FFP charges? | Page 131 | Vital Football

FFP charges?

chandos9 said:
Originally, having read the Panel's decision, I thought that Forest had misled the fans by saying that they had been in dialogue with the EPL. It is clear that, for instance, the claimed sale of Brennan Johnson to meet PSR ages later was not the result of any dialogue.

But where there might be something properly called communication is in relation to the submission of their accounts, and specifically, those parts of the accounts and claimed losses that were in compliance with EFL rules but only retrospectively, and some time after the primary underlying information had been supplied to the EPL, were rejected. In fact, I think that Forest might have a very good argument that they could not know that they were not in compliance with EPL rules when an entirely different approach was being taken to those Covid losses etc from that which had been APPROVED by the EFL.

If those are the grounds on which an appeal is lodged, then Forest do have a chance, and I think would certainly have a chance in the courts, were Mr Marinakis to take it there and be permitted to pursue it there ( bearing in mind the clubs agree to arbitration clauses etc when in their various leagues).
Click to expand...

I had the same journey and the same thoughts but feel even more sure listening to your good self.

you can see where the "infamy, infamy, they all have it in for me" comes from.
 
Almost a relief to see a few stories circulating today about Awoniyi being eyed up. If we can get what we paid for Taiwo we have to take it and find a striker who can play regularly. It's such a shame because he seems like a great bloke and he's a superb striker. We just can't carry someone so injury prone.
 
LynxRed said:
Almost a relief to see a few stories circulating today about Awoniyi being eyed up. If we can get what we paid for Taiwo we have to take it and find a striker who can play regularly. It's such a shame because he seems like a great bloke and he's a superb striker. We just can't carry someone so injury prone.
Click to expand...

I would be hoping for at least £30m, duck.
 
LynxRed said:
Almost a relief to see a few stories circulating today about Awoniyi being eyed up. If we can get what we paid for Taiwo we have to take it and find a striker who can play regularly. It's such a shame because he seems like a great bloke and he's a superb striker. We just can't carry someone so injury prone.
Click to expand...
We can get a lot more than we paid. He's a proven goalscorer. Fitness just needs dealing with by a better bunch of sports scientists than we've got
 
LynxRed said:
Almost a relief to see a few stories circulating today about Awoniyi being eyed up. If we can get what we paid for Taiwo we have to take it and find a striker who can play regularly. It's such a shame because he seems like a great bloke and he's a superb striker. We just can't carry someone so injury prone.
Click to expand...
Some folk reckon the auction starts at £35m...lol.
 
I have to wonder if we have playing strategically with our whole approach to the first hearing.

Lose a battle to win the war kind of thing, but I have little confidence that we (the club) are capable of thinking that far ahead.

Play our cards close whilst being as helpful as we can and hope that we get what we were asking for, which was a suspended points deduction. We can always appeal right?

However, the vultures at the EPL anxious that they are about to lose control of their golden egg laying goose, took their chance to stiff us to prove a point to the Govt. and the rest of the League. Now we go back, all guns blazing aiming to expose the whole sorry situation that is the EPL rules making process, for what it is. A cartel with no interest in allowing fair competition from upstart smaller clubs.

As good a conspiracy theory as I 've heard so far though :LOL:
 
Phatnovice said:
I have to wonder if we have playing strategically with our whole approach to the first hearing.

Lose a battle to win the war kind of thing, but I have little confidence that we (the club) are capable of thinking that far ahead.

Play our cards close whilst being as helpful as we can and hope that we get what we were asking for, which was a suspended points deduction. We can always appeal right?

However, the vultures at the EPL anxious that they are about to lose control of their golden egg laying goose, took their chance to stiff us to prove a point to the Govt. and the rest of the League. Now we go back, all guns blazing aiming to expose the whole sorry situation that is the EPL rules making process, for what it is. A cartel with no interest in allowing fair competition from upstart smaller clubs.

As good a conspiracy theory as I 've heard so far though :LOL:
Click to expand...

paz will be all over this...
 
In one podcast and discussion with RM, Garribaldi Red has managed to air what has been discussed on here for many weeks. SC and NEP got in many of RM’s points in a recent article. All these points need airing on national platforms to drive public opinion prior to appeal hearing. Football fans need to be aware of the facts not the version published so far. The Premiership League is a cartel. Any team getting promoted will find it difficult, without parachute payments impossible.

