FFP charges? | Page 88 | Vital Football

FFP charges?

TMFwanstead said:
I agree it’s possible. Don’t buy what Colin Fray said nailed on penalty points because if the IC find that the premier league by what they told us did give us the go ahead to delay the Johnson sale then it’s possible it could be a suspended sentence
Click to expand...

If they told us the late sale of BJ was ok for PSR , surely there shouldn't be any penalty ?
 
Of Everton were given a chance to correct it and given a plan - that they subsequently ignore and breached again - surely we should be given the ‘plan’ option before points deduction?
 
Lienking said:
If they told us the late sale of BJ was ok for PSR , surely there shouldn't be any penalty
Click to expand...
And as such we shouldnt have been charged at all but people have said other clubs insisted we were charged because technically we did breach. The IC will have to determine what the constant communication between us and the premier league amounted to. I hope we have some proof that makes it seem we were under the impression at the very least least from those communications that we would be ok selling Johnson late
 
I really think that this situation is a big problem for the EPL.
Obviously, nobody really knows the full facts, but I think it can be assumed that the ‘breach’ if there is one, revolves around the BJ sale timing.
I’m equally sure that all parties involved in that deal knew the situation.

It was fairly clear that BJ was going to Spurs, and they needed/wanted to sell Kane first, but it was going to happen at some point in that transfer window.
I’m equally sure that somewhere there exists a correspondence chain between all parties that makes this clear, and that the EPL was central to this sale process. Involved and informed throughout.
Nowhere does it seem that Forest have broken any business or accounting regulations.

I appreciate it’s hard to comprehend after the last 3 decades, but Forest are a pretty well run professional organisation these days. They will be well versed in the rules and legalities, both from a sporting angle and also from a business point of view.

I think any points deduction will be challenged, either by an appeal or through the courts.
Marinakis has not invested this much in Forest to simplify go quietly, he will fight to maintain the EPL status. He is not a man accustomed to losing.

So that’s the problem for the EPL. Do they want this season to conclude in May….or in the courts?

Maybe that’s why VAR seems to have stopped working for us since January. It must have cost us 6 points already.
 
It's also a really poor precedent to set to other teams in the league, and in so many ways every club that has to sell to meet P&S should be backing Forest to win their case. Nobody in the league should be forced to sell the family silver at a cut price simply to meet an arbitrary P&S deadline that, inexplicably, falls in the middle of the biggest trading period in the football calendar.
 
Feco said:
I really think that this situation is a big problem for the EPL.
Obviously, nobody really knows the full facts, but I think it can be assumed that the ‘breach’ if there is one, revolves around the BJ sale timing.
I’m equally sure that all parties involved in that deal knew the situation.

It was fairly clear that BJ was going to Spurs, and they needed/wanted to sell Kane first, but it was going to happen at some point in that transfer window.
I’m equally sure that somewhere there exists a correspondence chain between all parties that makes this clear, and that the EPL was central to this sale process. Involved and informed throughout.
Nowhere does it seem that Forest have broken any business or accounting regulations.

I appreciate it’s hard to comprehend after the last 3 decades, but Forest are a pretty well run professional organisation these days. They will be well versed in the rules and legalities, both from a sporting angle and also from a business point of view.

I think any points deduction will be challenged, either by an appeal or through the courts.
Marinakis has not invested this much in Forest to simplify go quietly, he will fight to maintain the EPL status. He is not a man accustomed to losing.

So that’s the problem for the EPL. Do they want this season to conclude in May….or in the courts?

Maybe that’s why VAR seems to have stopped working for us since January. It must have cost us 6 points already.
Click to expand...
The video posted yesterday was interesting as it centered on the idea of sporting advantage.

On the one hand, I think it would be very easy to argue there was no sporting advantage gained in two months of non-complience. Unlike Everton, who were non-complient and remained so and mitigated through fantasy "lost opportunities" due to the Ukraine War, we were non complient for a very short time, and this was done to maximise revenue to make us even more complient. The fact that one of the teams that went down was also non complient should also be a key argument about not having gained a sporting advantage.

The commission needs to consider the message they are sending out- that an arbitrary filing date is more important than actual profit and sustainability.

I think the club should also be making a strong argument against the implementing of a sporting sanction now, with only 10 games to go. There is no precedent for this; Everton's was after about 15 games, so plenty of time. A sporting sanction now is completely disproportionate with 10 games to go compared to with 10 or zero games played. Even a 3 point penalty counts for vastly more at this stage of the season. Deduct points on day one and the outcome for that club is uncertain; deduct them now and you can very much trace the outcome and consequences.

However, I feel there is an agenda. Not necessarily against Forest per se, but there is something political here and I think we are the victims of it

I can see the commission dismissing the sporting advantage argument, saying we played Brennan Johnson in three games and won one of them- so that's 3 points deducted to start. For what it's worth, I think that would be an excuse; I think they would deduct even if we lost all three.

