Financial Fair Play (general thread)

[GMI]

I thought it might be worth having a general Financial Fair Play (FFP) thread as it feels like things are starting to ramp up with further possible punishment for both Everton and Notts Forest. Could it be that Levy's dream of a functioning FFP system is starting to become real?

Everton and Nottingham Forest: Financial Fair Play D-Day - BBC Sport

Everton and Nottingham Forest: Financial Fair Play D-Day

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Trix]

I thought it might be worth having a general Financial Fair Play (FFP) thread as it feels like things are starting to ramp up with further possible punishment for both Everton and Notts Forest. Could it be that Levy's dream of a functioning FFP system is starting to become real?

Everton and Nottingham Forest: Financial Fair Play D-Day - BBC Sport

Everton and Nottingham Forest: Financial Fair Play D-Day

www.bbc.co.uk

It was always real, but you actually have to have teams breach it, and then you have to prove it before the punishments come in to play.

 

[GMI]

It’s a bit shouty but Simon Jordan talking around this one..

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

Two minutes of listening to anything on Talksport is enough, for that Martin bloke to say that the Everton punishment came out of the blue is total rubbish.
Everton were referred to the Independent Commission last March and the 10 point penalty desicion reached in November as the charges were far simpler than the Man C case, how is that out of the blue everyone knew the commission were sitting.

The only real precedents in England for breaching spending rules was Sheff Wed who were deducted 12 points in July 2020 by a Football League independent panel this was later on appeal reduced to 6 points which is what I expect to happen to Everton i,e getting their 10 reduced to 5 deduction.

We then get how sorry we are supposed to be for Dyche & players etc , well that is down to the owners and their irresponsible actions, as Levy has said many many times clubs need to be run sustainably.

We then get this Martin geezer going on about how Man C haven't yet had any desicion on their charges, it took four years for the PL to investigate and come up with the charges, if he was paying attention he would know that this case is going to take far longer than the Everton case.
He also says that maybe Man C have better lawyers !!!!!!, the PL independent commissions are headed by King's Council you can't get much higher than that in the legal world unless you are appointed a Judge.
Gave up listening after about two minutes.

As the KC who summed up in the Everton case said fining clubs with wealthy owners is a waste of time a sporting sanction is the only suitable punishment and the only thing they understand, roll on points deductions for Everton, Forest and Man City

 

[FrankSpencer]

Can’t fault SJ, he knows his onions and has the conviction to air them in a way that the common man can understand and relate to.

 

[Dannyspur]

Just because city have loads of charges shouldn’t be a reason to delay things. Just split them into smaller chunks and deal with each chunk and punish them ( if guilty) for each chunk. Rather than wrapping them up and dishing out one punishment.

 

[GMI]

Two minutes of listening to anything on Talksport is enough, for that Martin bloke to say that the Everton punishment came out of the blue is total rubbish.
Everton were referred to the Independent Commission last March and the 10 point penalty desicion reached in November as the charges were far simpler than the Man C case, how is that out of the blue everyone knew the commission were sitting.

The only real precedence in England for breaching spending rules was Sheff Wed who were deducted 12 points in July 2020 by a Football League independent panel this was later on appeal reduced to 6 points which is what I expect to happen to Everton i,e getting their 10 reduced to 5 deduction.

We then get how sorry we are supposed to be for Dyche & players etc , well that is down to the owners and their irresponsible actions, as Levy has said many many times clubs need to be run sustainably.

We then get this Martin geezer going on about how Man C haven't yet had any desicion on their charges, it took four years for the PL to investigate and come up with the charges, if he was paying attention he would know that this case is going to take far longer than the Everton case.
He also says that maybe Man C have better lawyers !!!!!!, the PL independent commissions are headed by King's Council you can't get much higher than that in the legal world unless you are appointed a Judge.
Gave up listening after about two minutes.

As the KC who summed up in the Everton case said fining clubs with wealthy owners is a waste of time a sporting sanction is the only suitable punishment and the only thing they understand, roll on points deductions for Everton, Forest and Man City

I would agree regarding Talk Sport, and Martin O'Neil wasn't particularly insightful, but Simon Jordan did provide some interesting comment a bit further into the video.

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

I would agree regarding Talk Sport, and Martin O'Neil wasn't particularly insightful, but Simon Jordan did provide some interesting comment a bit further into the video.

I didn't listen to his bit , O'Neil was so ignorant I turned off, will have to go back and hear what Jordan says.

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

Just because city have loads of charges shouldn’t be a reason to delay things. Just split them into smaller chunks and deal with each chunk and punish them ( if guilty) for each chunk. Rather than wrapping them up and dishing out one punishment.

City have the right of appeal , if you split the charges into sections appeals could go on for years & years .

