Yesterday’s anticipated points deduction leaves many Forest fans with a mix of emotions.
Despite the initial relief of a four-point deduction, many still feel that PSR and FFP are not fit for purpose, and the whole saga surrounding Everton, Nottingham Forest and 115 charges-Manchester City is nothing more than corruption of the FIFA approved variety.
PSR Charges – The Basics.
Firstly, before we get into the frustration and the angst of the situation, let’s agree that the rules were broken and we have to accept our fate, move on, and focus on what needs to be done.
And for those interested in the breakdown of the points deduction, here is the basic tariff:
- 3 points deducted per breach
- 3 points deducted for the amount of the breach
- +2 points for mitigation and cooperation
No getting away with it.
It’s a complex situation; it’s wrong; it’s borderline corruption and, ultimately, football shouldn’t be decided by lawyers, accountants, owners, and independent adjudicators.
The points on a league table should represent the standard of football that is played on the pitch, not what happens in the boardroom. Forest broke the rules, they were complicit in the findings, and there is no getting away with it now.
The punishment was inevitable. The points deduction has been hanging over us like a nuclear winter and now the radioactive dust has settled, the club can see what it needs to do: win games.
Four Points Relief.
It’s not the worst outcome because many of us were looking at a six-point deduction as a best-case scenario.
It all seems very convenient, but what resonates with many fans is that you can’t get away from the idea that the points reduction may have been was reduced to four because Forest threw two pints away at Kenilworth Road.
And this is my point. If Forest could simply win games and not have thrown twenty-one points away from winning positions, we wouldn’t be worrying about a measly four points deduction, we’d be brushing it off like temporary dandruff. It’s all in the hands of the team now.
Based on the aforementioned calculation, Forest received a deduction of 3 points for a solitary breach, 3 points for the amount (£34.5 million), and 2 points awarded for the mitigation and compliance.
However, when you consider that a club receives a ten-point deduction for the ultimate disaster of insolvency, four points still seem quite harsh.
Big Hero Six – Mitigation
Similar to a court hearing whereby the jury hears about someone’s character, there were six mitigating circumstances that came to our rescue and helped reduce the penalty.
The mitigating circumstances included the club’s unique position of being newly promoted with no prior parachute payment, having a record of complying with FFP, immediately addressing the breach at the first opportunity, gaining no sporting advantage following the breach due to the three-year spend being less than the permitted £105 million, the Brennan Johnson sale and the Atletico Madrid offer, and securing further profitable sales later in the transfer window.
Also, and this is quite significant in the realm of fairplay and sustainability, when Forets gained promotion without the assisted parachute payments, the squad was worth a mere £11 million. When you consider that Chelsea are complaining about their 1/2 £billion mediocre squad, stating that they need to buy better players, £12 million to a newly promoted club like Nottingham Forest is merely loose change down the back of the Stamford Bridge sofa.
The uneven financial playing surface.
Forest’s squad in the Championship promotion season, prior to the player exodus, was only worth £12 million. Let’s compare to a couple of rivals who were in a similar situation.
Bournemouth and Fulham who were promoted the same season benefitted from previous parachute payments. As they emerged from the Championship with the The Reds in tow, their squads were valued at circa £151 million (Bournemouth) and £197 million (Fulham)….! Some comparison, hey.
Forest didn’t gain promotion following previous parachute payments – promotion bonuses weren’t included in any calculation for PSR either – and further losses were attributed to the club’s position following promotion and the Covid pandemic when everyone was locked up for a year and Government distributed £800 billion into a system that, inevitably, just benefitted the rich.
What people tend to forget when they mock the idea of Forest’s spending is that the club made so many signings in an attempt to compete at the highest level – they had to. How can you expect to compete with the likes of the Manchester clubs, Liverpool, and the Chelsea billionaires unless you buy lots of shiny, new players? You have to play these teams. You can’t put out a team worth £12 million against Arsenal and expect a close contest.
It’s not that I’m condoning untethered affluence, but if the competition contains teams worth £700 million, surely, you can slightly overspend on a measly £105 million if it’s available, especially as the unpaid tax that HMRC claimed back from the league in 2023 was £124.8 million – https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66975608 . And that’s just unpaid tax, not a club’s spending threshold.
Many of the players who came up with the promoted team were on loan deals and decided to return to their respective clubs or, a la Jedd Spence, saw the glory and pursued bigger and better deals elsewhere.
It’s not an even playing field for the newly promoted clubs, not by a long stretch of a fiscal year.
The Everton Comparison.
I was asked this morning about the comparison with the Everton deduction and the severity of their sanction. The only conclusion I can draw is that Everton, allegedly, submitted false accounts.
