Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) PL generally seem weak as water. They should in such a case have hammered the point about recklessness. In the Appeal they should hammer that point if possible. As I said above the Football League actually have Appealed multiple cases in recent years when they were not happy with the outcome. They got aspects of the Sheffield Wednesday one a bit wrong ie the bad faith bit but.. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) Well I had more sympathy with Nottingham Forest vs Everton due to the sheer size etc but the Nottingham Forest Chair or the Supporters Trust ie Organisations who should know better, reportedly said on SSN that their breach was only there for 2 months?? I expect it from regular fans maybe but Chair of a Supporters Trust should know better. Or worse knows better but is feeding it. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) Some of the takes in this... https://nffctrust.org/further-statement-and-analysis-of-profit-and-sustainability-rules/ There is a wider Regulatory debate to be had for another day but... It's basic Accounting!! End of May for e.g. Wolves, end of June for Nottingham Forest and end of July for e.g. Burnley. This is a fairly warped take. Especially the two months bit. They broke the Upper Loss limit to 2023 and possibly 2022- stayed up and won playoffs respectively. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretSam Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 17 hours ago, pillred said: Has anybody who's appealed ever NOT had their punishment cut? it seems to me that you get an 8-point deduction appeal, and immediately it's reduced to 4. I think it should be 'double or quits' - if you lose the appeal, the punishment is doubled; you win, it's all wiped. And there should be VAR on all decisions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) The 2 months is just bollocks. They had a deadline and a number to hit, they missed it therefore they failed. They had a generous 3 year target albeit some big EFL loss in 2021-22. It's sophistry or he doesn't fully get it.. either way Head of a Supporters Trust should really be better briefed. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W-S-M Seagull Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said: The Plea Deal thing maybe a myth or a supposition but the PL themselves should've Appealed I'd say. They had the right. What people maybe conflating is An Agreed Decision and a Plea Deal. You can't Appeal an Agreed Decision. The bizarre thing is Forest asked for either no points deduction or a minimum points deduction and they got what they essentially wanted. Another question I've got is that obviously they recieved a discount on the points deduction by 'pleading guilty' and by cooperating. But now they are appealing. Surely that discount they recieved for cooperating should now be void as they are no longer cooperating. There is now a real risk the season is going to end with a * against the final table whilst we await the outcome of their appeal. I'm not sure that's worthy of receiving a discount. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 17 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said: The bizarre thing is Forest asked for either no points deduction or a minimum points deduction and they got what they essentially wanted. Another question I've got is that obviously they recieved a discount on the points deduction by 'pleading guilty' and by cooperating. But now they are appealing. Surely that discount they recieved for cooperating should now be void as they are no longer cooperating. There is now a real risk the season is going to end with a * against the final table whilst we await the outcome of their appeal. I'm not sure that's worthy of receiving a discount. I assume they wanted lower. That guy from the Supporters Trust says they were in beach for 2 no the and this is a bizarre take. Either that or it is some form of protest v the Premier League as they were quite scathing about them in their Statement last week. The Premier League possibly could have Appealed themselves on the grounds of leniency? I believe that would be for the Appeal Panel/New Commission as to whether the -2 is now Void. Appealing isn't necessarily the same but the optics make it seem a farce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kit Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 Surely the precedence from Bristol Rovers only being in the bottom 2 for 30 minutes of a season and still being relegated from the football league should stand here. It is a about as strong an argument to say they shouldn't be punished for a breach because they were only in a breach for a little while whilst benefitting for the whole of the breach period with the services of all the players they overspent on. Fact is they were in breach at the exact time that the rules say they shouldn't be in breach. Are Forest suggesting that the sale proceeds should be taken out of their 2023/24 numbers so 2 more years down the line they have an extra £xm of headroom so they can get double the benefit from the sale as well if they want the punishment gone for 22/23. There is a lot of mental gymnastics that seems to be going on from reporters, fans and clubs arguing against these punishments. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) Mental gymnastics is the killer line here. There really are. At first Nottingham Forest seemed relatively willing to take it on the chin at least a lot more than Everton. Yeah they had the opportunity as all clubs in the PL at least do to maintain their position in thr League and yet to get in line by June 30th. They failed to do this. Think £10-15m, maybe £17.5m the headroom added from selling Johnson when they did. The bits I do find interesting are Covid losses and Promotion Bonuses.. 1) Where do Fulham stand if you don't exclude Promotion Bonuses from the calculations. Especially as they've yoyoed and Bournemouth too. 2) It seemed to decisively set a cap of £2.5m for 2021-22 numbers after further analysis and deliberation between the 2 Leagues. Nottingham Forest sought to argue £9-10m more in 2021-22 especially. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 (edited) Just thinking about it and tbis isn't club specific. A system whereby you can keep the advantage of an overspend during the season then scramble to compliance by end if June through Player Sales is mad. Or miss it and get docked months later and another unrelated side/sides benefit from the breach. Far better to have some forward planning like the Football League is moving towards and sanctions during the season where the 3 year threshold is crossed if at all possible.. Far worse if clubs win titles, get into Europe, Promotion/Relegation etc and benefit or lose out due to the retrospective angle. Edited March 26 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 26 Report Share Posted March 26 I'd be tempted to say automatic relegation for FFP breaches and for Administration would focus minds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 28 Report Share Posted March 28 (edited) Had they followed the PL formula, Nottingham Forest would have got 13 points according to this and Everton 9 or 10. https://www.footballinsider247.com/nottingham-forest-richard-masters-wanted-a-13-point-deduction-kieran-maguire/ Probably less the 2 for mitigation? I like the idea of 6 for the baseline plus 1 per £5m..it provides certainty. Either way the process lacks a floor, and appears to be in the lap of the Gods somewhat. Edited March 28 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.