Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

6 + 2 Point Deductions

Cake said:
Forest reported losses of £45.6m for 22/23. The PL have assessed their losses as £61m over the three years to the end of that period. This is from The Telegraph Jan 2024.

Forest said they delayed the sale of Johnson until after 30/6/23 because they knew they could get more for him by holding out until near the end of the 2023 summer transfer window. This waiting to sell Johnson is their only defence against selling him before 30/6/2023 to reduce their reported losses despite them knowing they had overspent. With them blatantly ignoring their losses and knowingly overspending and without having a crafty Belarusian and Iranian and an almost billion pound stadium build to consider, their charge and subsequent penalty should, in effect, be greater than ours.
Click to expand...
There is a lot of finger in the air stuff. You are seeing arguments from both sides. Everton have breached twice so the second punishment will be more severe vs Everton have already been charged for two thirds of the 3 year period so will receive a lesser breach.

For Forest it is the promoted mitigated + Brennan Johnson sale = small punishment versus larger punishment for larger malicious breach.

With the corruptness of the PL I wonder if all parties shake hands on a 2-4 point penalty for both clubs on the basis there is no appeal
 
Tin-Tin said:
Anyone seen the article on Forests breach. Says the below. But then the rest of the article is how they will see even a 6 point deduction worthy of appeal.

They told the PL they were selling Johnson once Kane went (not sure what would have happened if he broke his leg or got a bad injury).

They have kept quiet so have been more respectful, not garnering local MP's support (even though we only did that AFTER the 10 point deduction

They only have £61m to breach, which is a lot less. Even though, like we were told, they are the rules fair or not.

They have to buy more players to stay in the league.

Sounds like they honestly feel that they should or will get a lesser punishment of around 3 points with more suspended.

"Forest are understood to have breached by a higher figure than Everton, who had an overspend of £19.5million on their allowable losses of £105m over a three-year period.

Crucially, however, Forest’s breaches occurred over a considerably shorter time frame.

Because Forest spent two of the three years they are being assessed over in the Championship, their loss limit is lower, at £61m
Click to expand...
As we have set precedent for keeping the PL informed and it not meaning anything ultimately, I'm not sure how that helps them at all.
 
Jamiednm said:
I don’t know why people still bother going to PL football matches. It’s a totally manufactured 6-team mini league with 14 others literally making up the numbers, with rules that are blatantly designed to prevent other teams from challenging the 6.

Its the same every year, it is continually blighted by garbage like VAR and TV broadcasts are basically one big betting advert, with moron ex-footballers talking about the same bollocks every week.
Click to expand...
It's honestly mostly a social event for me, least competitive sport I follow by some distance
 
Bebeto said:
How will it be close...they did sell nunes to city last summer for a big fee, and they have stopped spending big in the last year or so...
Click to expand...
Their losses increased from £46m the year before to £67m despite selling Nunes for £60m, Neves for £55m, Collins for £27m, Coady for £9m, Jiminez for £7m plus a few other bits and pieces. Those 5 players alone are sales of £158m. They bought a few (Cunha and others) and reported a player trading profit of £82m.

Their turnover increased by only £3m and despite those sales (and loads out on loan) their wage bill rose £30m plus having to pay off Lopetegui for sacking him (by mutual consent) and also ahving to buy out the rest of Jonny's contract because he did or said something so they effectively sacked him as well.

Despite the £82m player trading profit and the almost irrelevant increase in turnover their losses still rose by £21m. The chairman put £18m into the club as a loan last year (which they hope can be turned into equity). All sounds very familiar to me.
 
Fralahna said:
Think the Johnson argument will be interesting. We sold richy before the cut off for potentially less than we could have got and breached. They sold Johnson after the cut off for more. The PL will need to say which strategy is better for a club in terms of P and S.

....or they will be complete morons and say you shouldn't do either and should do both. Because, you know, the PL.
Click to expand...
They played him in 3 games at the start of this season so a definite sporting advantage…having your cake and eating it comes to mind.
 

jonnyboy316 said:
There is a lot of finger in the air stuff. You are seeing arguments from both sides. Everton have breached twice so the second punishment will be more severe vs Everton have already been charged for two thirds of the 3 year period so will receive a lesser breach.

For Forest it is the promoted mitigated + Brennan Johnson sale = small punishment versus larger punishment for larger malicious breach.

With the corruptness of the PL I wonder if all parties shake hands on a 2-4 point penalty for both clubs on the basis there is no appeal
Click to expand...
Who knows what they'll do? 6 more for us and 6 suspended for Forest? 2 more for us and 4 for them? 6 suspended for us and 10 for them? Although our mitigating factors of Ukraine, Sigurdsson, etc were thrown out Forest have done exactly the same as us in trying to stick two fingers up to the PL but without those mitigating factors. We also sold Richarlison when we could have held on for a few weeks.
 
Cake said:
Their losses increased from £46m the year before to £67m despite selling Nunes for £60m, Neves for £55m, Collins for £27m, Coady for £9m, Jiminez for £7m plus a few other bits and pieces. Those 5 players alone are sales of £158m. They bought a few (Cunha and others) and reported a player trading profit of £82m.

Their turnover increased by only £3m and despite those sales (and loads out on loan) their wage bill rose £30m plus having to pay off Lopetegui for sacking him (by mutual consent) and also ahving to buy out the rest of Jonny's contract because he did or said something so they effectively sacked him as well.

Despite the £82m player trading profit and the almost irrelevant increase in turnover their losses still rose by £21m. The chairman put £18m into the club as a loan last year (which they hope can be turned into equity). All sounds very familiar to me.
Click to expand...
Nunes was sold in the summer, so not part of the latest accounts released.
 
Tin-Tin said:
As we only got some points back due to being called dishonest, its hard to see how Forest wont get hit with 6-8 points at least - I dont think the overspend figure has been released so it could be £20m or £80m.

Imagine if Forest do get a lesser punishment for a bigger breach.
Click to expand...
Has to be 20m +, iirc that was the difference between selling Brennan Johnson within the finance period time frame and the end of the window when he went to Spurs for £47.5m,they'd turned down a £25m+ offer in the june.
 

Dixieslaces said:
Very good read that and for me tries to address the salient facts that they "made it up as they went along" that we have all been privy to.

I still believe we have grounds for them to look at the 7 dismissed factors, however i understand that also to draw a line under it and now focus on the pitch and impending second charge should probably take priority, i would however add that when you really lay it on the line and read the facts as presented the Premier League ballsed this up and while the laymen fan who never looks past his nose for facts wont be interested in anything other than "You Cheated blah blah blah!" we should at least try and restore the reputational damage. This may well follow when Masters falls on the sharpened sword that is ready for him and the more inquisitive look a bit further.

We simply have to move forward now and for me we play for every point available, even taking into account Dyche good performance so far but his limited scope in the future, we simply have to try and make the next charge irrelevant as the points on the board will make it so.

Thanks for sharing, enjoyed that perspective.

BTW being lazy, is he a Toffee?

UTFT
Click to expand...
Yes mate he's an Evertonian - was Chair of the shareholders' association and is involved with Toffee TV.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top