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

I would agree regarding Talk Sport, and Martin O'Neil wasn't particularly insightful, but Simon Jordan did provide some interesting comment a bit further into the video.

Is this the same Simon Jordan , if it is maybe I won't go back and listen.

Simon Jordan (born 24 September 1967)[1] is an English businessman and presenter. He made his fortune in the mobile phone industry. In 2000, he purchased Crystal Palace Football Club and remained chairman of the club until administration in early 2010.

 

[Marty]

Everton and Forest referred to independent commission over alleged breach of spending rules

Everton and Nottingham Forest have been referred to an independent commission over an alleged breach of the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability regulations (PSR). Forest become the third top-flight club to be charged with a breach of the league’s financial rules after reporting...

theathletic.com

Everton and Nottingham Forest have been referred to an independent commission over an alleged breach of the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability regulations (PSR).

Forest become the third top-flight club to be charged with a breach of the league’s financial rules after reporting losses that exceed the allowed amount over the three-year reporting cycle.

Everton, who are already appealing against a 10-point deduction relating to the 2021-22 season, have also been charged for a further alleged breach.

Under the guidelines both clubs are now at risk of a fine or a points deduction.

Premier League financial fair play rules explained

An Everton statement read: “Everton Football Club acknowledges the Premier League’s decision to refer a breach of profit and sustainability rules (PSR) for the assessment period ending with the 2022/23 season to an independent Premier League commission.

“This relates to a period which covers seasons 2019/20, 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23. It therefore includes financial periods (2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22) for which the club has already received a 10-point sanction. The club is currently appealing that sanction.

“The Premier League does not have guidelines which prevent a club being sanctioned for alleged breaches in financial periods which have already been subject to punishment, unlike other governing bodies, including the EFL. As a result – and because of the Premier League’s new commitment to deal with such matters “in-season” — the club is in a position where it has had no option but to submit a PSR calculation which remains subject to change, pending the outcome of the appeal.

“The club must now defend another Premier League complaint which includes the very same financial periods for which it has already been sanctioned, before that appeal has even been heard. The club takes the view that this results from a clear deficiency in the Premier League’s rules.

“Everton can assure its fans that it will continue to defend its position during the ongoing appeal and, should it be required to do so, at any future commission – and that the impact on supporters will be reflected as part of that process.”

A Forest statement read: “Nottingham Forest acknowledges the statement from the Premier League confirming that the club has today been charged with a breach of the league’s profitability and sustainability Rules.

“The club intends to continue to cooperate fully with the Premier League on this matter and are confident of a speedy and fair resolution.”

New guidelines aimed at fast-tracking PSR decisions have been introduced to ensure any basic breaches of the regulations are dealt with in time for punishments, such as points deductions, to be levied in the same season as the charge is brought.

All clubs had to submit their accounts for 2022-23 by December 31 — rather than in March as they had previously — with any breaches and subsequent charges confirmed 14 days later.

The league have pencilled in May 24 as a backstop date for any appeal which comes after the end of the season on May 19. This date comes ahead of the league’s annual general meeting.

As reported by The Athletic, this raises the prospect of teams who are appealing against potential points deductions completing their league season while not knowing their final league position or even what division they may be playing in for the following campaign.

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.

Everton’s second successive breach follows years of financial mismanagement under owner Farhad Moshiri.

While the 2022-23 figures are yet to be published, they lost £260m across the two Covid seasons alone. In this latest PSR cycle, they also sacked manager Frank Lampard and suspended lucrative commercial deals with companies linked to sanctioned oligarch Alisher Usmanov due to the war in Ukraine.

Having received a points deduction last November for a breach in 2021-22, Everton are now in the unique position of being vulnerable to — and, indeed, having to fight — two sanctions in the same season. The consequences could be severe, with the club’s long-held top-flight position on the line.

What are profitability and sustainability rules?
All Premier League clubs are assessed for their adherence to the competition’s profitability and sustainability rules each year.

Their compliance with said rules is assessed by reference to the club’s PSR calculation, which is the aggregate of its adjusted earnings before tax for the relevant assessment period.

Under the PSR, clubs are allowed to lose a maximum of £105m over three seasons (or £35m a season) but certain costs can be deducted, such as investment in youth development, infrastructure, community and women’s football.

There were also specific allowances relating to Covid and, to help clubs, the league combined the two pandemic-hit seasons into one, turning the three-year accounting period into four years.

Forest’s permitted losses are lower than the £105m limit because the club were in the Football League during a portion of the accounting period. Their top figure instead amounts to £61m, which breaks down as £13m for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 seasons when they were in the Championship, plus £35m for last season, their first back in the top flight.

What is the precedent for punishment?
The Everton case is only the second time action like this has been taken, after Manchester City were hit with more than 100 charges last February.

