6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Amokachi1995]

I don’t think there’ll be an appeal. Whatever they get is what they’ll get.

Why wouldn't they appeal? Unless the punishment was very soft.

 

[toffeeblue9]

That's like doing 50 mph in a 30 zone and saying "well it shouldn't be 30 mph there". Try that one and see how you get on!

I don't think there's anything wrong with pointing out that the rules are a farce mate. That's not to say they should get away with it, because the PL have to be fair, but I have every sympathy with their argument that the rules are effectively incentivising putting themselves in a worse financial situation and that can't possibly be the outcome we should be happy with.

Still - 6 points please

 

[Bkk Andy]

So what do folks reckon they will get?

6 down to 4 on appeal?

6 and no appeal as a precedent has now been set at 6.

 

[Kylito]

They ignored the opportunity to balance their books by the 30th June deadline and instead kept their best player for the start of the season, where they took 3 points from fellow relegation rivals Sheff U in a game he played the full 90.

PL and media would've gone mental if we did that with Richy last year.

 

[Goat]

They ignored the opportunity to balance their books by the 30th June deadline and instead kept their best player for the start of the season, where they took 3 points from fellow relegation rivals Sheff U in a game he played the full 90.

PL and media would've gone mental if we did that with Richy last year.

Well we should have done that.

 

[pfim]

To be completely fair to Forest, their argument effectively shows what a nonsense PSR is - they're incentivised to sell players by an arbitrary deadline to comply with an arbitrary loss figure, despite selling the player a couple of months later being better for their actual financial health and sustainability as a business

Don't get me wrong, I want to see the rules applied as stringently as they were to us as we received no mitigation for a similar scenario for Richarlison, nor any of the common sense mitigation around Russia etc, but I do have sympathy with Forest's argument - the "profit and sustainability rules" in the example here have literally the opposite effect to what they're intended to achieve.

End of the day, PSR and the new iteration of it are nothing other than a system designed to preserve the status quo in football - actual sustainability is a complete afterthought

There has to be a cutoff, arbitrary or not. PSR is a farce, but thems the rules.

 

[Lob]

The majority of the blurts on the forest forum think they are going to get 4 points max. Would absolutely make my day if they all get their eyes wiped and get double that. Would even send them some bed sheets and tissues over.

 

[Bedfordblue]

If forest get less than 6 points this place will meltdown.

GOT? really? I think it will simply generate more thoughtful and rational adult debate myself.
Plus someone will f someone rar up in The New Arena

 

[pfim]

Well we should have done that.

To knowingly break the rules? I don't think that would have played well. Just as it shouldn't for Forest.

 

[MikeH72]

Why wouldn't they appeal? Unless the punishment was very soft.

I think they may have been made aware they were going to get 10 points like we did, and the maximum they could appeal it down to was 6. So they’ll just get the 6 and be told it’s pointless appealing.

 

[Wat Tyler]

Has the Forest been felled yet?

 

[Goat]

To knowingly break the rules? I don't think that would have played well. Just as it shouldn't for Forest.

The Richarlison mitigation was dissmissed, so in HINDSIGHT we made the wrong decision.

 

[coollino]

I've worked out the best point deduction: thebiggestGOTmeltdownpossible/number of Notts Forest points = Everton don't get relegated

 

[Frenk]

Premier League to mess up even more and give a 6.5 point deduction. Forest go down by 1/2 a point.

 

[pfim]

The Richarlison mitigation was dissmissed, so in HINDSIGHT we made the wrong decision.

If we sold Richarlison after 6/30, we would have just been further afoul of the calculation.

To me, what Forest is claiming is much worse. They knew that they were outside of the allowed losses and did nothing about it.

We were too incompetent to know we were outside the calculation and only came up with the Richarlison mitigation once we were told we suck at accounting.