Mick Harford Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, David said: Can anyone explain why Manchester City are avoiding answering their 115 charges before the rule changes in August, whilst Forest and Everton must answer them now? 115 charges which has dragged on for how long? I want to sit here and take the piss out of Forest as nature intended, however it's just wrong how Manchester City are continuing and picking up silverware whilst others are having the book thrown at them. Simon Stone from the BBC says: Perhaps the most significant football event of the week will not involve a pitch or players - at least in the conventional sense. The Premier League will confirm today whether any of the 20 top-flight clubs have breached profit and sustainability rules and if they have been charged. The process has been streamlined to ensure charges are dealt with during the reporting period in question - to avoid the scenario they have ended up in with Everton, who were deducted 10 points this season even though their breaches took place outside the relevant reporting period. Worrying for everyone at Goodison Park, Everton and Nottingham Forest are amongst those thought to be most at risk. And, before anyone mentions Manchester City, their case is historic and so complicated, it would not have been part of the fast-track process even if those rules had been in place when they were charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 Plus the wider ranging consequences - Forest and Everton are 'only' trying to avoid relegation. In this time, City have won trophies, making any decision made wide open to the type of shenanigans we've seen from The Curly Haired One Day, Wignall12 and Red_Dawn 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 22 minutes ago, Mick Harford said: Simon Stone from the BBC says: Perhaps the most significant football event of the week will not involve a pitch or players - at least in the conventional sense. The Premier League will confirm today whether any of the 20 top-flight clubs have breached profit and sustainability rules and if they have been charged. The process has been streamlined to ensure charges are dealt with during the reporting period in question - to avoid the scenario they have ended up in with Everton, who were deducted 10 points this season even though their breaches took place outside the relevant reporting period. Worrying for everyone at Goodison Park, Everton and Nottingham Forest are amongst those thought to be most at risk. And, before anyone mentions Manchester City, their case is historic and so complicated, it would not have been part of the fast-track process even if those rules had been in place when they were charged. I hear this is all historic and complicated, however we're talking about charges over a period of 14 seasons dating back to 2009, 15 years it's taken. 7 Premier League titles 3 FA Cups 6 League Cups 1 Champions League All won during those periods, circling back to our own situation where we had Boro and Wycombe wanting to sue us for 'cheating' and costing them positions in the table, successfully getting paid off to go away and the EFL retrospectively changing the rules to throw the book at us. All those clubs beaten twice by City going down by the 6 points. All those clubs missing out on European football, titles, trophies. It's just insane to me that a club with 115 charges is still carrying on regardless 15 years after their first unpunished offence, you can bet your house that they won't face any retrospective punishment and pay a fine of a few million which will pay for a lavish PL bosses Xmas party. Forest have been naive to think they can slide a transfer from one accounting period to another, yet in the grand scheme of things, seems a minor infraction whilst other state run clubs stick two fingers up and laugh from afar. BucksRam, OohMartWright, sheeponacid and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 3 hours ago, David said: Can anyone explain why Manchester City are avoiding answering their 115 charges before the rule changes in August, whilst Forest and Everton must answer them now? 115 charges which has dragged on for how long? I want to sit here and take the piss out of Forest as nature intended, however it's just wrong how Manchester City are continuing and picking up silverware whilst others are having the book thrown at them. These cstand 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, David said: Whether Warning: The Met Office warns that it is currently unknown Whether Forest will get enough points deduction to be relegated and/or finish with less than the coveted 11 points. Wignall12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, David said: I hear this is all historic and complicated, however we're talking about charges over a period of 14 seasons dating back to 2009, 15 years it's taken. 7 Premier League titles 3 FA Cups 6 League Cups 1 Champions League All won during those periods, circling back to our own situation where we had Boro and Wycombe wanting to sue us for 'cheating' and costing them positions in the table, successfully getting paid off to go away and the EFL retrospectively changing the rules to throw the book at us. All those clubs beaten twice by City going down by the 6 points. All those clubs missing out on European football, titles, trophies. It's just insane to me that a club with 115 charges is still carrying on regardless 15 years after their first unpunished offence, you can bet your house that they won't face any retrospective punishment and pay a fine of a few million which will pay for a lavish PL bosses Xmas party. Forest have been naive to think they can slide a transfer from one accounting period to another, yet in the grand scheme of things, seems a minor infraction whilst other state run clubs stick two fingers up and laugh from afar. I suspect that the scale of the Man City issue is so huge that the authorities don't have a clue where to start - whatever decision they make will leave them wide open to action being taken by other clubs who believe they were disadvantaged by Man City's actions - any club that's missed out on a title; that missed out on qualification for European competions; that lost to them during a season and was subsequently relegated - there's an argument that every club that's been up against