NFFC Financial Talk

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Rumours (and I stress only vague unsupported rumours) that Forest are expecting -6 points.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

So we don't even have a date set for our hearing yet but Carragher already knows the outcome.

Tit.

[DR Forest]

Just on this bit:

3. The PL were advised of the situation throughout

Everton used this excuse and in different circumstances so did Derby. Basically its nonsense because its not the responsibility of the PL to manage your accounts or to tell you to do things differently. All the PL needed to do is say “here are the rules”.

Not really.

Everton informed the PL what they were going to do and then didn’t complete their agreed plan- which was effectively drafted by the PL for them.
They ended up selling Richarlison in haste to paper over the cracks when the penny dropped, but still too little too late. Only then were they punished. 

That’s totally different to Forest’s situation which is massively more finite- the breach is for a period of two months (within the same transfer window) and the resultant sale brought Forest in line- unlike Everton. Forest should therefore be afforded the same latitude as Everton for a year- even though it only took 2 months.

Where there may be similarities in both clubs’ cases are the allegations of the PL moving the goalposts on allowable deductions- both clubs have at least hinted at this with Everton whining massively about it.

The inference here is that the PL are doing so to produce sacrificial lambs to avoid external regulation. With that, it’s hard to disagree.

[JollyLolly]

Exactly Sniff!

[Jean_claude_killy]

Personally, I would dismiss all the talk of Premier League Club Chairmen being adamant and other talk of pre arranged points deductions out of hand.

The date for the tribunal has not yet been set; there will be no points deducted until the tribunal is complete.

The one thing we can take from the Judgement on Everton's case is the tribunal is independent; some of the criticism levelled at the PL management could not have been stage managed.

People who are making claims ahead of the tribunal are just guessing.

[Fumanchew]

The carragher stuff is tantamount to click baiting. Producers probably made him talk about it as it kinda connects with Everton, they then can tweet it from all their accounts etc etc

[Paplane]

Just on this bit:

3. The PL were advised of the situation throughout

Everton used this excuse and in different circumstances so did Derby. Basically its nonsense because its not the responsibility of the PL to manage your accounts or to tell you to do things differently. All the PL needed to do is say “here are the rules”.

Not really.

Everton informed the PL what they were going to do and then didn’t complete their agreed plan- which was effectively drafted by the PL for them.
They ended up selling Richarlison in haste to paper over the cracks when the penny dropped, but still too little too late. Only then were they punished. 

That’s totally different to Forest’s situation which is massively more finite- the breach is for a period of two months (within the same transfer window) and the resultant sale brought Forest in line- unlike Everton. Forest should therefore be afforded the same latitude as Everton for a year- even though it only took 2 months.

Where there may be similarities in both clubs’ cases are the allegations of the PL moving the goalposts on allowable deductions- both clubs have at least hinted at this with Everton whining massively about it.

The inference here is that the PL are doing so to produce sacrificial lambs to avoid external regulation. With that, it’s hard to disagree.

Presumably Everton hadn't been charged at the point the PL imposed their plan on them. They then charged them following a period of discussion when they didn't comply with said plan. We've actually been charged, hence the tribunal.

So we've either been given a plan and failed to adhere, as Everton did, or the PL have given advanced warning to all the clubs that over-runs will result in a charge and there will be no period of discussion/plans/special measures etc. I suspect this is the case as, for example, Wolves have been struggling to become compliant for the last two windows.

My concern is that there's no room for discussion, special measures etc., we've been charged and are either guilty or innocent. And if guilty a punishment will follow and the panel may not have the authority to impose a suspended sentence. I believe before Everton's hearing the PL suggested to the panel an appropriate punishment. Presumably the same will happen before our tribunal.

[JollyLolly]

Although JG played all his career for Liverpool he actually is an Everton fan, hence the remarks!

[Jean_claude_killy]

Just on this bit:

3. The PL were advised of the situation throughout

Everton used this excuse and in different circumstances so did Derby. Basically its nonsense because its not the responsibility of the PL to manage your accounts or to tell you to do things differently. All the PL needed to do is say “here are the rules”.

Not really.

Everton informed the PL what they were going to do and then didn’t complete their agreed plan- which was effectively drafted by the PL for them.
They ended up selling Richarlison in haste to paper over the cracks when the penny dropped, but still too little too late. Only then were they punished. 

That’s totally different to Forest’s situation which is massively more finite- the breach is for a period of two months (within the same transfer window) and the resultant sale brought Forest in line- unlike Everton. Forest should therefore be afforded the same latitude as Everton for a year- even though it only took 2 months.

Where there may be similarities in both clubs’ cases are the allegations of the PL moving the goalposts on allowable deductions- both clubs have at least hinted at this with Everton whining massively about it.

The inference here is that the PL are doing so to produce sacrificial lambs to avoid external regulation. With that, it’s hard to disagree.

Presumably Everton hadn't been charged at the point the PL imposed their plan on them. They then charged them following a period of discussion when they didn't comply with said plan. We've actually been charged, hence the tribunal.

So we've either been given a plan and failed to adhere, as Everton did, or the PL have given advanced warning to all the clubs that over-runs will result in a charge and there will be no period of discussion/plans/special measures etc. I suspect this is the case as, for example, Wolves have been struggling to become compliant for the last two windows.

My concern is that there's no room for discussion, special measures etc., we've been charged and are either guilty or innocent. And if guilty a punishment will follow and the panel may not have the authority to impose a suspended sentence. I believe before Everton's hearing the PL suggested to the panel an appropriate punishment. Presumably the same will happen before our tribunal.

With regard to the charge, I do not think it will be as binary as you allude to.

If our case is based on the use of GAAP and the PLs insistence that it is not allowed, you have a legal dispute.

If the PL cannot provide evidence that the procedure is not permissable, we have found a loophole.

The more I read about this, the more I am convinced this is less about PSR and more to do with PL politics.

We have made enemies in supporting some of the big Clubs on recent votes; that will not have gone down well with someone the smaller Clubs.

Our spending has guaranteed attention from other Clubs and Masters, in his attempts to be all things to all people, has had to act.

That does not mean.he is right.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

Thanks JCK for your information on this it is very interesting ::

[Jacksbadhobbits]

Although JG played all his career for Liverpool he actually is an Everton fan, hence the remarks!

He is trying to stir trouble for us. If we get a points deduction why wouldn’t Everton get another one. From everything we are hearing they have been far more culpable. But I suppose it is true we do not seem to be the most popular club amongst our competitors and any nonsense decision is possible.

[Marco Polo]

We could have just stuck to the rules and avoided all this by not buying quite as many players