Forest- possible points deduction

[Parkfieldswolf]

I’m a bit perplexed by the seemingly lenient punishment both Everton & Forest have received. We had to scramble in the summer to raise some serious money to avoid a similar fate but 6 and 4 points? It’s not likely to give some clubs sleepless nights is it if they want to break the rules too. Maybe there shouldn’t be any leeway ie if you lose £1million or £100million you receive a 15-20 points deduction.

 

[WickedWolfie]

I’m a bit perplexed by the seemingly lenient punishment both Everton & Forest have received. We had to scramble in the summer to raise some serious money to avoid a similar fate but 6 and 4 points? It’s not likely to give some clubs sleepless nights is it if they want to break the rules too. Maybe there shouldn’t be any leeway ie if you lose £1million or £100million you receive a 15-20 points deduction.

Problem with your last sentence is that everyone will breach by £100M if the punishment is the same....

 

[WW1963]

Newcastle and their Sheikh likes this.

Said so on the Everton thread. He could spend £5bn in the summer and then challenge any ruling against them with the beat lawyers in the world.

 

[Parkfieldswolf]

Problem with your last sentence is that everyone will breach by £100M if the punishment is the same....

Maybe but not many clubs could endure a 20 points deduction.

 

[WickedWolfie]

Maybe but not many clubs could endure a 20 points deduction.

Good luck on firstly getting all, or at a sufficient majority under PL rules, of the clubs to agree that and then the independent panel and if necessary the Court of Arbitration for Sport to enforce it.....

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

If anything it is going to encourage clubs to break the rules using the excuse of mitigating circumstances because a certain deal took too long… absolutely bs of the highest order

 

[WickedWolfie]

If anything it is going to encourage clubs to break the rules using the excuse of mitigating circumstances because a certain deal took too long… absolutely bs of the highest order

Of course the follow up excuse is we relied on a particular deal but it unexpectedly fell through...

 

[northnorfolkwolf]

Maybe but not many clubs could endure a 20 points deduction.

I said above there could now be a table of points deduction which equates to overspending. A point per million of overspend?

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

If anything it is going to encourage clubs to break the rules using the excuse of mitigating circumstances because a certain deal took too long… absolutely bs of the highest order

Well the same rules will presumably apply for this season, but the finances for that are already basically done. So it's effectively irrelevant now for clubs planning their spending. If anyone has broken the rules this season they'll be quietly smiling!

Hopefully for next season the new rules will be in place. What they need is live coverage, think they've got the player contracts, so they know the squad costs, they know most of the income.

Although bizarrely did I see it would be done by Calendar year? So hopefully by the end of Jan if anyone has broken the rules they can be fined for the same season.

 

[Axle]

This is ridiculous.

If we had bought a striker at £35m he would have been worth more than four points.

It doesn’t pay to play by the rules. No doubt on appeal it will be halved to two points and then they will stay up.

Sorry Nuno, love you and all but your club is horrible.

Brian Clough will be turning in his grave.

 

[BillyBoots]

Dear Jeff spend big this summer we can afford 4 points we've managed this season with a 7 point deduction

 

[Jefe]

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.

This also sets another horrible precedent among many. Clubs knowing they will breach, will informally agree with a buying club to defer the sale to the next accounting period, and saying to the League, "We couldn't realistically sell him before the cutoff date, because we were trying to work a fairer deal" which will see them get points knocked off their sentence, and give them a good chance to comply the following season.

 

[Superted]

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

So they've set a precedent that an early plea counts toward mitigation.

So if you warn the league in advance that you're going to breach does that count as an "early plea"?

I which case, if the earlier you plead the lower the punishment then that could mean the league giving you some points back.

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

I’ve scanned through the ruling, and it seems that they dismissed the Johnson sale as mitigation, mainly because they were warned (internally) that they would fail PSR unless they sold him in January. They ignored that and signed more players.
Subsequently again warned internally, that they needed to sell before end of June - but chose not to.

They were given 6 points. 3 as a starting point and 3 more in terms of size of breach (with the panel making reference to Everton’s appeal ruling).

They were then given a 2 points back as ‘ mitigation’ for early guilty plea, and cooperation.

So 4 points deduction overall.

I was just thinking about if they appeal. Should the panel accept that 6 points is the appropriate sanction - do they then lose their guilty plea and cooperation mitigation.
In my mind, you can’t plead guilty and claim cooperation (which the PL accept) and then appeal it - surely that is counterintuitive?

 

[kapitiwolf]

4 points deduction for Forest !!!! amounts to a slap on the wrist.Their fans must be avin a laughat their severe punishment LOL.

 

[Ginger Chimp]

I’ve scanned through the ruling, and it seems that they dismissed the Johnson sale as mitigation, mainly because they were warned (internally) that they would fail PSR unless they sold him in January. They ignored that and signed more players.
Subsequently again warned internally, that they needed to sell before end of June - but chose not to.

They were given 6 points. 3 as a starting point and 3 more in terms of size of breach (with the panel making reference to Everton’s appeal ruling).

