Forest- possible points deduction

[Ginger Chimp]

Definitely could've signed a decent striker on loan in January. Given the precedent set by the Everton and Forest rulings, we'd have got what, a couple of points at most? A small price to pay compared to that of forcing Fraser to play week-in week-out.

We’re Wolves.

14 points, minimum.



(Beaten to it by @JamesWolves )

 

[Jefe]

We’re Wolves. 14 points, minimum.

Doubled on appeal.

 

[YouGottaRaulWithIt]

4 points too many

Four points is nowhere near enough. Where is the deterrent. The Premier league are worse at regulating than OFWAT.

 

[RosehillWolf]

What a joke. What’s the point of doing what we did if 4 measly points is the “ punishment “

 

[old wittonian]

Absolute cop out.

 

[djmikeydickens]

£34.5m over for 4pts. A £34.5m striker will get you those points back easily. Joke punishment.

 

[Wolf316]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1769735189347844148

 

[DanishWolf]

4 points..
And we couldn't even loan a striker in January

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Haven't read through all this tbh so apologies if I'm making the same point. The Prem have set a precedent now so whatever Everton did is worth 6 points and whatever Forest did is worth 4 points. We now have enough info to produce a table of overspending and the points which will be deducted. So if say £18 mil overspend equates to 6pts and £12 mil equates to 4 pts, £3 mil therefore equates to 1 point. I know this is too simplified and, of course, it won't work like this , but the precedent has been set so Clubs should in future have some idea of their punishment if they break the rules. Surely now Everton will have some idea of their 2nd pts deduction?

 

[Ned]

This one leaves a sour taste.

 

[Ginger Chimp]

Haven't read through all this tbh so apologies if I'm making the same point. The Prem have set a precedent now so whatever Everton did is worth 6 points and whatever Forest did is worth 4 points. We now have enough info to produce a table of overspending and the points which will be deducted. So if say £18 mil overspend equates to 6pts and £12 mil equates to 4 pts, £3 mil therefore equates to 1 point. I know this is too simplified and, of course, it won't work like this , but the precedent has been set so Clubs should in future have some idea of their punishment if they break the rules. Surely now Everton will have some idea of their 2nd pts deduction?

Way too logical.

 

[Starsky]

"The best league in the World."

 

[Jefe]

What a joke. What’s the point of doing what we did if 4 measly points is the “ punishment “

Worse, it will be reduced to 3 or even 2 on appeal. Everton will probably only end up with 8-10 after appeals, for their two seasons of ****-taking. No one at Wolves has a crystal ball of course and you can understand our circumspection, but increasingly it seems both our Summer and January transfer strategies have aged poorly.

 

[Wonder Boyo]

Four points is nowhere near enough. Where is the deterrent. The Premier league are worse at regulating than OFWAT.

Agree with your sentiment but the Premier League didn't decide the points deduction, it was decided by an independent commission. The Premier League just provided them with the details of the offence. I reckon they've gone soft in order to avoid another successful appeal.

 

[Sedgley Gold N Black]

They seem to have been given two points back for not kicking up a fuss quite as much as Everton did?!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Agree with your sentiment but the Premier League didn't decide the points deduction, it was decided by an independent commission. The Premier League just provided them with the details of the offence. I reckon they've gone soft in order to avoid another successful appeal.

I think the problem is that the appeal has now set a benchmark of 6 points for the kind of breach Everton had in the prior periods assessed. Forest spent like mad, but to be fair had they sold Johnson earlier in the summer, they’d have not breached. The fact they did eventually sell him for a higher fee the same summer suggests an intention to operate roughly within the restrictions in the long term, and that would have to be taken into account as mitigation.

Everton by contrast did not seriously try to cut their spending until the owners backers couldn’t fund it any more when war broke out in Ukraine, and Usmanov was sanctioned. I suspect they will also only get 4 points this time, but not because of good intentions, but because the PL will recognise that part of the period assessed has already been punished through the previous 6 point deduction, and this is part of Everton’s defence against a further punishment.

 

[Rabid Wolf]

Agree with your sentiment but the Premier League didn't decide the points deduction, it was decided by an independent commission. The Premier League just provided them with the details of the offence. I reckon they've gone soft in order to avoid another successful appeal.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1769758281734439021

 

[Ewok vs Wolf]

Shambles

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Haven't read through all this tbh so apologies if I'm making the same point. The Prem have set a precedent now so whatever Everton did is worth 6 points and whatever Forest did is worth 4 points. We now have enough info to produce a table of overspending and the points which will be deducted. So if say £18 mil overspend equates to 6pts and £12 mil equates to 4 pts, £3 mil therefore equates to 1 point. I know this is too simplified and, of course, it won't work like this , but the precedent has been set so Clubs should in future have some idea of their punishment if they break the rules. Surely now Everton will have some idea of their 2nd pts deduction?

I'd love to know what the precedent is.

Everton breached the spending by £19.5m and got 6 points (in the end). Forest breached it by £34.5m and got 4.

It's almost like they just make it up as they go along.

 

[sedgwolf1980]

I'd love to know what the precedent is.

Everton breached the spending by £19.5m and got 6 points (in the end). Forest breached it by £34.5m and got 4.

It's almost like they just make it up as they go along.

Yes but Forest admitted they mudered someone so seem to have been charged with involuntary man slaughter, is about the long and short of it.

‘exceptional co-operation’ lol, what an absolute shambles.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Yes but Forest admitted they mudered someone so seem to have been charged with involuntary man slaughter, is about the long and short of it.