The recent 50 page document has many incorrect statements. It makes too many assumptions and bases some findings on here-say not fact.

I thought it interesting the Shef Utd, who spent very little in promotion season would receive points reduction if they remained in PL next season. The rules do not reflect the objectives of PSR or equal competition. This has to be aired at national level and get the Premier League Cartel to rethink its stance prior to new regulations.

Supporters of NFFC need to ensure these facts are heard not the misinformation that has been put out by national media and repeated verbatim by the IC.

The objective of PSR needs to be voiced.

The unfairness of the situation that promoted teams and imparticular promoted teams without parachute payment needs to be heard.

The exceptance of covid payments and bonuses by EFL being rejected by PL, a separate organisation being illegal.

Then worse, the Premier League announcing this in June only weeks prior to window closing and ffp balance sheets being filed, making it an impossibility to correct any understanding or implications.

The concept that Forest spent inappropriately or at a higher rate than is normal. The IC stated this in report. In fact allowing for inflation in wages and transfers Forest were comparable in expenditure to other promoted teams in the past, notably Fulham, Villa and Leeds. Non of those teams achieved promotion with such a thin squad of retained players. Nor was their expenditure penalised.

The report quoted the BJ sale and Forest choosing to wait till later in window. BJ was never going to sign for Brentford when bigger teams and bigger money was in the offering. The report also suggests Forest turned down a bid from Athletico. They didn’t. That bid was reliant upon selling another player. This sale never happened. All here say and rumour. Forest didn’t choose.

All these points, though known by Forest supporters, are new to football supporters nation wide. Even pundits appear blind to the facts of the case. They are still discussing the appeal decision date being after season end not the facts.

It needs to be heard and debated, held up to scrutiny and the PL held to account. Not continuing with this farce and malpractice. Let’s hear it for the Garribaldi. Shout it from the roof tops and every clarion, bugle and herald.
 
Phatnovice said:
I have to wonder if we have playing strategically with our whole approach to the first hearing.

Lose a battle to win the war kind of thing, but I have little confidence that we (the club) are capable of thinking that far ahead.

Play our cards close whilst being as helpful as we can and hope that we get what we were asking for, which was a suspended points deduction. We can always appeal right?

However, the vultures at the EPL anxious that they are about to lose control of their golden egg laying goose, took their chance to stiff us to prove a point to the Govt. and the rest of the League. Now we go back, all guns blazing aiming to expose the whole sorry situation that is the EPL rules making process, for what it is. A cartel with no interest in allowing fair competition from upstart smaller clubs.

As good a conspiracy theory as I 've heard so far though :LOL:
Click to expand...
He described the whole affair as a hatchet job, and it is increasingly looking that way.

It took until 2nd June to inform us that neither the Covid allowance or the Promotion Bonuses would not be accepted; effectively leaving 28 days to rectify the situation.

That implies we were being forced into a fire sale situation.

And guess what, a Club comes in with a lowball offer for our most saleable asset; its almost as if they were aware what was going to happen.

If one of the big Clubs had have done the same it definitely would have appeared conspiratorial.

I am now of the opinion that an appeal is just not enough; we need to come out fighting and stick a court order on both the PL and Dick Masters for breaching Competition Law, because its looking more like a cartel by each passing day
 
Polly 433 said:
In one podcast and discussion with RM, Garribaldi Red has managed to air what has been discussed on here for many weeks. SC and NEP got in many of RM’s points in a recent article. All these points need airing on national platforms to drive public opinion prior to appeal hearing. Football fans need to be aware of the facts not the version published so far. The Premiership League is a cartel. Any team getting promoted will find it difficult, without parachute payments impossible.

The recent 50 page document has many incorrect statements. It makes too many assumptions and bases some findings on here-say not fact.

I thought it interesting the Shef Utd, who spent very little in promotion season would receive points reduction if they remained in PL next season. The rules do not reflect the objectives of PSR or equal competition. This has to be aired at national level and get the Premier League Cartel to rethink its stance prior to new regulations.

