The Premier League has docked Nottingham Forest four points for breaking the profit and sustainability regulations.
It has also raised concerns about how Forest avoided a punishment as harsh as that imposed on Everton, who lost 10 points at first before having those points lowered to six by an appeals board.
Everton’s breach was £19.5m, whereas Forest’s was £34.5m. There is an additional charge against the Blues. Our panelists discuss the case in their opinions.
There’s another substantial Premier League report to sift through, and the indications point to a more acrid aftertaste.
The Premier League’s independent panel’s justification for Nottingham Forest’s four-point loss for a profit and sustainability infringement only helps to heighten the absurdity of the penalties.
Even though Forest was found to have violated more than the Blues, their punishment was two points lower on appeal and six points fewer than Everton’s first deduction.
The commission’s conclusion that Eden gave “false information” raises additional concerns. After all, the idea that Everton behaved in bad faith was rejected as part of the Blues’ appeal, which is mentioned throughout the most recent report about Forest.
Maybe additional information about how and why Forest’s punishment was determined differently than Everton’s will become available in the next few days. If they want to file an appeal, the amount could still be lowered.
But Evertonians are left with a sensation that is all too familiar. It seems that the club has once again been viewed as an easy target for ridicule. As it is, supporters find it difficult to see why; perhaps the commission isn’t completely certain themselves?
Joe Rimmer – Commission ruling only increases confusion
The Premier League’s hopes of winning back the confidence of fans may have vanished in the wake of Nottingham Forest’s most recent point deduction.
It was difficult enough to justify Everton’s initial 10-point penalty and subsequent appeal-based decrease, but it is absolutely incomprehensible that Forest was only awarded four points for a larger excess.
Written reasons highlight Forest’s cooperation and ‘incorrect information’ that Everton submitted in their own case, but it appears that the latest appeal board rejected the notion that the Blues deliberately misled the Premier League. In the meantime, the justifications acknowledge that they “do not know” how the appeal board reached a decision to award Everton a “extra three points”—which raises the question of how this may all be a coordinated effort.
The decision makes reference to “breach bands” in other places and tries to group Forest’s results together with an explanation of how their points were deducted. When Everton’s breach was revealed and disclosed, where were these bands?
I support regulation, but how can the Premier League expect anyone else to obey or comprehend their rules if they themselves are unable to adequately explain or implement them? The only possible way out of this situation at this point may be through an independent regulator.
It was hoped that the Nottingham Forest decision would bring some clarity to Everton’s impending second case as well as the relegation struggle. Verdicts would follow one another in a logical manner, setting precedent and procedure and assisting all parties in comprehending what began as a novel system in November but has now undergone three tests. To put it plainly, this most recent ruling does not provide clarity.
GET MORE NEWS HERE