They were then given a 2 points back as ‘ mitigation’ for early guilty plea, and cooperation.

So 4 points deduction overall.

I was just thinking about if they appeal. Should the panel accept that 6 points is the appropriate sanction - do they then lose their guilty plea and cooperation mitigation.
In my mind, you can’t plead guilty and claim cooperation (which the PL accept) and then appeal it - surely that is counterintuitive?

They won’t be appealing the decision (“guilty”), they’ll be appealing the size of the sanction.

 

[kidder_wolf_II]

They won’t be appealing the decision (“guilty”), they’ll be appealing the size of the sanction.

They have been let off massively.

Surely if they appeal they should be deducted an extra 2 points. Just for taking the ****.

 

[Starsky]

The likes of Newcastle must be tempted now...

Some of the worst leadership the sport has ever seen for me.

 

[Kebab Warrior]

The whole thing is a farce at this point. Go and buy Bellingham Jeff. **** it.

 

[Ginger Chimp]

They have been let off massively.

Surely if they appeal they should be deducted an extra 2 points. Just for taking the ****.

Oh I agree with that wholeheartedly.

 

[WWFC4EVA]

I'd be ****ing fuming if I was an Everton fan!!!
As bent as a nine bob note!!!

 

[Sussex Wolf]

They have been let off massively.

Surely if they appeal they should be deducted an extra 2 points. Just for taking the ****.

Well that would be fair, since 2 pts were deducted from the sanction for fessing up and cooperating. If they appeal, then reinstate the 2 pts for good behaviour.

 

[Parkfieldswolf]

Good luck on firstly getting all, or at a sufficient majority under PL rules, of the clubs to agree that and then the independent panel and if necessary the Court of Arbitration for Sport to enforce it.....

I know I’m in dream land. What’s happened to our game? There’s always been wealthier clubs I know that but I can’t recall there being such disparity back in the 80’s when I fell in love with the game. We had West Ham, Spurs, Utd, Watford, Liverpool, Cov, Wimbledon winning trophies now we got City, Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal and latterly Chelsea virtually guaranteed to scoop up all the trophies. Even Everton mid 80’s we’re winning things.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

I just dont get it
They just seem to be plucking numbers from a hat
If the precedent is 6 points then its 6 points
If they appeal there needs to be jeopardy say another 3 points if its dismissed
These need to go on a sliding scale say 3 points deducted for a £10mil and under breach rising by 3 points per £10mil after that
So a £30mil breach is 9 points

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I'd be ****ing fuming if I was an Everton fan!!!
As bent as a nine bob note!!!

Well of course they will, because that’s what their fans always do. But why? Everton were docked 10 points originally due to a mixture of the scale of the breach, and their alleged misdirection and intransigence - the opposite of Forest and their quick acceptance of breaking the rules. Everton’s alleged misdirection was rejected on appeal, and precedents of 6 pt deductions in the EFL applied to the underlying punishment for overspending. So they had their reduction reduced to 6 pts, and because they certainly didn’t fess up and cooperate, it wasn’t reduced further. Forest started at 6 pts, because of the Everton appeal, and it was reduced to 4 pts due to their cooperation.

Everton’s appeal is the reason why Forest’s punishment was only 4 pts.

 

[WickedWolfie]

I know I’m in dream land. What’s happened to our game? There’s always been wealthier clubs I know that but I can’t recall there being such disparity back in the 80’s when I fell in love with the game. We had West Ham, Spurs, Utd, Watford, Liverpool, Cov, Wimbledon winning trophies now we got City, Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal and latterly Chelsea virtually guaranteed to scoop up all the trophies. Even Everton mid 80’s we’re winning things.

I went to my first game in the late 60s. You had way more diversity of winners then. The PL was about greed, the Champions League similarly, and FFP is about maintaining the status quo.

 

[Sutton Wolf]

Well of course they will, because that’s what their fans always do. But why? Everton were docked 10 points originally due to a mixture of the scale of the breach, and their alleged misdirection and intransigence - the opposite of Forest and their quick acceptance of breaking the rules. Everton’s alleged misdirection was rejected on appeal, and precedents of 6 pt deductions in the EFL applied to the underlying punishment for overspending. So they had their reduction reduced to 6 pts, and because they certainly didn’t fess up and cooperate, it wasn’t reduced further. Forest started at 6 pts, because of the Everton appeal, and it was reduced to 4 pts due to their cooperation.

Everton’s appeal is the reason why Forest’s punishment was only 4 pts.

We’ve be screwed of potentially 7points which is more than either of them.

 

[WWFC4EVA]

Well of course they will, because that’s what their fans always do. But why? Everton were docked 10 points originally due to a mixture of the scale of the breach, and their alleged misdirection and intransigence - the opposite of Forest and their quick acceptance of breaking the rules. Everton’s alleged misdirection was rejected on appeal, and precedents of 6 pt deductions in the EFL applied to the underlying punishment for overspending. So they had their reduction reduced to 6 pts, and because they certainly didn’t fess up and cooperate, it wasn’t reduced further. Forest started at 6 pts, because of the Everton appeal, and it was reduced to 4 pts due to their cooperation.