I can absolutely see a reference being made to the "huge extent of our wreckless spending". This will be very popular in the media and with a small number of rival clubs. That it wasn't wreckless at all and we had an owner covering it will be dismissed.

I think to an extent, we are victims of the media, of Talksport and the headlines. Burnley spend similar amounts to us, as did Bournemouth, and no one bothered picking up on it. But the media were obsessed by how many players we signed, and I think someone wants to make an example of that

I think it will be six.

And I think that will be it. I think Everton will be let off, with the commission arguing double jeopardy, and I think Leicester will find a way to get away with it a fourth time.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
The video posted yesterday was interesting as it centered on the idea of sporting advantage.

On the one hand, I think it would be very easy to argue there was no sporting advantage gained in two months of non-complience. Unlike Everton, who were non-complient and remained so and mitigated through fantasy "lost opportunities" due to the Ukraine War, we were non complient for a very short time, and this was done to maximise revenue to make us even more complient. The fact that one of the teams that went down was also non complient should also be a key argument about not having gained a sporting advantage.

The commission needs to consider the message they are sending out- that an arbitrary filing date is more important than actual profit and sustainability.

I think the club should also be making a strong argument against the implementing of a sporting sanction now, with only 10 games to go. There is no precedent for this; Everton's was after about 15 games, so plenty of time. A sporting sanction now is completely disproportionate with 10 games to go compared to with 10 or zero games played. Even a 3 point penalty counts for vastly more at this stage of the season. Deduct points on day one and the outcome for that club is uncertain; deduct them now and you can very much trace the outcome and consequences.

However, I feel there is an agenda. Not necessarily against Forest per se, but there is something political here and I think we are the victims of it

I can see the commission dismissing the sporting advantage argument, saying we played Brennan Johnson in three games and won one of them- so that's 3 points deducted to start. For what it's worth, I think that would be an excuse; I think they would deduct even if we lost all three.

I can absolutely see a reference being made to the "huge extent of our wreckless spending". This will be very popular in the media and with a small number of rival clubs. That it wasn't wreckless at all and we had an owner covering it will be dismissed.

I think to an extent, we are victims of the media, of Talksport and the headlines. Burnley spend similar amounts to us, as did Bournemouth, and no one bothered picking up on it. But the media were obsessed by how many players we signed, and I think someone wants to make an example of that

I think it will be six.

And I think that will be it. I think Everton will be let off, with the commission arguing double jeopardy, and I think Leicester will find a way to get away with it a fourth time.
Click to expand...

Our spending was largely a wreck, chap.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
The video posted yesterday was interesting as it centered on the idea of sporting advantage.

On the one hand, I think it would be very easy to argue there was no sporting advantage gained in two months of non-complience. Unlike Everton, who were non-complient and remained so and mitigated through fantasy "lost opportunities" due to the Ukraine War, we were non complient for a very short time, and this was done to maximise revenue to make us even more complient. The fact that one of the teams that went down was also non complient should also be a key argument about not having gained a sporting advantage.

The commission needs to consider the message they are sending out- that an arbitrary filing date is more important than actual profit and sustainability.

I think the club should also be making a strong argument against the implementing of a sporting sanction now, with only 10 games to go. There is no precedent for this; Everton's was after about 15 games, so plenty of time. A sporting sanction now is completely disproportionate with 10 games to go compared to with 10 or zero games played. Even a 3 point penalty counts for vastly more at this stage of the season. Deduct points on day one and the outcome for that club is uncertain; deduct them now and you can very much trace the outcome and consequences.

However, I feel there is an agenda. Not necessarily against Forest per se, but there is something political here and I think we are the victims of it

I can see the commission dismissing the sporting advantage argument, saying we played Brennan Johnson in three games and won one of them- so that's 3 points deducted to start. For what it's worth, I think that would be an excuse; I think they would deduct even if we lost all three.

I can absolutely see a reference being made to the "huge extent of our wreckless spending". This will be very popular in the media and with a small number of rival clubs. That it wasn't wreckless at all and we had an owner covering it will be dismissed.

I think to an extent, we are victims of the media, of Talksport and the headlines. Burnley spend similar amounts to us, as did Bournemouth, and no one bothered picking up on it. But the media were obsessed by how many players we signed, and I think someone wants to make an example of that

I think it will be six.

And I think that will be it. I think Everton will be let off, with the commission arguing double jeopardy, and I think Leicester will find a way to get away with it a fourth time.
Click to expand...
Lol.
Owd Neg.
We get 6, Everton get zero and Leicester get off scot free.
Ok.
Don't Forget refs and VAR conspiring against us every game until the end of the season costing us 27 points, the whole squad being struck down with Green Parrot disease Friday night and Merryknackers going bankrupt overnight because all his ships get sunk by Somalian pirates.
Woe is us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.