them during the period of their 'cheating' may have deserved more prize money - there's eveen arguments to be made that other clubs in the Chamions League deserve a bite of the cherry. It has the potential to bring the whole house of cards crashing to the ground..... Ram-Alf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red_Dawn Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 30 minutes ago, Gaspode said: I suspect that the scale of the Man City issue is so huge that the authorities don't have a clue where to start - whatever decision they make will leave them wide open to action being taken by other clubs who believe they were disadvantaged by Man City's actions - any club that's missed out on a title; that missed out on qualification for European competions; that lost to them during a season and was subsequently relegated - there's an argument that every club that's been up against them during the period of their 'cheating' may have deserved more prize money - there's eveen arguments to be made that other clubs in the Chamions League deserve a bite of the cherry. It has the potential to bring the whole house of cards crashing to the ground..... That doesn't mean they should just ignore it though. All the while chasing other apparent mischievous clubs who've committed a fraction of the reported breaches. RadioactiveWaste 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 7 minutes ago, Red_Dawn said: That doesn't mean they should just ignore it though. All the while chasing other apparent mischievous clubs who've committed a fraction of the reported breaches. Where did I suggest they ignore it? I'm just suggesting reasons why it may be taking so long for them to take action. In your case, it's pretty straightforward rather tha 'apparent' - your owner treated prmotion as if he was on supermarket sweep - shovelling any old crap into his trolley no matter how expensive it was - enjoy those chickens when they come home to roost.... Wignall12 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariotofmyown Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 3 hours ago, Ram-Alf said: These Whereas Forest just have a fan of baked goods, who when purchasing said items from the shop, sometimes accidently leaves his cigarette stub next to flamable materials. We've all done it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 11 minutes ago, ariotofmyown said: Whereas Forest just have a fan of baked goods, who when purchasing said items from the shop, sometimes accidently leaves his cigarette stub next to flamable materials. We've all done it. Nottingham burned while Marinakis fiddled 👍 Sparkle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, Red_Dawn said: That doesn't mean they should just ignore it though. All the while chasing other apparent mischievous clubs who've committed a fraction of the reported breaches. Did you suggest the same when the EFL were after us out of interest? EtoileSportiveDeDerby, Wignall12 and OohMartWright 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wignall12 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 hours ago, Gaspode said: Where did I suggest they ignore it? I'm just suggesting reasons why it may be taking so long for them to take action. In your case, it's pretty straightforward rather tha 'apparent' - your owner treated prmotion as if he was on supermarket sweep - shovelling any old crap into his trolley no matter how expensive it was - enjoy those chickens when they come home to roost.... .........and so the wheel turns , just off to get the popcorn in !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ketteringram Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 (edited) If the two clubs have just been charged with this, then how long before anything is decided on, punishment wise? Are we talking weeks, months, or years?? Edited January 15 by ketteringram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaltRam Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 1 minute ago, ketteringram said: If the two clubs have just been charged with this, then how long before anything is decided on, punishment wise? Are we talking weeks, months, or years?? This season isn't it? New fast-track system. ketteringram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 Just now, ketteringram said: If the two clubs have just been charged with this, then how long before anything is decided on, punished wise? Are we talking weeks, months, or years?? I believe it has to be decided before April this year and sanctions implemented, so as the Premier league does not end up with the EFL Derby/Wycombe/Boro situation and law suits flying around ketteringram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott129 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 6 minutes ago, ketteringram said: If the two clubs have just been charged with this, then how long before anything is decided on, punishment wise? Are we talking weeks, months, or years?? Hearings must be completed by 5th April. Decision provided on the 12th, although clubs do get 7 days to appeal. ketteringram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mucker1884 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 2 minutes ago, Scott129 said: Hearings must be completed by 5th April. Decision provided on the 12th, although clubs do get 7 days to appeal. Pfft. Forest haven't appealed to me in over 50 years. They've got no chance with 7 days! dantheram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 26 minutes ago, MaltRam said: This season isn't it? New fast-track system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elwood P Dowd Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 I’m just beginning to realise how much the City ground looks like Morecambe's ground 😂😂😂 Perhaps not a good sign of future events at Forest alexxxxx 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsRam77 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 11 hours ago, TomTom92 said: I agree with this completely. The excuse is that because there’s so many charges it’ll take longer to come to a conclusion. When judgement day comes I’ll be intrigued by the punishment. Whilst in the meantime they continue to win trophies. how many retrospective claims might this cause against them from other clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now