Everton’s appeal is the reason why Forest’s punishment was only 4 pts.

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick then???
My understanding is that Forest's breach is larger than Everton’s initial one, however, their punishment appears more lenient.

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

They won’t be appealing the decision (“guilty”), they’ll be appealing the size of the sanction.

Yes in understand that, but my point being the decision clearly lays out where and how they came to the 6 points and also acceptance of mitigation, to give the 2 back.

like I said I find it a bit counterintuitive to argue the sanction given a) you’ve admitted it b) you want to be seen to be cooperative and c) it was quite clear that they knew they were going to fail it before they did.

From my POV to get away with 4 is quite a good result for them given the above

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick then???
My understanding is that Forest's breach is larger than Everton’s initial one, however, their punishment appears more lenient.

That’s what I was trying to explain. Everton’s initial deduction was 10 pts due to a mixture of the scale of the breach and their behaviour. The appeal dismissed the behaviour aspect of the punishment, and reduced the underlying punishment for the overspend. But Forest were still more cooperative than Everton, and unlike Everton, didn’t disagree with the assessment they broke the spending limit. So the Everton appeal capped the punishment for the breach, and Forest benefited their cooperation.

In my opinion it’s not fair, but I can see how they arrived at this outcome.

My guess is Everton will get a further 4 pt deduction from their second breach. The reduction from 6 pts being justified by the overlapping periods assessed rather than due to any good behaviour, which is already part of Everton’s defence.

 

[Black Country Wanderer]

I went to my first game in the late 60s. You had way more diversity of winners then. The PL was about greed, the Champions League similarly, and FFP is about maintaining the status quo.

I dont think a lot has changed really,obv in cups you get a bit more variation with one off situation
Top tier winners since 1960
Spurs 1
Ipswich 1
Forest 1
Villa 1
Blackburn 1
Leicester 1
Derby 2
Everton 3
Leeds 3
Chelsea 5
Arsenal 5
Man C 8
Liverpool 13
Man U 14

FA Cup
Ipswich 1
WBrom 1
Leeds 1
Leicester 1
Sunderland 1
Southampton 1
Coventry 1
Wimbledon 1
Portsmouth 1
Wigan 1
Everton 2
WHam 3
Man C 4
Spurs 6
Chelsea 8
ManU 8
Liverpool 8
Arsenal 11
Same teams dominate in League and cup generally except for odd seasons over 65 years

 

[Timberwolf]

4 points???? What a ****ing joke. How is that any deterrent? ****ers!

 

[Leominster_Wolf]

Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick then???
My understanding is that Forest's breach is larger than Everton’s initial one, however, their punishment appears more lenient.

yes it does seem to be, but as I see it the below is the 2 relevant sections by which the panel reached 6 points as the punishment.

Everton (at appeal) got 3 points for failing PSR and then an additional 3 points for the size of the breach AND providing ‘Incorrect’ information.
So the panel for Forest could not determine what points were for breach and what was for the incorrect info.

Therefore, as Forest have not provided incorrect info, they must have a higher portion attributed to the size of the breach.

It’s also interesting that the PL requested 8 points as Forests breach was 1.77 times Everton’s so 1.77 x3 = 5.31. Giving 3 automatically and additional 5 for size of the breach.

 

[SE10 Wolf]

We’ve be screwed of potentially 7points which is more than either of them.

You beat me to it. In fact it’s possible, should Forest appeal successfully, that we could have lost the same amount of points as these two admitted rule breakers combined, having also sold a lot of players and not spent much on recruitment to, erm, follow the rules.

 

[Eastern Wolf]

4 points is nothing. They are lowering the penalties so that they won’t need to clobber Man C and Chelsea by so much.
Now that it’s clear on how much is at stake, it may be worth gambling a little more to secure a couple of better players to improve your team.
I’ve a feeling that Forest will still stay up as will Everton.
So no punishment at all in the end. Where’s the justice in that for a club like Wolves who have taken major surgery to the team to comply with the rules? It’s shambolic and all utter nonsense. Felt like we’ve been robbed.

 

[CelebrityWolf]

I have a really really clever idea. Hear me out, but how about we just don't do any points deductions and clubs can spend what the hell they like given clubs in the same competition for 20+ years have spent whatever the hell they liked. Crazy right??

 

[WorcesterWanderer]

These "rules" are severely broken. They make zero sense. Certain clubs aren't getting punished or looked into at all. There's no point in having this system at all.

Sod it- I say we should go and buy everyone we want now! Joke.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

These "rules" are severely broken. They make zero sense. Certain clubs aren't getting punished or looked into at all. There's no point in having this system at all.

Sod it- I say we should go and buy everyone we want now! Joke.

If you break the rules it should be a set amount like 9 points no less no more same for each club jokers at the FA as usual

 

[Macman]

I know one thing… I desperately want them to be relegated now.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

If you break the rules it should be a set amount like 9 points no less no more same for each club jokers at the FA as usual

3 points for every 1 million over imo