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.
Sean Ashley
Player Valuation: £8m
If I am honest Mike I am not sure want point you are trying to make here? Jimmy didn't suggest selling anyone under market value. He just put out there not selling anyone and accepting a breach would be a risk I don't see that as a controversial comment. Calm down lad.
Zatara
Player Valuation: £100m
Look at Forest.
Purposely hold onto Brennan Johnson until they get a higher offer.
Then sell way beyond the deadline.
Flaunt this at the hearing.
Receive a lower penalty.
FTY
Player Valuation: £80m
Mixed feelings watching this, pisses me off that a) he didn't play like this more and b) we didn't go through, horrible decision from the ref/linesman
I thought that we need around £25M by the end of June to satisfy PSR. That means we can hold off on the sale of Onana, hoping he has a good Euros to push up his asking price. He'll sell easily enough anyway but you can safely assume Kev is looking at the bank balance and weighing up all the possibilities.
I do it all the time, but with me it's which trainers, camera equipment and art supplies I can sell before I buy more. I love a bit of wheeling and dealing. Strange that I'm playing Trigger, rather than Delboy, in that Sixties Club thing.
That’s not at all what he said, he said it would be “deliberate cheating” (his actual words)
It would be seen as that, yes.
Last time I'm sure they said we should have sold Branthwaite in the summer to PSV, and Thelwells defence was we knew his price would go up. They see that as a risk. He could have broke his leg day one of the season. You could also argue that logic behind not selling any player - "we knew their price would go up"
Same was true with Forest/Johnson.
That’s fine but then Forest only got a 4 point deduction for deliberate cheating so I’ve got no idea where this theory that we’ll get a mammoth deduction for the same offence has come from.
They got mitigation applied - that mitigation perhaps lessens when you've broke it repeatedly, and willingly.
Willingly would be alleged if we argued we didn't sell Branthwaite for £40m because we wanted £60m.
They make it up as they go - perhaps best to not give them a chance.
We could argue that in the previous years we have been punished for, that we weren’t willingly breaking the rules and in fact did try to comply by selling the likes of Richarlison. So I don’t think they could go down the road of “you’ve willingly broken the rules 3 years running”
knowing your history
Player Valuation: £25m
Well that would be minimum of 4 points for a start (Forest should've got 7 point deduction imo given he played in the Sheffield United win in August).
Plus ultimately that was Forest's first offence compared to this club getting two deductions last season so I don't think it would be a clever idea at all.
Sell Onana and you'd hope with the players released that's enough to satisfy FFP. Then it's a case of hoping a takeover actually happens at some point in July/August otherwise other players will have to leave, that's an inevitability.
It’s not a very difficult or controversial point really we’ve signed up to a set of rules that say we will stay within certain boundaries with our finances and it’s our responsibility to take whatever steps we have to take to do that. If we’ve got ourselves in a position where the only way we can do it is to sell a player for less than they’re worth then the premier league would be within their rights to say that’s our problem. I think the rules are a crock of manure but they are there so that doesn’t matter. My replies were to people saying we should just ignore the rules and take a points deduction firstly ignoring the rules just is cheating it’s like the definition of it so you can argue as much as you want but you can’t make words change meaning. I think there is probably a feeling in football that we’ve got away with it a bit with our last couple of breaches and doing it a third time when we could have complied but chose not to might make us a bit of a pariah imo. Secondly my feeling is that a third straight breach which we present with no mitigation whatsoever and basically say we just decided to take the points deduction might make them give us a huge deduction because otherwise literally everyone will do it and the rules will become pointless that’s a pure guess by me maybe you’re right and they’d just give us 1 point but they’ll look like idiots if they do and open the door for everyone to walk all over them so it seems unlikely to me. I don’t really like the thought of us just deliberately breaking rules whenever it suits us that’s obviously why I said about having 12 players because I thought it would be easy enough even for you maybe I’m just an old romantic and out of touch with how things work.
Exactly!
Yeah.... No.
That wouldn't wash.
It would be another breach which alone dictates a point deduction and any mitigation is lost when it's successive breaches, and more so if we're reported to have refused an opportunity to not breach.
As far as they'll be concerned is if you can sell a player to avoid breaching, then you sell that player. Not doing so is a deliberate 2 fingers up to rules that Everton agreed to.