[Football] Forest docked 4 points FFP

Official Old Man said:

I've said it before and I'll bore you all by saying it again.
Chelsea have played a final and are back at Wembley for a cup semi.
If Brighton exceeded FFP and had a points deducted we'd already had the best season in our history and you cant take that away.
So does a small points deduction mean breaking the rules is worth it.
Answer YES.

Click to expand...

Tom Hark Preston Park said:

It's got everything to do with them

Click to expand...

Beanstalk said:

But we haven't broken FFP/PSR and we've had a better 3-year-period than either Forest or Everton.

Just because you can cheat, doesn't mean that the outcome will be more positive than those who don't.

And I'll add to this, I'd be fuming at the club if we'd just plunged into the relegation zone because we'd spent £20m on Chris Wood.

Click to expand...

hans kraay fan club said:

The 11 goals Chris Wood has scored this season, include:

- an 89th minute winner, in a 2-1 win over Sheffield United.
- both goals in a 2-2 draw at home to Luton.
- all THREE goals in a 3-1 win at Newcastle.
- Forest's only goal, in a 1-1 draw at Luton.

If his signing alone had cost them the 4 point deduction, it would have been well worth it.

(Which is why the penalty is absolute pointless bollocks).

Click to expand...

Giraffe said:

"Forest, who hired leading sports lawyer Nick de Marco to defend them, are thought to have based their case around the sale of Brennan Johnson to Tottenham Hotspur in September.

The move, worth more than £45m, took place after the accounting deadline but Forest argue selling Johnson at a later date allowed them to earn a higher fee than if they had sold him by 30 June."

So what? It's easy to use an isolated transfer as the reason they breached. They knew when the financial year end was they shouldn't have spent so much in the first place. If they wanted to spend they should have sold first. Pathetic attempt to justify it.

Click to expand...

Beanstalk said:

It's a good point. But what should the penalty be then? Go back and 8 points off of them for Wood? Well then really you'd have to replay the games in their entirety to be fair.

I don't like the giving them two back for being civil. That's rubbish. But I can't really see how else you do it?

Both Everton and Forest felt it should've just been a fine or a transfer ban. That would've been even more pointless.

Click to expand...

Beanstalk said:

But we haven't broken FFP/PSR and we've had a better 3-year-period than either Forest or Everton.

Just because you can cheat, doesn't mean that the outcome will be more positive than those who don't.

And I'll add to this, I'd be fuming at the club if we'd just plunged into the relegation zone because we'd spent £15m on Emmanuel Dennis, and £20m on Chris Wood.

Click to expand...

Beanstalk said:

Has it?

City and Chelsea's cases are considerably more complex and the allegations considerably more serious than just overspending. The only similarity is that the rule infringements fall under the same wider umbrella term (FFP/PSR). As far as I'm aware, neither of those clubs will face the same charges as Everton or Forest. (Chelsea may in the near future but not at the moment).

Click to expand...

schmunk said:

As an arcane comparison, Everton and Forest have failed to hand in their homework one week, and admitted upfront they hadn't done it (although 'they weren't feeling very well, and their pen ran out and the shop was shut').

Man City and Chelsea have handed in their homework every week this year, but on closer inspection it's never in their own handwriting, they're insisting that they've not cheated and their parents are backing them up.

Click to expand...

Harry Wilson's tackle said:

There needs to be an unequivocal and published set of tariffs for this. And a coherent rubric for decision making.

Instead they are making it up as they go along, changing the objectives, plucking tariffs out of thin air, basing the narrative on wafer-thin foundations that are easily challenged. All slogans, huff and puff, and no evident plan let alone end game. No idea what success should look like.

It all seems a bit 'Brexitty' to me.

Click to expand...

Littlemo said:

In the reports that they publish, have they explained how the points deductions are calculated? I think they did in Everton’s case, as the appeal rested on them throwing out the bit about not cooperating, but I guess it’s explained in there?

Click to expand...

Beanstalk said:

But we haven't broken FFP/PSR and we've had a better 3-year-period than either Forest or Everton.

Just because you can cheat, doesn't mean that the outcome will be more positive than those who don't.

And I'll add to this, I'd be fuming at the club if we'd just plunged into the relegation zone because we'd spent £15m on Emmanuel Dennis, and £20m on Chris Wood.

Click to expand...

Hiheidi said:

This is how they have broken it down.
View attachment 178967

Click to expand...

Easy 10 said:

Predictably this whole sorry saga is drowning in a sea of whataboutery.

The wider point is that breaches of FFP/PSR is now finally showing some TEETH, with actual shock-horror points deductions instead of slap-on-the-wrist fines - and this is what is now driving the outrage. That, and the fact that it is relatively unprecedented. Well guess what - they are now setting the precedents that will help in setting future tariffs for clubs breaching the rules. The rules, I might add, that EVERY CLUB signed up to.

You could argue that the points deductions have been too lenient, given that Forest and Everton have narrowly swerved the guillotine at the expense of other clubs who cut their cloth, and went down as a result. And I'm annoyed at the appeals process cutting the punishment. But at least this is a start.

If you are going to take the piss with spending, then as everyone has seen, you will now reap the consequences. Its already in the post for Chelsea when their incredible splurge is due for review. City have arseholed up the whole process with their lawyers for years, but I live in hope that they'll meet their Waterloo at some point.

Meantime, I'm liking seeing consequences. Its a mess, but it needed doing.

Click to expand...

Cheshire Cat said:

£10 million = 1 point?

Click to expand...

Guy Fawkes said:

I suspect it's lower than Everton's deduction as they took into account Forest's argument around the timing of the sale of Brennan Johnson to Spurs as mitigation, having showed how it was in their best interest to hold out for a few months to receive a far better price for the player, rather than to sell earlier to meet this deadline but receive a far lower fee in return.

Their argument was simply why should they be forced to sell early when it damages them financially, and if that (later) sale was taken into account, they would have met the criteria.

If clubs are forced to accept low fees in order to meet a deadline whilst negotiating with other clubs over the sale of their assets, then it hands the initiative to the buyer, who can use that as leverage to pay a lot less than an asset may be worth, punishing the selling club as they would be left with the dilemma of accepting an unrealistic, undervalued bid and passing, or getting a fair / true value for their asset but fail.

Click to expand...