Supporters of NFFC need to ensure these facts are heard not the misinformation that has been put out by national media and repeated verbatim by the IC.

The objective of PSR needs to be voiced.

The unfairness of the situation that promoted teams and imparticular promoted teams without parachute payment needs to be heard.

The exceptance of covid payments and bonuses by EFL being rejected by PL, a separate organisation being illegal.

Then worse, the Premier League announcing this in June only weeks prior to window closing and ffp balance sheets being filed, making it an impossibility to correct any understanding or implications.

The concept that Forest spent inappropriately or at a higher rate than is normal. The IC stated this in report. In fact allowing for inflation in wages and transfers Forest were comparable in expenditure to other promoted teams in the past, notably Fulham, Villa and Leeds. Non of those teams achieved promotion with such a thin squad of retained players. Nor was their expenditure penalised.

The report quoted the BJ sale and Forest choosing to wait till later in window. BJ was never going to sign for Brentford when bigger teams and bigger money was in the offering. The report also suggests Forest turned down a bid from Athletico. They didn’t. That bid was reliant upon selling another player. This sale never happened. All here say and rumour. Forest didn’t choose.

All these points, though known by Forest supporters, are new to football supporters nation wide. Even pundits appear blind to the facts of the case. They are still discussing the appeal decision date being after season end not the facts.

It needs to be heard and debated, held up to scrutiny and the PL held to account. Not continuing with this farce and malpractice. Let’s hear it for the Garribaldi. Shout it from the roof tops and every clarion, bugle and herald.
Click to expand...
I was going to write similar - but couldn’t put it so eloquently.
Brilliant post
 
Polly 433 said:
In one podcast and discussion with RM, Garribaldi Red has managed to air what has been discussed on here for many weeks. SC and NEP got in many of RM’s points in a recent article. All these points need airing on national platforms to drive public opinion prior to appeal hearing. Football fans need to be aware of the facts not the version published so far. The Premiership League is a cartel. Any team getting promoted will find it difficult, without parachute payments impossible.

The recent 50 page document has many incorrect statements. It makes too many assumptions and bases some findings on here-say not fact.

I thought it interesting the Shef Utd, who spent very little in promotion season would receive points reduction if they remained in PL next season. The rules do not reflect the objectives of PSR or equal competition. This has to be aired at national level and get the Premier League Cartel to rethink its stance prior to new regulations.

Supporters of NFFC need to ensure these facts are heard not the misinformation that has been put out by national media and repeated verbatim by the IC.

The objective of PSR needs to be voiced.

The unfairness of the situation that promoted teams and imparticular promoted teams without parachute payment needs to be heard.

The exceptance of covid payments and bonuses by EFL being rejected by PL, a separate organisation being illegal.

Then worse, the Premier League announcing this in June only weeks prior to window closing and ffp balance sheets being filed, making it an impossibility to correct any understanding or implications.

The concept that Forest spent inappropriately or at a higher rate than is normal. The IC stated this in report. In fact allowing for inflation in wages and transfers Forest were comparable in expenditure to other promoted teams in the past, notably Fulham, Villa and Leeds. Non of those teams achieved promotion with such a thin squad of retained players. Nor was their expenditure penalised.

The report quoted the BJ sale and Forest choosing to wait till later in window. BJ was never going to sign for Brentford when bigger teams and bigger money was in the offering. The report also suggests Forest turned down a bid from Athletico. They didn’t. That bid was reliant upon selling another player. This sale never happened. All here say and rumour. Forest didn’t choose.

All these points, though known by Forest supporters, are new to football supporters nation wide. Even pundits appear blind to the facts of the case. They are still discussing the appeal decision date being after season end not the facts.

It needs to be heard and debated, held up to scrutiny and the PL held to account. Not continuing with this farce and malpractice. Let’s hear it for the Garribaldi. Shout it from the roof tops and every clarion, bugle and herald.
Click to expand...

I was arguing with a Huddedsfield fan the other day and he was saying all of this was karma for bringing a referee out of retirement and then bribing them so we could win the Playoff final.


Maybe there's a Huddersfield fan high up in PGMOL and/ or the EPL lol?

I explained thst it's difficult to win a game when your team finds it completely unacceptable to have a shot but apparently that's irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.