NFFC Financial Talk

[Fumanchew]

If the rumours in the prem league thread are true wouldn’t Everton get a 6pt deduction for their second separate charge?

[Marinakis Red]

You'd hope so considering we have only breached for one season. So there latest charge in the 3 year account will be for one season having already had points deducted for the first 2 years.

[BomberBowyer]

You'd hope so considering we have only breached for one season. So there latest charge in the 3 year account will be for one season having already had points deducted for the first 2 years.

And you would hope that a second offence results in a harsher punishment. Similar to the way Everton got a pts deduction having had previous warnings and chances to get their house in order.

[Marinakis Red]

You'd hope so considering we have only breached for one season. So there latest charge in the 3 year account will be for one season having already had points deducted for the first 2 years.

And you would hope that a second offence results in a harsher punishment. Similar to the way Everton got a pts deduction having had previous warnings and chances to get their house in order.

That 2 bomber, they had the luxury of a plan prior to getting charged to bring their finances in order too. We have not been afforded that either.

[jurgen rober]

I was listening to a podcast where a sports barrister was talking about FFP and said the points are between 3 and 9 and 9 was only for clubs going into administration. The points deductions are for using the financial position to gain a sporting advantage. In the case of Everton, they were warned by the EPL about their spending and also held onto to players when they said they would sell them and gained a sporting advantage. He said in the case of Forest, they could have sold Brennan before the end of June but kept hold of him until the end of August and in that time, he played in 3 matches in which they lost 2 and won 1, so was the sporting advantage actually that great. Interesting point.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

I was listening to a podcast where a sports barrister was talking about FFP and said the points are between 3 and 9 and 9 was only for clubs going into administration. The points deductions are for using the financial position to gain a sporting advantage. In the case of Everton, they were warned by the EPL about their spending and also held onto to players when they said they would sell them and gained a sporting advantage. He said in the case of Forest, they could have sold Brennan before the end of June but kept hold of him until the end of August and in that time, he played in 3 matches in which they lost 2 and won 1, so was the sporting advantage actually that great. Interesting point.

A few have been saying that a logical deduction would be the 3 points gained during which Brennan played this season. It’s probably the most likely outcome, hope the rumours from yesterday are wrong.

[Mcforest]

I just wish they would tell us and stop dragging it along. It is easier to deal with knowing what we are facing rather than being in the dark and causing uncertainty for so long and disturbing our season. One could argue that this hanging over us has been an unfair sporting advantage to us and counters the so call advantage we had.

[Paplane]

I was listening to a podcast where a sports barrister was talking about FFP and said the points are between 3 and 9 and 9 was only for clubs going into administration. The points deductions are for using the financial position to gain a sporting advantage. In the case of Everton, they were warned by the EPL about their spending and also held onto to players when they said they would sell them and gained a sporting advantage. He said in the case of Forest, they could have sold Brennan before the end of June but kept hold of him until the end of August and in that time, he played in 3 matches in which they lost 2 and won 1, so was the sporting advantage actually that great. Interesting point.

A few have been saying that a logical deduction would be the 3 points gained during which Brennan played this season. It’s probably the most likely outcome, hope the rumours from yesterday are wrong.

How is sporting advantage actually defined though? Did Brennan play well or poorly? Did he have an assist or score a goal? Did he keep Elanga out of the side (who's stats are probably equal, if not better than Brennan's)? There's no true definition as there's so many variables involved. This will be a points deduction based purely on precedence. And that's 6 points.

[BestwoodRed]

Surely it would be very difficult to prove a sporting advantage when 17 clubs could lose £105m over the three year period, 2 clubs (Bournemouth and Fulham) could lose £83m and Forest were allowed to lose £61m. As long as our losess were below £83m it would be a tough argument to prove a sporting advantage over anyone.

[Marco Polo]

Especially when we waste £30 million in sangare - no advantage at all of spending that money

[MacAwoniyi Cheese]

Copied from another forum, this appears to be similar to what Kieran Maguire said on today's PoF podcast regarding what has happened to Leicester and their breach...

I am confident we will escape a points deduction, and my logic is there is now a very recent precedent where Leicester City is concerned.

Leicester, as we have recently found out, have exceeded the £105m PSR limit set in the Premier League; but, as they are no longer a member of the EPL, they cannot be charged by them for breaching.
The EFL then, tried to take over and charge Leicester over the Premier League breach and gave them intended notice to charge them.
Leicester then said, hold on a minute EFL, you can’t get involved as we weren’t a member of the EFL when the breach took place, we were a Premier League member!!

This then went to a commission who, after representation by a certain Nick De Marco KC, sided with Leicester saying that, yes Leicester is immune from charges from the EFL as they were not a member when the breaches took place.

This has an obvious benefit to us. Using precedent, Forest can defend that the two seasons in the Championship should be discounted from the Premier League PSR calcs, and we have two further seasons to begin our 3-year rolling PSR formula, OR places us on the same 3-year rolling used by the Premier League. There cannot be a ‘pick-a-mix’ of EFL and EPL rules.

[BomberBowyer]

Copied from another forum, this appears to be similar to what Kieran Maguire said on today's PoF podcast regarding what has happened to Leicester and their breach...

I am confident we will escape a points deduction, and my logic is there is now a very recent precedent where Leicester City is concerned.

Leicester, as we have recently found out, have exceeded the £105m PSR limit set in the Premier League; but, as they are no longer a member of the EPL, they cannot be charged by them for breaching.
The EFL then, tried to take over and charge Leicester over the Premier League breach and gave them intended notice to charge them.
Leicester then said, hold on a minute EFL, you can’t get involved as we weren’t a member of the EFL when the breach took place, we were a Premier League member!!

This then went to a commission who, after representation by a certain Nick De Marco KC, sided with Leicester saying that, yes Leicester is immune from charges from the EFL as they were not a member when the breaches took place.

This has an obvious benefit to us. Using precedent, Forest can defend that the two seasons in the Championship should be discounted from the Premier League PSR calcs, and we have two further seasons to begin our 3-year rolling PSR formula, OR places us on the same 3-year rolling used by the Premier League. There cannot be a ‘pick-a-mix’ of EFL and EPL rules.

I like the theory and hope that is the case but could it also be that the PL say ok, you weren’t part of the PL for the first two years so we’ll discount them and only take into the third and final year when you were in the PL? If that happens then best hope we were within permitted losses for that year.