FFP charges? | Page 105 | Vital Football

FFP charges?

Pope John XXIII said:
Toms, we didn't cheat.

This whole thing is not about cheating. Everton didn't cheat, Chelsea haven't cheated, Man City didn't cheat.

Breaking a rule and cheating are very different things and it's very unfair for you to conflate the two.

We got the financials wrong, clearly. We can disagree with the rule, we can argue it's unjust but we didn't do enough to comply with the rule. But we did not cheat
Click to expand...
Pope what about continuing to spend in full knowledge that we were in severe danger of breaching the rules. How much did we spend in that year-are you trying to tell me that we couldnt build an ok squad by spending 35 m less?
 
toms said:
The club is deflecting from its breach of the rules
Click to expand...
You voted and supported a man who broke international agreements he signed Toms, as well as lying to the Queen.

This new found morality does not become you.

The club accepted a breach of the rules in January and has gained 2 points back for doing so and not contesting it. We copped to it essentially.

The statement does not dispute the breach. It criticises the extent of the punishment and, particularly, the way the Premier League have treated us.

The club talks about the tone and content of the PL's submission to the commission and their demands for a totally disproportionate 8 points.

Unless you have seen that submission from the PL, you can't really argue that the club are wrong to criticise it. Clearly they feel that it is hostile and discriminatory in it's tone and content; something reflected in how we've been treated on the pitch as well
 
toms said:
Basta look at Luton. Are you trying to tell me that we couldnt have reached Luton's standard and met the rules?
Click to expand...
Luton are not very good at all. They have benefited from some good luck, some astonishing referee decisions and a lot of good will.

You can say the same about Burnley and Sheffield United.

The difference is that all three came up with far better permanent squads than we did, and all three had either parachute payments or had been fighting for promotion together for at least a couple of years
 
jbacsta said:
Not making many friends are we? Having previously called out the refereeing body we have now said we think the League itself is bent. Don't know where this is going to end to be honest. The media will be all over this by tomorrow morning and we will be public enemy number one. For what it's worth though I agree with every fucking word.
Click to expand...
I agree the club & fans are feeling a bit miffed at the moment and we would probably all like to rage at the PL and may well have some justification. However whether it is wise or not I have my doubts. Sometimes it is better to bite your tongue & bide your time until an opportunity to strike back presents itself because it will at some point.

If we manage to stay up the last thing we want is to made enemies of premier league management. There are ways & means of trying to change things for the better & I'm not sure this it.

I'm old & when I look back on some incidents in my life I would have been better keeping quiet & waiting instead of wading in which probably seemed a good idea at the time, but that soon passed once I had considered what had actually happened
 
jbacsta said:
You said that we have cheated. How Luton have conducted their affairs in comparison to ours is completely irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Luton were also a top end Championship side when they were promoted and didn't have a threadbare squad. Don't engage with the hypocrite Bacsta, it's not worth the hassle.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
You voted and supported a man who broke international agreements he signed Toms, as well as lying to the Queen.

This new found morality does not become you.

The club accepted a breach of the rules in January and has gained 2 points back for doing so and not contesting it. We copped to it essentially.

The statement does not dispute the breach. It criticises the extent of the punishment and, particularly, the way the Premier League have treated us.

The club talks about the tone and content of the PL's submission to the commission and their demands for a totally disproportionate 8 points.

Unless you have seen that submission from the PL, you can't really argue that the club are wrong to criticise it. Clearly they feel that it is hostile and discriminatory in it's tone and content; something reflected in how we've been treated on the pitch as well
Click to expand...
Were you present at Boris' conversation with the Queen? Plus this thread is not really a place for dissecting what you just said.

We were warned -we could have acted accordingly.
 
Last edited:
toms said:
Pope what about continuing to spend in full knowledge that we were in severe danger of breaching the rules. How much did we spend in that year-are you trying to tell me that we couldnt build an ok squad by spending 35 m less?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that is wrong.

But it is not cheating.

Cheating is moving the ball during a free kick. It is diving for a penalty. It is doing something where there is a victim and you are trying to hide it.

That isn't what we've done is it? Are you saying we cheated by buying Chris wood? Despite being allowed to lose £44m less than everyone else in the first place?
 
in_the_top_one said:
Mr Vrentzos says that “This was not an offer that was capable of acceptance as we knew that Atlético de Madrid had to sell a player before it could sign Player A”. The Premier League submitted that the offer could have been accepted on the conditional basis on which it was made. Entering into a conditional agreement during FY23 which would hopefully become unconditional very shortly after the year end would have been a “true near miss” and would have constituted “very powerful” mitigation.


It's weird because the PL themselves would see that as very powerful mitigation but the IC did not. There is a chink in the armour here and DiMarco could focus on that.


