Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[GoldenToffee]

I think SS gets us five points back. The second sting in a few months is likely to take those five points back away = no real change and we need to perform better than at least one of Forest and Luton. If we can't do that then we can't argue and fully deserve to be playing Championship football next season.

 

[Iana]

I think the problem with the sponsorship angle is that the PL can turn round and say that if this was a legitimate sponsorship at a reasonable market rate, we could’ve replaced USM with someone else. The fact we couldn’t (because it was a massively inflated deal to sink cash into us by the back door) tells the story. So they’re unlikely to let us cry it in over the loss of a “sponsorship” of that nature.

That’s a fair point but our response should be the timing of the mainstream sponsorship loss which meant we lost a third of that income to the end of the 21/22 financial year would have reduced our PSR breach…we would have not been able to replace that so quickly.
In addition, we need to hammer home the £10m mitigation linked to Player X and some pragmatism from the PL over stadium interest costs.
All of those would get us very close to the £105m threshold.

 

[Goodisongang]

I think SS gets us five points back. The second sting in a few months is likely to take those five points back away = no real change and we need to finish ahead of at least one of Forest and Luton. If we can't do that then we can't argue and fully deserve to be playing Championship football next season.

We'd just take them to court again, the second charge is even more bs than the first considering they are charging us for some of the same years as the first charge, additionally two separate charges in the same season is comical as well.

 

[GoldenToffee]

We'd just take them to court again, the second charge is even more bs than the first considering they are charging us for some of the same years as the first charge, additionally two separate charges in the same season is comical as well.

We might well do, but the points will be deducted this season and any relegation will not be postponed. Even if the court ruled in our favour what would that get us, a few million in lost prize money maybe? An apology?

 

[Tony’s Carp]

That’s a fair point but our response should be the timing of the mainstream sponsorship loss which meant we lost a third of that income to the end of the 21/22 financial year would have reduced our PSR breach…we would have not been able to replace that so quickly.
In addition, we need to hammer home the £10m mitigation linked to Player X and some pragmatism from the PL over stadium interest costs.
All of those would get us very close to the £105m threshold.

Yeah, you are right and we need to hammer home the combination of circumstances not just the individual ones- their response to stuff like the sponsorship or player X was that they were bad luck and that businesses should have contingencies for those individual things but how many businesses, and certainly how many football clubs, have contingencies for them all happening at once?

 

[Goodisongang]

We might well do, but the points will be deducted this season and any relegation will not be postponed. Even if the court ruled in our favour what would that get us, a few million in lost prize money maybe? An apology?

Well if we happened to be relegated based on a deduction that was later overturned then I think it would ge more than a few million mate.

if We were to get some points back for the first deduction, you'd think they'd be hesitant to take more for the second charge given the outcome of the appeal on the first ( like they would expect us to then appeal and get them back again for the second charge )

Who knows with the PL though, bent as anything

 

[Iana]

Well if we happened to be relegated based on a deduction that was later overturned then I think it would ge more than a few million mate.

if We were to get some points back for the first deduction, you'd think they'd be hesitant to take more for the second charge given the outcome of the appeal on the first ( like they would expect us to then appeal and get them back again for the second charge )

Who knows with the PL though, bent as anything

We are dealing with a PL board who actually sat down and created a policy for the IC(not approved by the clubs)that punishes clubs more than the PLs own sanction for clubs going into administration.
The fact that not one of those PL execs in that meeting questioned the credibility of this cack handed approach versus their own rule book sanctions suggests we are not dealing with the Brains trust…that’s before the accusations of vendettas and corruption.

The minutes of that PL meeting in August will be very interesting to see…

 

[Lloydaldo11]

The minutes of that PL meeting in August will be very interesting to see…

Think the fact they are dragging their feet and leaking their nonsense to journos suggests that the meeting was not a clear cut unanimous decision or in all probability never even took place and Masters is lying again.

If it was a unanimous decision and all clubs including us agreed, any normal organisation would share the facts and put the debate to bed.

 

[brucemate]

I don’t know him personally obviously , but he seems to have ignored everyone else .

Brands
Bill
The board
The fans ( appointing Rafael)

So I am not confident he gave a toss what the prem were telling him.

He’s deluded enough to go into the independent commission without a decent lawyer and believe he can take the stand and make our worries go away by basically confessing .

He’s an idiot and I have no idea how he became so rich

I think he became rich because he was fortunate enough and very lucky to become involved with Usmanov.
Usmanov benefited as a result of the political changes in Russia and becoming an oligarch, many of whom were/are allegedly paying a levy to Putin.

Alisher Usmanov - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It certainly appears that even his wealth was not gained as a result of brilliant business acumen. Moshiri seems to have been very lucky, which as you say does not prevent him from being an idiot.

 

[Jacko93]

Yeah, you are right and we need to hammer home the combination of circumstances not just the individual ones- their response to stuff like the sponsorship or player X was that they were bad luck and that businesses should have contingencies for those individual things but how many businesses, and certainly how many football clubs, have contingencies for them all happening at once?

This is surely where a defence starts. Had two of those mitigations not happened, where woudl we stand?

Player X, but no war or stadium build and covid complications.

Stadium build but no Gylfi or war etc etc.

The odds on this must be miniscule and surely not feasible to work into a risk strategy. One yes, two, maybe.... but all 3.

If you were to make a bet on the same odds to try and gain a positive, and basing a budget on it, you'd be absolutely bonkers. What the IC and PL are asking is that we effectively decimate our entire squad beyond a level of basic capability to satisfy an arbitrary figure that was conjured up 6 years previous because of world events that have out businesses out of existence all over the world and squeezed household bills so much that people are losing their homes.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

As poor as he is, we must be very very confident in the appeal and second charge to be sending reinforcements to Sheffield United. Yes they are a long way back but even so. Funny jokes about making their relegation even more likely, but surely not common to see teams in the bottom 3 giving each other players????

 

[peteblue]

Masters seems to be doubling down justifying the points deduction, and making it known before the review. Unless we threaten them with court action I doubt we will get the points back….

 

[Tipp blue]

I think the problem with the sponsorship angle is that the PL can turn round and say that if this was a legitimate sponsorship at a reasonable market rate, we could’ve replaced USM with someone else. The fact we couldn’t (because it was a massively inflated deal to sink cash into us by the back door) tells the story. So they’re unlikely to let us cry it in over the loss of a “sponsorship” of that nature.

A sponsorship deal is worth what someone is willing to pay, as long as it's not an illegal money laundering scheme or something like that, shouldnt any business man be allowed to sponsor any amount they want? If Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Bill gates all got together and asked the PL if they could sponsor the PL for 1 year for 300 billion do you think the PL would say no this is not a reasonable market rate give us less?

 

[Tipp blue]

Masters seems to be doubling down justifying the points deduction, and making it known before the review. Unless we threaten them with court action I doubt we will get the points back….

I really really dislike that man he's an arrogent son of a bitch.

 

[Eggs]

I think SS gets us five points back. The second sting in a few months is likely to take those five points back away = no real change and we need to perform better than at least one of Forest and Luton. If we can't do that then we can't argue and fully deserve to be playing Championship football next season.

….in that scenario, Forest would end up 5 points worst than now whereas we remain the same. I think we’d settle for that.