Points deduction incoming?

[duncanjwitham]

1 minute ago, ossieram said:

 

I'm confused ? 

Nixon’s fiction, but Percy is worsey. Hope that helps.

[Gringo]

4 minutes ago, Archie said:

Exactly this. There's a lot on here saying, 'I'd take 6 points' or 'I'd take 3 points' etc. Tragic that a large percentage of the fanbase would simply allow this to happen without knowing the facts of the case because they don't want to think about it anymore. Boo Hoo. This is and should be a non negotiable punishment based on facts and not something open to subjective negotiation on any part. Until we know exactly what has been breached (if anything) we shouldn't accept any 'punishment' from this shitshower of an organisation and fight on/back relentlessly. 

"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees" as Emiliano Zapata said,

[IslandExile]

Funny that so many people generally only believe things when they are posted by Percy but now it's something we don't like.... It seems he's making it all up just because he's a Forest fan.

[Foreveram]

Where’s B4 when you need a rallying cry 

[ossieram]

4 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

Funny that so many people generally only believe things when they are posted by Percy but now it's something we don't like.... It seems he's making it all up just because he's a Forest fan.

I don't believe anyone. 

[Philmycock]

1 minute ago, Foreveram said:

Where’s B4 when you need a rallying cry 

Still counting how many stands we have 

[Archie]

5 minutes ago, Charlotte Ram said:

"Better to die on your feet than live on your knees" as Emiliano Zapata said,

Or as some of our fans think, 'better to get rodgered for something you haven't done,  rather than for something you have done!'

[DCFC1388]

33 minutes ago, Archie said:

Exactly this. There's a lot on here saying, 'I'd take 6 points' or 'I'd take 3 points' etc. Tragic that a large percentage of the fanbase would simply allow this to happen without knowing the facts of the case because they don't want to think about it anymore. Boo Hoo. This is and should be a non negotiable punishment based on facts and not something open to subjective negotiation on any part. Until we know exactly what has been breached (if anything) we shouldn't accept any 'punishment' from this shitshower of an organisation and fight on/back relentlessly. 

Maybe the facts that you say should be non negotiable show us breaching p&s which is a point deduction? Surely we should then be in a position to negotiate?

Its not the fans who decide on the punishment, fans will just state what they think is best for the club to move forward.

The club & EFL clearly have been in discussions and both parties will know how the accounts look and what that means in terms of potential punishments. Both parties dont want to go to a tribunal so are trying to agree the final punishment.

The club will no doubt have their arguments and feel we're innocent whereas the EFL will have their own arguments and will want to punish us. If we are now in breach of p&s we will argue the accounts were signed off, we could've sold players to bring the extra money in or not spent so much on incomings plus the fact we have been under embargoes for ages but the EFL will simply say you're over by X million which equals a X amount of points deducted. This is where the agreement on punishment comes into place.

Would people really rather us let the EFL issue any punishment they want, we appeal it and this drag on for another year? Whilst remaining under embargoes etc. Who does that benefit? Also, would be no guarantee we would win after all that anyway.

Edited August 26, 2021 by DCFC1388

[Van der MoodHoover]

18 minutes ago, ossieram said:

I don't believe anyone. 

 

?

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, DCFC1388 said:

The club & EFL clearly have been in discussions and both parties will know how the accounts look and what that means in terms of potential punishments. Both parties dont want to go to a tribunal so are trying to agree the final punishment.

This is total supposition. Why did we appeal before then?

[strawhillram]

We fight it

[RoyMac5]

Just now, StrawHillRam said:

We fight it

I agree. Err but fight what?

I still think Percy is poo-stirring.

[DCFC1388]

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

This is total supposition. Why did we appeal before then?

Why is it total supposition? Its been reported by the efl themselves we are in discussions with them.