We argued that the end of the transfer window was a near miss. The IC say that waiting that long disrespects the rules and "flies in the face of mitigation".

"It could categorise a sale in the summer 2023 as a “near miss”, if it was truly near to the PSR deadline or at the first available reasonable opportunity proximate to the deadline."

They are pissed off that we didn't sell to Brentford early in the window, for any money that would have put us over the threshold.

Worse still, they say,
"In the eyes of the other clubs, had Forest sold Player A within the first few weeks following the PSR deadline, this would demonstrate a willingness to comply, so why not make the “miss” as near as it could? It may have cost Forest some money, but it would have demonstrated that Forest showed some respect for the Rules, its fellow clubs and the competition and reacted as soon as it could."

I think this is a fairly weak argument given that profit and sustainability is the literal name of the rules. Maybe we thought a miss was as good as a mile over the summer. But that argument is undermined a good bit by playing him in three games of the new season.
Click to expand...

the PL are full of shit- we basically got 3 more pts because apparently it was serious because we lost more than Everton. we have a ceiling 44m fooking lower!

so we get punished but no one else does and then they change the rules! the whole thing is a fix between the top 6.
 
toms said:
I consider it absolutely grotesque. We cheated . We knew we cheated . We kep on spending. Then we co-operated. We didnt accept Athleticos June 30th offer.

We are Forest Fans buts lets not look for crumbs of comfort on a day when the club's reputation has been absolutely tarnished possibly for good.

Somehow, we have to move on try and stay up and hope Marinakis sells up to people who know what they are doing
Click to expand...
Do you actually agree with the EPL that selling Johnson 3 months later to get a fair price deserves an eight point deduction?
 
FeNris said:
Luton were also a top end Championship side when they were promoted and didn't have a threadbare squad. Don't engage with the hypocrite Bacsta, it's not worth the hassle.
Click to expand...
So what FeNris? We spent what £180m including agents fees etc? Bacsta if you don't want to debate this, fine. Like all total lefties, FeNris wants to stifle it. His fooked up Avatar says it all
 
pebble said:
Do you actually agree with the EPL that selling Johnson 3 months later to get a fair price deserves an eight point deduction?
Click to expand...
I don't know why the Premier League went for an 8 point deduction-you'll have to ask them. But there was no deal for Johnson as at 30th June . Imo Marinakis gambled it all and arrogantly thought we'd have so many points we'd never go down this season so could ride a points deduction.
 
Last edited:
Oof, makes those praising Forest's reckless spending, management and statement look rather silly:

"The Commission does question the use of “unique” in Forest’s submissions. It was clear from Mr Brown’s report that 12 other clubs over the last 10 years of the Premier League (so 13including Forest) had been promoted without the benefit of a Parachute Payment the year before. They then joined a league where the other 17 teams all had a Premier League squad and, in the main, would have the benefit of the full £105m PSR Threshold. This is not a unique occurrence, rather it is something that has happened every season in the previous 10 seasons, on average"
 
Do we know what our losses were for the EPL season alone? just wondering how we stack up against the rest of the league for the 1 season
 
BlackGold said:
Oof, makes those praising Forest's reckless spending, management and statement look rather silly:

"The Commission does question the use of “unique” in Forest’s submissions. It was clear from Mr Brown’s report that 12 other clubs over the last 10 years of the Premier League (so 13including Forest) had been promoted without the benefit of a Parachute Payment the year before. They then joined a league where the other 17 teams all had a Premier League squad and, in the main, would have the benefit of the full £105m PSR Threshold. This is not a unique occurrence, rather it is something that has happened every season in the previous 10 seasons, on average"
Click to expand...

thats a fair point, however did any of those promoted clubs fail FFP and it either wasn't looked at or not punished?
 
toms said:
I don't know why the Premier League went for an 8 point deduction-you'll have to ask them. But there was no deal for Johnson as at 30th June . Imo Marinakis gambled it all and arrogantly thought we'd have so many points we'd never go down this season so could ride a points deduction.
Click to expand...
I asked if you agreed with it.
 
BlackGold said:
Oof, makes those praising Forest's reckless spending, management and statement look rather silly:

"The Commission does question the use of “unique” in Forest’s submissions. It was clear from Mr Brown’s report that 12 other clubs over the last 10 years of the Premier League (so 13including Forest) had been promoted without the benefit of a Parachute Payment the year before. They then joined a league where the other 17 teams all had a Premier League squad and, in the main, would have the benefit of the full £105m PSR Threshold. This is not a unique occurrence, rather it is something that has happened every season in the previous 10 seasons, on average"
Click to expand...

don't forget at the time we were being told we were being run inside PSR. not a single poster supported reckless spending. the system is a joke but the club has questions to answer as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.