6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Drico]

From the Forest side this is a new experience, but based on what Masters said today we think these are the key points. Would be good if you lads could confirm:

1) Everton (record holders for seasons in the top division) and Forest (twice as many European Cups as City) are ‘small clubs’

2) 1 accusation in 2023 is treated more seriously, and swiftly, than 115 accusations before 2023

3) there is a date to look at City’s alleged offences - this date is a secret, but it won’t be this season. The precise timescale for Forest and Everton being assessed is widely published and any punishment will be this season.

4) Coincidentally, the rules will change between this season and next season

5) alleged offences by Forest and Everton are treated one at a time, and immediately. Alleged offences by City are only assessed once every detail of all 115 is known.

Feel free to correct any of this - it’s a steep learning curve

Are we still cheats?

 

[COYBL25]

Nah, that’s what the James Bond films say, mate.

Both are just a business man that are friends with politicians. Like all the billionaires.

Sanctions are to pressure Putin, that’s how it works.

Nope, both have been officially cited as being Putin money men, hence why Abramovich legged it to protect his assets from getting seized and Usmanov‘s money tap was turned off at Everton.

Abramovich is part of Putins inner circle mate.

You don’t get that rich in Russia and survive for as long as he has, without paying your dues to Vlad.

 

[pfim]

From the Forest side this is a new experience, but based on what Masters said today we think these are the key points. Would be good if you lads could confirm:

1) Everton (record holders for seasons in the top division) and Forest (twice as many European Cups as City) are ‘small clubs’

2) 1 accusation in 2023 is treated more seriously, and swiftly, than 115 accusations before 2023

3) there is a date to look at City’s alleged offences - this date is a secret, but it won’t be this season. The precise timescale for Forest and Everton being assessed is widely published and any punishment will be this season.

4) Coincidentally, the rules will change between this season and next season

5) alleged offences by Forest and Everton are treated one at a time, and immediately. Alleged offences by City are only assessed once every detail of all 115 is known.

Feel free to correct any of this - it’s a steep learning curve

Pretty much.

There's absolutely no justifiable reason whatsoever to delay City's hearings this long. They were charged, which means the PL has some sort of evidence of wrongdoing. I'm not sure what else is required, other than a reasonable amount of time for City to prepare a defense, which has long since passed.

 

[MACCA75]

Because of the amount of long established clubs with long held roots within a community who have come very close to going to the wall due to the reckless actions of owners trying to fulfil that ambition in a reckless and unsustainable manner.

Before walking away from the mess that they created possibly taking nothing more than a financial hit while a 100+ year old community institution utterly crumbles. Personally I don't think the rules go far enough. There should be no way an owner can burden a club with debts in the manner that the Glazers have and (I think) the current Burnley ownership have.

I'd prefer a system where any debt placed on a club by owner ambition should be their own personal liability until it is cleared off the club books.

But the punishment makes it 10x more likely that the club goes into administration!!

 

[trueblue84]

Kill us off is more accurate .....

They don't want clubs like Everton. I found it very interesting the amount of times masters referred to Luton. They want 14 clubs who are just happy to be there, leaving the top 6 to their own mini league.

 

[John from Bootle]

Your logic seemed to be that because newly promoted clubs don't immediately compete at the top end then it must be a bad league. There are very few historical occasions where this has been the case so by your logic the top flight must have been predominantly poor throughout it's history.

Well, you're wrong. I questioned whether teams in a perceived relegation battle should be happy to only compete with three other teams, in a league of twenty, as you suggested they should be happy to aspire to, at least from a budgetary perspective.

 

[DanEFC92]

 

[DanB90]

I could have sworn loads of posters on here were delighted with the board when Moshiri was spending 100's of millions of pounds on players. Far too many people ignored the warnings about Moshiri and his dodgy money.

You also had loads questioning nearly every commercial deal we’ve made. Every mediocre signing on big wages and high fees. The sacking and hiring of managers at an unheard of rate.

If they had a clue what they were doing, the money they spent wouldn’t have been an issue. As many people seen though, it was amateur hour stuff.

 

[ForestAreMagic]

Pretty much.

There's absolutely justifiable reason whatsoever to delay City's hearings this long. They were charged, which means the PL has some sort of evidence of wrongdoing. I'm not sure what else is required, other than a reasonable amount of time for City to prepare a defense, which has long since passed.

Absoluteky

The precedent being set is the more offences you commit, the longer your hearing is deferred. It’s absurd, and totally unjustifiable. They should have been dealt with years ago - even if that meant all 115 were not tackled straight away.

 

[ClausThomsen]

Well, you're wrong. I questioned whether teams in a perceived relegation battle should be happy to only compete with three other teams, in a league of twenty, as you suggested they should be happy to aspire to, at least from a budgetary perspective.

I never said they should be 'happy' to. I said that if their minimum aim is to stay up then they only need to be better than 3 teams.

And you don't need £105M players to do that in the immediate season or two after promotion. That may change in time but certainly not in the promotion season.

 

[anton66]

Masters using the small club jibe tells you everything you need to know about this horrible little man. It is definitely vindictive and personal. Hope we take them to the cleaners with our new super lawyer.

His belittling the club is vindictive. He’s more or less saying we treat everyone the same but you small clubs are getting done.

 

[kenada_blue]

Around 1 minute of this - he referred to "the small clubs"

Was on the back of as

From the Forest side this is a new experience, but based on what Masters said today we think these are the key points. Would be good if you lads could confirm:

1) Everton (record holders for seasons in the top division) and Forest (twice as many European Cups as City) are ‘small clubs’

2) 1 accusation in 2023 is treated more seriously, and swiftly, than 115 accusations before 2023

3) there is a date to look at City’s alleged offences - this date is a secret, but it won’t be this season. The precise timescale for Forest and Everton being assessed is widely published and any punishment will be this season.

4) Coincidentally, the rules will change between this season and next season

5) alleged offences by Forest and Everton are treated one at a time, and immediately. Alleged offences by City are only assessed once every detail of all 115 is known.

Feel free to correct any of this - it’s a steep learning curve

One of those clubs is ran by an Arab state who discuss the breaches in UK consulate.

 

[bluenorthwarrior]

Making 200m in one year and losing it the next two is not really sustainable either.

Of course it is, how on earth is a club breaking even over 4 years not sustainable? I bet there's not 5 teams in PL that have ever done that and i dont see mass admisitration. Like it or not being a football club is not a profit making enterprise for the vast majority (and never will be, but 95+% continue to survive despite this as there is always more money to be found due to the profile of the sport).

This is a simplistic model to make a point, obviously finances are more complex but the point remains that the rules have more holes in them than your local golf club.

 

[royalbalou]

Pretty much.

There's absolutely justifiable reason whatsoever to delay City's hearings this long. They were charged, which means the PL has some sort of evidence of wrongdoing. I'm not sure what else is required, other than a reasonable amount of time for City to prepare a defense, which has long since passed.

Within them 100+ charges against City I'd be very surprised if at least one of them isn't the same charge as against us/Forest.. therefore charge them for that and sort the rest out later.
To say that the details can't be released is a cop out..I hope this 'super silk' is onto things like this.

 

[ClausThomsen]

But the punishment makes it 10x more likely that the club goes into administration!!

I think the ultimate aim is fear of the punishment means clubs refrain from reckless behaviour. Of course if you have incompetent ownership who continue to plunge full steam ahead into the iceberg then even the most perfect of systems is going to be rendered ineffective.

EDIT - not that I think the current model is anywhere near perfect