last 3 seasons in the PL and by the EFL for this season. In the PL they lost 92.5 million in the year ended May 2022 and 33.1 the season before which already takes them over the 105 million 3 year loss permitted by the PL. So far they have refused to publish their accounts to May 2023 but there is no way they made a profit of more than 20 million in a relegation season to keep them within the permitted losses.
So if they get promoted they will face action from the PL - probably a joke 3 point deduction and if they do not get promoted they face action from the EFL probably a 10k fine and told not to do it again.
The "punishment" being handed out to these clubs compared to the sums involved are ridiculously small and continue to show that the penalty we were hit with was to try to set an example (which failed) or just vengeance because we had rich owners who fought the case - just as Forest Everton and Leicester are doing now.
Meanwhile Leicester seem to be trying to claim that they cannot be touched by the PL as they are not a PL club and cannot be touched by the EFL as they have not completed a year in the Championship. Either way the cases will drag on past the end of this season and make another mockery of the whole process and even unjustly leave clubs in etc wrong league - remember Wycombe and Derby!. Of course Man City facing over 100 different charges and Chelsea carry on in their usual untouchable fashion with the authorities too scared to do what they should do. It would only take 2 or 3 years for those 2 clubs to work their way back up from League One or League Two but a few brown paper envelopes will make sure they never face that.
|
|
dan
Ian Holloway
Posts: 328 
|
Post by dan on Mar 22, 2024 19:49:12 GMT
I look at Forest being in Trouble because they have Gio Reyna and hardly play him.
Kid completely dominated last night. Maybe they can send him our way 😀
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on Mar 25, 2024 6:00:49 GMT
Going by this Man City & Chelsea should be out of business by seasons end.
|
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on Mar 26, 2024 9:29:41 GMT
and now Forest are appealing with the "not us gov, too many points deduction" arguments. Sad thing is the appeal should "if possible" be held no more than 5 days after the end of the PL season. So the clubs at the bottom face the possibility of not knowing who gets relegated until after the season has finished and not knowing what they need to do in their last few games - and then the decision will not be based on football but administrators opinions on finance. How do they get away with it - just as bad as Trump getting his way again in court yesterday. A penalty is a penalty - unless VAR gets involved  |
|
dan
Ian Holloway
Posts: 328
|
Post by dan on Mar 26, 2024 18:38:57 GMT
Trump’s issues are politically motivated to distract from the millions of dollars of “politically influenced” investments the Bidens got busted with in China and Ukraine.
They all are part of the same scam.
|
|
|
|
Post by harr on Mar 27, 2024 8:30:32 GMT
Can’t understand how so many of these clubs are getting away with so much, crazy.
No consistency whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Mar 27, 2024 9:17:47 GMT
It is the culture that has been developed by Sky / Sky Sports News / Transfer Deadline Day over many years.
Fans of all clubs are desperate for new blood - indeed we are all very grateful for the January 24 window.
But in Forest's case, it was clear to one and all that they were busting all records (even ours) with their outrageous acquisitions, buying far more players than they could include in the squad, players like Josh Bowler acquired and then loaned out to a Greek sister club etc.
SSN always rejoice in such extravagance, labelling less active promoted clubs as unambitious. This in turn adds pressure on owners to act equally irresponsibly. SSN's viewership and revenues highest days in the year. They have no interest in reporting that Forest (or whoever) are being stupid. Likewise, any penalty imposed is either unreasonable or worth challenging.
A market where the supporters' hunger for new blood, daft owners, overpaid players, controlling agents - all fueled by Sky's hysteria.
But not helped by stupid / inadequate rules, thresholds that have not been adjusted for inflation, incompetent EFL / Prem league management, and a desire to make the rich richer.
I watch with interest just how the Leicester situation will unfold. Having beaten the EFL legally once on FFP, the EFL want a rematch and now they have (correctly) been charged by the Prem. Quite confusing how any of this mess is possible - but then again just look at the clowns running our game. Or perhaps in the case of Chelsea and City, it is expensive lawyers who are controlling things.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Mar 28, 2024 11:38:22 GMT
A really sad stat of affairs for Enlgish footbal. Now we have to stay clean to avoid the drop.
|
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on Apr 9, 2024 8:52:52 GMT
The Pl is as big a joke as the EFL
Everton deducted 10 points for breaching the 3 year rule to 21/22 then given 4 points back on appeal. Now docked only 2 points for the identical but a repeat breach for the 3 years to 22/23 -. As a repeat offence how come they have a much smaller penalty for the same offence. Now that is going to appeal and likely will not be decided until after the season ends. If we had overspent by 16million I hate to think what would have happened but these boys walk away with a smile.
Meanwhile Forest are deducted 4 points but that is also going to appeal and possibly not decided until after the season ends. And who suffers? fans Football and especially Luton who are making a good honest fight but will have their fate decided by arbitration probably after the season ends.
Plus please do not tell me that Burnley and Sheff Utd did not breach any rules or that all the clubs in the Championship are within the rules- sorry pigs do not fly.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on Apr 9, 2024 10:01:09 GMT
The Pl is as big a joke as the EFL Everton deducted 10 points for breaching the 3 year rule to 21/22 then given 4 points back on appeal. Now docked only 2 points for the identical but a repeat breach for the 3 years to 22/23 -. As a repeat offence how come they have a much smaller penalty for the same offence. Now that is going to appeal and likely will not be decided until after the season ends. If we had overspent by 16million I hate to think what would have happened but these boys walk away with a smile. Meanwhile Forest are deducted 4 points but that is also going to appeal and possibly not decided until after the season ends. And who suffers? fans Football and especially Luton who are making a good honest fight but will have their fate decided by arbitration probably after the season ends. Plus please do not tell me that Burnley and Sheff Utd did not breach any rules or that all the clubs in the Championship are within the rules- sorry pigs do not fly. It is incredible how inept the whole governance is now. If our fine was to stop teams buying success - it has hardly discouraged Manchester City who are facing over 100 charges - and I suspect that the rules will be changed before any punishment is dished out. I have said it countless times before, this is not a difficult matter to govern: 1) Tighten club ownership rules - in particular third party ownership. They are currently unable to detect who the new purchaser is. Perhaps owners have to be domiciled in the UK. 2) Allow existing owners to inject unlimited equity. 3) Get clubs to sign off on the FFP limits, be it salary to income, maximum spend, maximum loans, player cap, and agree a standard rate card for FFP breaches, to be applied in the subsequent season. 4) The Prem and the EFL to agree on how clubs crossover though promotion and relegation, but in essence one system of governance, not two. 5) Define the circumstances of the appeals procedure. It should not be an automatic right, but based on specific criteria. Clubs currently get an allowance from co-operating with the procedure...it should all be audited and not a question of disclosure, but procedure. 6) Consult with EUFA & FIFA to get consistency. It is not just a joke in this country. Just my thoughts - it is currently a joke. |
|