We appealed before because we felt we were innocent n we pretty much were in most of the cases

Maybe now we have breached p&s but the agreement is due to the reasons behind us breaching 

[JfR]

47 minutes ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

@Carneroprobably said this twenty minutes ago but…

Estoppel got thrown out at the Sheff Wednesday hearing (the EFL wrongly advised / endorsed their actions).

I’m fairly sure that Wednesday didn’t have St Nick de Marco at that hearing.  As he’s on a retainer with us, if I were Mel I’d be doubling down.

The embargo doesn’t scare me.  Sibley’s gonna keep us up on his own.

I think a key point in that Sheffield Wednesday case was that they hadn't even considered selling their stadium until they were already forecasting a loss over the allowed threshold. Selling the stadium was a way of "undoing" a loss that was already apparent, so the stadium selling process being flawed didn't matter, as they'd already broken the spending rules. In our case, any breach will likely be after the implementation of the unusual amortisation policy, so there's far more of an argument that a breach wouldn't have been made if the club were aware of the "reality" of their accounts, as they would likely have taken different business decisions based upon the position they were in. I think the club would also point to the fact that the disciplinary commission in the original case concluded that the breach "occurred without any real fault on (the Club's) part", which they would argue is a massively mitigating circumstance.

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

Why is it total supposition? Its been reported by the efl themselves we are in discussions with them.

We appealed before because we felt we were innocent n we pretty much were in most of the cases

Maybe now we have breached p&s but the agreement is due to the reasons behind us breaching 

We could have been discussing anything with the EFL. Chris Coles earlier in the month talked about agreeing how the P&S should be submitted. Maybe we're discussing how to get out of embargo while we wait for the EFL to look over the restated accounts & P&S? 

Edited August 26, 2021 by RoyMac5

[duncanjwitham]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

I agree. Err but fight what?

I still think Percy is poo-stirring.

Poo-stirring aside, I see only 4 possible sources of a points deduction:

The EFL are trying to add a points deduction to what we’ve already been found guilty of and fined for. Obviously we fight that.

The restated accounts have failed FFP. We sort of take it on the chin, but try to argue the deduction down due to mitigating circumstances (if we’d have known, we’d have sold a player etc).

The EFL are pushing for additional ‘aggravating circumstances’ deductions on top of an FFP fail. Obviously we fight this one, and cite the numerous references in DC 1 and 2 to us acting in good faith, having a reasonable expectation that what we were doing was permitted etc.

We’re plea-bargaining a punishment for the other issues (HMRC, non submitted accounts etc). Again there might be an element of taking it on the chin, but we absolutely argue mitigating circumstances for almost all of these. Suspended deductions, like the failing to pay wages one, seems appropriate to me.

[strawhillram]

8 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I agree. Err but fight what?

I still think Percy is poo-stirring.

Hope so. 

[Day]

Fans from other clubs are replying questioning why the EFL are even discussing/negotiating with us on the punishment.

It's a valid point, why are they?

The answer is pretty obvious at this point, they haven't got a leg to stand on and all this is a face saving exercise to please some fella up in the North East that's beyond tedious now.

[Carnero]

I think someone called it right earlier, if we have breached then there will be a set-in-stone points penalty based on the level of the breach, say 3 points. They then have the power to impose up to a further 9 points based on our conduct, mitigating circumstances, etc - this would be the part that we're negotiating over, we want 3+0 they and all of our championship rivals want 3+9.

My hunch remains that it'll be a -3 point penalty and that Mel has fed the -9 point line to Percy to ease the blow when we do eventually agree the penalty.

[DCFC1388]

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

We could have been discussing anything with the EFL. Chris Coles earlier in the month talked about agreeing how the P&S should be submitted. Maybe we're discussing how to get out of embargo while we wait for the EFL to look over the restated accounts & P&S? 

From the EFL statement last week - 

Following constructive discussions between the Club and the EFL it has now been agreed to extend this deadline

That was regards the account submission deadline which shows we have been in discussions over the accounts