6 + 2 Point Deductions

[mistuhp]

The rum is making me laugh hysterically at the headline, given that there's been chaos in the rules since they created this incredibly strict and anticompetitive rule without establishing any enforcement mechanism nor even so much as basic guidelines for enforcement.

 

[indieman1]

Clubs scrambling to push for relaxation of the rules.

The voting rules in the league mean that will just never happen. Top 5 won't countenance it with Newcastle poised to pounce, neither will the likes of Brighton and Brentford or anyone else that stands to take an advantage from the misfortune of others in any given season. We're stuck with this now, or at least until all these foreseeable loss scenarios (like Chelsea) have worked out of the assessment window.

 

[CrimsonToffee]

In regards of the second breach accusation I think that we are arguing that we had no possibility to avoid the second breach to begin with. If we had been made aware of the PL math before last summer we could have avoided the second breach.

This coupled with the notion of double jeopardy and PL changing rules on the fly I choose to be optimistic. I'm not letting the corrupted league to dictate how I feel anymore. [Poor language removed] em. We shall not be moved!

As it is evident to see that PL has absolutely no common sense, I do hope that the comission of the 2nd breach accusation see it as it is. A complete incompetent PL mess.

This is an interesting point. A lot of our argument about the first charge related to a change in the rules for allocating stadium costs against losses. We thought we could, but then they said no. Ok, we get hit with the first charge, then.

But because the whole process of the first charge wasn't resolved until during the next season, we were then unable to do anything to bring ourselves in line with their eventual ruling, because the time period had already closed during that long wait. It's not like we could go back retroactively and deal with it.

But if we had known before the summer, we could have sold someone and then presumably been in compliance. So no second breach. In other words, the very process itself could be said to have caused the second breach.

Granted, there are rebuttals to that, so it's not exactly air-tight, but maybe it will provide some mitigating thought towards the second charge.

 

[RomanReigns]

Man City will be playing in the same league as formby high school at this rate

 

[ForeverEverton]

This is an interesting point. A lot of our argument about the first charge related to a change in the rules for allocating stadium costs against losses. We thought we could, but then they said no. Ok, we get hit with the first charge, then.

But because the whole process of the first charge wasn't resolved until during the next season, we were then unable to do anything to bring ourselves in line with their eventual ruling, because the time period had already closed during that long wait. It's not like we could go back retroactively and deal with it.

But if we had known before the summer, we could have sold someone and then presumably been in compliance. So no second breach. In other words, the very process itself could be said to have caused the second breach.

Granted, there are rebuttals to that, so it's not exactly air-tight, but maybe it will provide some mitigating thought towards the second charge.

IC`s don`t like mitigating circumstances.... We are getting done again.

 

[hallamblue]

We have to presume we will get another 6 point deduction for the 2nd breach and Forest will get 6 as well. That will put us a point behind Luton and still 6 ahead of Burnley and Sheff Utd. It's not a great result at all but I suppose it gives us a better chance than a 20 point deduction.

 

[Jarvick]

I know transfers is only a small part of finances,but I've just looked at the ins and outs for the last few years. I haven't taken into account delayed payments like Beto, just the bald transfer fees given. So Beto is an expense of £26 million for example.

20/21 - We made a rough loss on transfers of £60 million. Ended up with an official loss on the sheet of £53 million.
21/22 - We made a rough profit on transfers of £50 million. Ended up with an official loss of £10 million.

The all important 22/23 - We made a rough profit on transfers of £20 million.

We seem to have £36 million loss to play with for 22/23, so surely we are in good shape to make that, especially as our biggest earners are falling off every year?

Unless the stadium payments have gone through the roof?

Surely nothing. I believe we are only starting to see the true depth of the club's financial troubles. Player wages, player sale and purchase fees and agent fees are only part of the equation. I am thinking we are getting crushed by interest payments and the massive borrowings from 777 just to pay operating expenses are mounting. The only way out is to sell a few big assets and try to make it to the new stadium where we can generate additional revenue. No happy times for a while I don't think.

 

[Blue Willy]

Cant see us getting 12 and Forest 6, in the SAME season.


The club seems relatively ok/quiet with this “ok” at best outcome. I wonder if thats because we have done a “deal” with them for a “satisfactory” second punishment? Say a suspended 3 points, or suspended 1 or 2 window embargo?

 

[MikeH72]

We have to presume we will get another 6 point deduction for the 2nd breach and Forest will get 6 as well. That will put us a point behind Luton and still 6 ahead of Burnley and Sheff Utd. It's not a great result at all but I suppose it gives us a better chance than a 20 point deduction.

Makes me laugh that people actually suggested this as a possibility and were serious.

 

[Wizard]

We have to presume we will get another 6 point deduction for the 2nd breach and Forest will get 6 as well. That will put us a point behind Luton and still 6 ahead of Burnley and Sheff Utd. It's not a great result at all but I suppose it gives us a better chance than a 20 point deduction.

We would also be ahead of Forest by a point and have better goal difference. I don’t see Forest getting a more lenient penalty for their breach than us for the second.

 

[hallamblue]

We would also be ahead of Forest by a point and have better goal difference. I don’t see Forest getting a more lenient penalty for their breach than us for the second.

I agree hence I said Forest will probably get 6. However they look far more capable of scoring than we do, so relying on finishing above them is probably harder than making up 1 point on Luton.

 

[MikeH72]

I agree hence I said Forest will probably get 6. However they look far more capable of scoring than we do, so relying on finishing above them is probably harder than making up 1 point on Luton.

Forest’s defence is markedly worse than ours.

 

[mikel_88]

I agree hence I said Forest will probably get 6. However they look far more capable of scoring than we do, so relying on finishing above them is probably harder than making up 1 point on Luton.

Maybe but now they have the pressure of the deduction going one nill behind and the pressure to get points now. Is true what you say but is a change now as the situation is nore real

 

[Bluepablo]

Also none of his figures are anywhere near correct.

Figures are as per the report. Para 221.

 

[Walken]

Can see why you suggest this

What a shock