shefcanary 2,504 Posted January 16 2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said: Forest are claiming that the only reason they failed the financial test is that they delayed the sale of Brennan Johnson in order to secure a better price from Spurs later in the window. They turned down a lower offer in June 2023 knowing that as a result they would fail FFP. I have some sympathy for them, especially as they were dealing with Levy, but the simple fact is that they could have chosen to take the lower offer and avoid a points deduction. The fact that they went on to spend the increase on Omidalebale beggars belief. In a way meeting the FFP rules and the hard cut-off should have a deflationary impact on the ridiculous transfer market. Florist have gambled, something their renegade owner has done for years. A lack of corporate governance methinks? 🙂 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dylanisabaddog 5,062 Posted January 16 12 minutes ago, shefcanary said: In a way meeting the FFP rules and the hard cut-off should have a deflationary impact on the ridiculous transfer market. Florist have gambled, something their renegade owner has done for years. A lack of corporate governance methinks? 🙂 Yes it is a lack of governance. For the sake of £10m they risked the entire future of a football club. I think the Premier League should take a very dim view indeed. Otherwise everyone will start appealing on the basis that it was just a timing matter. They were lucky that Johnson didn't suffer a training injury in the interim period. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ulfotto 666 Posted January 16 2 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said: The accounts to which the charges refer run to the end of the 2022/23 season. Forest are claiming that the only reason they failed the financial test is that they delayed the sale of Brennan Johnson in order to secure a better price from Spurs later in the window. They turned down a lower offer in June 2023 knowing that as a result they would fail FFP. I have some sympathy for them, especially as they were dealing with Levy, but the simple fact is that they could have chosen to take the lower offer and avoid a points deduction. The fact that they went on to spend the increase on Omidalebale beggars belief. I very much doubt they gave us anywhere near £20m for Andrew O, in fact I'd be surprised if it was any more than £10m including add ons. Does anyone know the true figure? Ah I see that makes sense. To be honest their argument regarding waiting for a best price is pretty weak that is not how account filings work. You set a reporting period and stick to it you can’t pick and choose when to report your figures to benefit your business. They are behaving like most large corporations do which is simply working along the lines of it’s better to ask for forgiveness than permission!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
littleyellowbirdie 2,614 Posted January 16 On 15/01/2024 at 09:17, cambridgeshire canary said: Much as I will be happy for Luton fans if they are able to stay up the fact they of all clubs have a chance at staying in the Prem and could do it in their very first attempt and yet we failed to do so in our last three tries is quite embarrasing Also, we were so far away from safety that any points deductions wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference to us! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,606 Posted January 16 On 15/01/2024 at 17:36, Icecream Snow said: Forest have signed 42 players since securing promotion in May 2022, with owner Evangelos Marinakis sanctioning a transfer spend of around £250m to help the club establish themselves in the top flight. Forest believed they had worked within the regulations when it came to the allowable losses with a lot of the issue centring around Brennan Johnson’s sale to Tottenham Hotspur. The club’s argument — which they have made in conversations with the Premier League — was that they could have sold Johnson earlier in the window but doing so at that point would have meant accepting a markedly lower price. His sale did not go through until September 1, well after the financial year ended, for £47.5m. That is one way to admit not only that you are guilty as charged but that you knowingly turned down the chance to avoid breaking the rules. With the context that they knowingly signed more than 40 players hardly helping to provide mitigation. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellow Fever 3,852 Posted January 16 As a generality I would propose if you fail FFP it's not a points deduction but mandatory relegation unless exceptional circumstances. There will then be no fiscal incentive to overspend. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