‘exceptional co-operation’ lol, what an absolute shambles.

Yes, I think that's about right, let off 2 points for a guilty plea. Both clubs fined 6 points for a breach (3) and the scale (3 - even though Forest was much bigger) but Forest let off 2 for saying fair cop, Everton tried to turn their £19.5m into about £7m.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Has a precedent been set, or will different rules be set for any future cases? I must admit I don’t have a clue how these punishments are decided, maybe someone much wiser than me could explain.

 

[djmikeydickens]

Newcastle and their Sheikh likes this.

 

[rincewind]

Has a precedent been set, or will different rules be set for any future cases? I must admit I don’t have a clue how these punishments are decided, maybe someone much wiser than me could explain.

Rules are probably changing completely next season.

 

[JadeWolf]

What planet are they on?! They turned down £55m in June to try and get more money, then sold him for £45m.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Has a precedent been set, or will different rules be set for any future cases? I must admit I don’t have a clue how these punishments are decided, maybe someone much wiser than me could explain.

Think the Ben Jacobs tweet in the post above is the best we have.

So Everton could actually manage to get 1 point. 3 for a breach, none extra if it's not very big and 2 off for being honest about it!

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

View attachment 41256

What planet are they on?! They turned down £55m in June to try and get more money, then sold him for £45m.

That means they got offered £42.7m and asked for £55.6m doesn't it - counter offer is a confusing phrase to use!

 

[Olivergoldblack]

Its like in fantasy football when you need to make more than one transfer and you wonder if its worth taking the 4 point hit.

Just need jeff to borrow the company credit card and overspend by 100m, get our plea in early, appeal the original decision and take the 6 point hit. But its OK Gary would have us comfortable in the champions league spaces so won't change anything.

 

[Minimalist]

The Johnson issue is a ridiculous defence.
The accounting date is one thing that is clear in all these rules. Also what if no bigger bid or in deed any bid at all came in later in the window? What if Johnson had got injured…..

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

The Johnson issue is a ridiculous defence.
The accounting date is one thing that is clear in all these rules. Also what if no bigger bid or in deed any bid at all came in later in the window? What if Johnson had got injured…..

Can't believe Sarabia didn't nip out 20 minutes after the final whistle on Saturday and grab us an equaliser.

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

I'd love to know what the precedent is.

Everton breached the spending by £19.5m and got 6 points (in the end). Forest breached it by £34.5m and got 4.

It's almost like they just make it up as they go along.

Very good point! Tbh I had no idea what either Club's breaches were but I assumed Everton's was bigger than Forest's? Perhaps the bigger the breach the smaller the points deduction?! It's sounds as ****ed up as the introduction and running of VAR.

 

[greco wolf]

Also they got two points for good behaviour. So spend **** loads. Then admit it straight away and help EPL work out what you’ve done. Good behaviour =2 points less.

It’s a ****ing farce

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Has a precedent been set, or will different rules be set for any future cases? I must admit I don’t have a clue how these punishments are decided, maybe someone much wiser than me could explain.

The further up the league you are the smaller the deduction. Had we fallen foul of the regs because we are in the top ten our points deduction would only have been 1 point!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

That means they got offered £42.7m and asked for £55.6m doesn't it - counter offer is a confusing phrase to use!

It does, but this information suggests their holding out only yielded a small improvement in the fee, and possibly that will be nullified by finishing in a lower position in the league following their deduction. Of course if it results in their relegation (unlikely) then it really was a disastrous decision!

 

[Thank you Sir Jack]

Thank goodness (and Cunha, Lemina, GON and others) that we aren't involved in a relegation scrap. Imagine our fate depending upon the punishment for others, the appeal, the appeal against the appeal and so on.
As the sheriff in "No country for Old Men" says, "if it ain't a mess, it'll sure do until the mess gets here".

 

[ombyman]

Its like in fantasy football when you need to make more than one transfer and you wonder if its worth taking the 4 point hit.

Just need jeff to borrow the company credit card and overspend by 100m, get our plea in early, appeal the original decision and take the 6 point hit. But its OK Gary would have us comfortable in the champions league spaces so won't change anything.

It makes me think could a club even announce a breach BEFORE it happens?!

We are going to sign x for £xm, this will mean we default by £xm, so we expect a vastly or none existent penalty?!?

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Also they got two points for good behaviour. So spend **** loads. Then admit it straight away and help EPL work out what you’ve done. Good behaviour =2 points less.

It’s a ****ing farce

Whistleblowers can escape eye watering fines and jail time if they rat on coconspirators first, even if they were themselves active members and beneficiaries of the cartel. It’s a ploy designed to encourage companies to whistleblow on cartels that might otherwise remain secret. Forest are not whistleblowers, but showing intent to stay within the spending limits, albeit by ignoring the financial reporting deadline, is a reasonable basis for a more lenient punishment. I’m saying this while not actually liking Forest!

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Nottingham Forest are expected to appeal, so going by the Everton situation, their points deduction will be reduced.

 

[WickedWolfie]

That’s a ridiculous penalty no deterrent whatsoever and a smack in the teeth for those that follow the rules

It appears that the cheeky sods are going to appeal the four point deduction. I seriously hope that it is increased!

 

[WickedWolfie]

I'd love to know what the precedent is.

Everton breached the spending by £19.5m and got 6 points (in the end). Forest breached it by £34.5m and got 4.

It's almost like they just make it up as they go along.

Everton breached despite ongoing active engagement by the EPL though.