The outcome in City’s case has not yet been communicated, with The Athletic reporting that a verdict — which would be subject to appeal — likely to take considerable time to be reached.

Last year, Chelsea’s new owners self-reported incomplete financial information related to transactions that took place during the stewardship of previous owner, Roman Abramovich, between 2012 and 2019.

European governing body UEFA fined them €10m for the historical breach in July while the Premier League and Football Association are continuing to investigate.

There have been several precedents in the English Football League in recent years, but a punishment relating to breaches of profitability and sustainability rules in the top tier of English football was unprecedented before Everton.

In fact, on only two other occasions has a club been handed a points penalty in Premier League history.

Middlesbrough were docked three points for failing to fulfil a fixture in the 1996-97 season while Portsmouth were hit with a nine-point penalty in January of the 2009-10 campaign after going into administration.

 

[aliyid]

Just because city have loads of charges shouldn’t be a reason to delay things. Just split them into smaller chunks and deal with each chunk and punish them ( if guilty) for each chunk. Rather than wrapping them up and dishing out one punishment.

Very different cases though, Everton & Forrest have breached the FFP rules that have been put in place and so are being punished.

City have not breached the rules but...... the only reason City haven't breached FFP rules are because they've lied about where the money is coming from, overstated how much they've received from various revenue streams and artificially inflated various sponsorship deals.

It's far easier and quicker to say "you've spent too much" than it is to pull together all 115 charges, confirm the source of all their money, compare to a 'fair market value' on these and prove beyond any doubt that if they hadn't done all of the above then they would have breached FFP rules (all while the best lawyers money can buy are muddying the waters and not providing you the documents / evidence needed)

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

It's all our fault , after Everton moaning about the price they got for Richy now Forest are moaning about the Johnson sale.

 

[Col_M]

Is this the same Simon Jordan , if it is maybe I won't go back and listen.

Simon Jordan (born 24 September 1967)[1] is an English businessman and presenter. He made his fortune in the mobile phone industry. In 2000, he purchased Crystal Palace Football Club and remained chairman of the club until administration in early 2010.

You can't write a cook book without burning a few onions.

 

[easley91]

So Everton have been charged again for a period they have already been punished for?

 

[jurgen]

It's all our fault , after Everton moaning about the price they got for Richy now Forest are moaning about the Johnson sale.

Be interesting to see how their argument goes down - they knew when the deadline was, but delayed to get more money.. sometimes you have to sell for below market value, because the player has a short contract, is out of favour on high wages, and so on. every club has had to do it, often because of poor decisions one way or another.

Instead they got a very tasty price for Johnson and elected to not hit their FFP commitments. Doesn't sound like the strongest line of defence really.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

So Everton have been charged again for a period they have already been punished for?

Different period, isn't it?

Everton are a financial mess - decent chance if they get relegated they could be down for a few seasons. Where are they on the stadium? I half expect them to see more financial difficulties due to that.

 

[easley91]

Different period, isn't it?

Everton are a financial mess - decent chance if they get relegated they could be down for a few seasons. Where are they on the stadium? I half expect them to see more financial difficulties due to that.

My brain might not be in gear, but reading their statement it sounds like it's the same period they got the 10 point deduction for plus last season?

An Everton statement read: “Everton Football Club acknowledges the Premier League’s decision to refer a breach of profit and sustainability rules (PSR) for the assessment period ending with the 2022/23 season to an independent Premier League commission.

“This relates to a period which covers seasons 2019/20, 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23. It therefore includes financial periods (2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22) for which the club has already received a 10-point sanction. The club is currently appealing that sanction.

“The Premier League does not have guidelines which prevent a club being sanctioned for alleged breaches in financial periods which have already been subject to punishment, unlike other governing bodies, including the EFL. As a result – and because of the Premier League’s new commitment to deal with such matters “in-season” — the club is in a position where it has had no option but to submit a PSR calculation which remains subject to change, pending the outcome of the appeal.

“The club must now defend another Premier League complaint which includes the very same financial periods for which it has already been sanctioned, before that appeal has even been heard. The club takes the view that this results from a clear deficiency in the Premier League’s rules.

“Everton can assure its fans that it will continue to defend its position during the ongoing appeal and, should it be required to do so, at any future commission – and that the impact on supporters will be reflected as part of that process.”

 

[luRRka]

My brain might not be in gear, but reading their statement it sounds like it's the same period they got the 10 point deduction for plus last season?

Reads to me that it includes some of the same period but based on figures from last season (of which they had to supply the figures by Dec 31st 23)

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

I would have to dig a little deeper - but I think the profitability issues always cover a range of years - so, its possible they will be in breach again next season.

But the clubs all know the rules - Once they are in breach, its their obligation to adjust their finances going forward.