Apparently, Everton lied and denied and, based on the mitigation and cooperation aspect, Forest’s honest submission appears to have reduced the deduction from a harsh six points to a more reasonable four-point penalty.
Also, Everton’s overspend was £19.5 million over the threshold of £105 million whilst Forest were £34.5 million over the £61 million EPL threshold.
According to the Guardian, Forest were given four points, opposed to six, because of their “early plea and cooperation” – https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/mar/18/nottingham-forest-docked-four-points-premier-league-financial-rules-breach-profitability-and-sustainability .
I can only assume that Forest’s allocation was less than Everton’s overspend over a three-year period as Forest were only allowed to lose £61 million a year whilst in the Championship, opposed to Everton’s £105 million a year, due to Forest previously playing in the lower tier of English football.
There have been huge increases in the cost of just about everything within the last decade and therefore I am vehement that the threshold should at least mirror the immediate economic climate. In my view, both Everton and Forest are victims of a corrupt organisation where only an elite few can be seen to breach a bunch of rules that aren’t fit for purpose.
Index Linked Changes the Deduction.
This confusion and the time-wasting exercise of spreadsheets explains why the Premier League are redrafting the rules.
What is even more frustrating for Forest and Everton fans is that, if you index link the archaic £105 million expenditure threshold against real-time figures, it becomes apparent that a £218 million threshold should now be in place, leaving neither Forest nor Everton with a points deduction.
Scrapped Losses
There is a huge revenue gap between the big clubs and newly established clubs and, although the suggested changes to PSR still don’t appear to help smaller clubs, the Premier League is scrapping the allowable losses format for next season.
Based on player wages, agents’ fees and net transfers, the Premier League is moving to a new format surrounding a club’s spending allocation being at a level of no more than 70% of its income.
Football is of course a talent industry and the most talented players will no doubt follow the money which will still flow from the highly profitable clubs with the biggest revenues.
What’s Happening with Manchester City?
Many fans are asking the same question: if Forest and Everton are being charged for PSR/FFP breaches, how are Manchester City getting away with it?
Well, we are constantly informed that the alleged 115 breaches are a complicated issue that spans 10 years……..10 years!
Going back to the calculation at 3 points per breach, if 115 breaches can be justified, Manchester City will begin with a whopping 345-point deduction, potentially dumping them into League Two or Division 5 of the Derbyshire Sunday Morning League.
And here comes the conspiracy theory…
I can’t be the only person who thinks this but, with the wealth and power associated with Manchester City, Newcastle United, and the other big six clubs, are the Premier League conscious that the big teams could push for a breakaway super league?
Is the Premier League afraid that, if they push the issue to the extent that Manchester City could be years away from a Premier League return, they will throw their diamond-encrusted dummies out of the Etihad pram and bail into a league of hugely profitable super clubs, into a realm of hog roasts and unlimited, Arab-esk competition?
And this is my missing the points deduction.
Having said all this, looking at the facts and figures, spending weeks stressing over league positions and potential points deductions, considering a paradoxical universe with a fairer system, calculating index levels, blaming referees, Harry Arter, VAR, and comparing sanctions with Everton and wondering why Manchester City remain unpunished, the fact remains: Forest need to start winning games.
If Forest can’t go toe-to-toe with Luton over the next nine games, including games against the bottom two teams in the league, Forest deserve to be relegated.
The goal conceded against Luton last Saturday was Forest’s 19th from set-pieces, whereas the antithesis represents a Forest side that can’t score from a set-piece and has only won 13 games in two years.
Just 13 wins in two years isn’t good enough.
The job at hand is to get about 14 points from the next nine games. That’s not even 2 points per game. If Forest can finish on 35 points it looks likely that they will survive. Four wins and two draws could see Forest back in the Premier League next season. Personally, I’d feel more comfortable with five straight wins to give us an additional 15 points for an end-of-season accumulation of 36 points.
On average, Premiership survival is obtained with 37 points but this year, due to the lack of quality at the bottom of the league, Forest could get away with surviving on slightly less.
Should Forest appeal?
The next nine games are all cup finals now. I think if there is nothing further to lose, and the Premier League doesn’t counteract an appeal, then Forest should at least try to reduce the deficit further, even if it’s just one point.
With Nottingham MPs now getting involved, ahead of a ‘Football Governance Bill’, introduced to Parliament on Tuesday, Nottingham MPs Nadia Whittome, Lilian Greenwood and Alex Norris have highlighted further consistencies between the smaller and larger clubs to the Culture, Media and Sport Secretary Lucy Frazer.
Parliament and appeals aside, if Forest can’t finish above Luton Town, they should be chucked out of the league for being too mediocre – COYR!
