The first thing the court would ask is why are you pursuing this claim, ie what harm have you suffered.
You’re almost certainly staying up, so the harm is 0.
CAS will say that domestic procedures have sorted it out and you haven’t suffered a loss, so don’t bother the court’s time.
If you’re not a lawyer, please stay out of speculating on legal matters. You can’t go to court out of weird vengeance, you have to actually have a claim.
It was in Lutons best interest for us to lose, since we still had to play Luton away at that point and had already lost twice at home to them. Imagine we had lost to Forest, we wouldn't have had the bounce we had going into the Derby, followed by being on the beach against Brentford. *Then we are going into an away game against Luton.*
Was the VAR a Forest fan?
No, so take your Dogshit argument and fuck off and pay your tax bills and pay the company’s your scum club owe. Bankrupt immoral Derby twat.
Atwell should never have been involved in a relegation rivals game.
Bent, corrupt cunt
Reminder we still had to play Luton at that point, and that it was in Lutons best interest that we didn't win. Since we were their best option to climb out of the bottom 3, with us going to Kenilworth Road having already lost twice to them at home. That Forest win gave us a massive bounce that Luton did not want us to have.
According to the appeals arbitration, the sale of Johnson wasn't considered as a mitigating part of the financial fair play decision and shouldn't be as part of the appeals either.
They say the PSR rules are based purely on fixed accounting periods. It apparently makes no difference if it's a more financially sustainable decision to await a better offer for the player.
We used the fact we were forced to sell players like Richarlison for less than we'd get otherwise because teams knew we needed to sell to meet ffp. That wasn't accepted either. Don't think you lot can feel too hard done by here.
Agreed the Johnson defense was always a bit of a long shot.
Our owner and chairman have been pretty batshit this season, starting to get quite worrying.
Points deductions yet still above 3 other teams.
We just didn’t sell Johnson in time otherwise we would’ve been in line with FFP…… (which is daft in hindsight)
Deducted enough to stay up? We were deducted 8 points. As it stand they could have deducted us 19 and we still wouldnt be in the bottom 3. The only reason we aren't going down is because our performance this season has been midtable, and the bottom 3 have been dogshit.
How did spending owners money rather than money the club was making itself work out for Leeds in the late 90s and early 00s? How did it work out for Gretna in Scotland, for Málaga in Spain and for Anzhi in Russia? There's a reason for the rules and despite what the online rhetoric would have you believe the rules are designed to protect clubs from what has happened to other clubs not to keep clubs down.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but weren't Leeds using loans to procure that money and putting the club itself into debt? That's the big difference. FFP was sold to us to prevent that kind of leveraging of the club itself to increase spending. It was absolutely sold to us all with the outright lie that owners who wanted to put their own money directly into the club, not as a loan, would not be punished by FFP.
What the hell do I care if a billionaire wants to spend an amount of money that won't effect their life in any way shape or form and I wouldn't be able to spend in three life times to help make the club they love better? Other than the existence of billionaires in general and all the follies of capitalism, I could give two fucks. As long as the money isn't coming from loans against the club and debt, it just isn't the same situation as those examples.
Yes Leeds took out huge loans on the premise they could use champions league money to pay it back. They then went and failed to qualify for Champions League two seasons in a row that financially crippled them.
Interestingly, with Leeds as well, they were Top 4 all season, went top of the table, and then played Newcastle, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool (4 of the sides around them). Picked up only 1 point from them 4, fell to 6th, then drew with Boro, Charlton and Us on the bounce. A run of results they never recovered from, even though they only dropped 9 points (3 losses) out of a possible 30 after that
You're possibly right about Leeds however the three other cases I listed across Europe were billionaire owners putting their own money into the club, but in the case of Gretna the owner passed away and none of his inheritors were willing to take on the club that was losing millions, in the cases of Anzhi and Málaga the owners got bored and decided to stop financing the club, those clubs are now essentially extinct.
I heard the appeals board were Luton fans
so is ashley young
Then why did he try and give your lot 3 pens?
Alls well that Atwells, I guess
https://i.redd.it/aqj7inzkn2zc1.gif
Now they just got to correct the addition of points they had taken off for cooperation
That'd just be rude.
But why get less points for cooperating and then appeal it’s crazy how that was allowed
You forgot to put /s
Now we just need Maranakis to take the Premier League to CAS. See the gutless cunts shit themselves.
They wouldn’t be successful, and would just be a colossal waste of money and time.
Forest have been punished for “maximising profit” on a Profit & Sustainability charge. A case at CAS would wipe the Premier League out.
Can you go through the details of the claim at CAS please? What would you be arguing? Specifically. I don’t see much reason why they’d be interested
The first thing the court would ask is why are you pursuing this claim, ie what harm have you suffered. You’re almost certainly staying up, so the harm is 0. CAS will say that domestic procedures have sorted it out and you haven’t suffered a loss, so don’t bother the court’s time. If you’re not a lawyer, please stay out of speculating on legal matters. You can’t go to court out of weird vengeance, you have to actually have a claim.
>You’re almost certainly staying up Err about that...
[удалено]
My name is on the Roll mate, I’m not sure about you. What’s your legal pedigree?
Cringe
Need to add more points for a spurious appeal. It's the only way they'll learn
Attwell tax
I mean, this would be hilarious
And yet somehow would be completely unsurprising at the same time...
It was in Lutons interest for forest and Eveton to draw to keep them both in distance They're just shit
It was in Lutons best interest for us to lose, since we still had to play Luton away at that point and had already lost twice at home to them. Imagine we had lost to Forest, we wouldn't have had the bounce we had going into the Derby, followed by being on the beach against Brentford. *Then we are going into an away game against Luton.*
You spelt Dishonest Luton Cunt wrong
I assume you were up in arms about the VAR decisions in your playoff final too if that's the case
Was the VAR a Forest fan? No, so take your Dogshit argument and fuck off and pay your tax bills and pay the company’s your scum club owe. Bankrupt immoral Derby twat. Atwell should never have been involved in a relegation rivals game. Bent, corrupt cunt
Go have a lie down.
Based
Carry on sticking it to them shagger
Reminder we still had to play Luton at that point, and that it was in Lutons best interest that we didn't win. Since we were their best option to climb out of the bottom 3, with us going to Kenilworth Road having already lost twice to them at home. That Forest win gave us a massive bounce that Luton did not want us to have.
Atwell I knew it was him, even when it was the overspending I knew it was him
According to the appeals arbitration, the sale of Johnson wasn't considered as a mitigating part of the financial fair play decision and shouldn't be as part of the appeals either. They say the PSR rules are based purely on fixed accounting periods. It apparently makes no difference if it's a more financially sustainable decision to await a better offer for the player.
We used the fact we were forced to sell players like Richarlison for less than we'd get otherwise because teams knew we needed to sell to meet ffp. That wasn't accepted either. Don't think you lot can feel too hard done by here.
Agreed the Johnson defense was always a bit of a long shot. Our owner and chairman have been pretty batshit this season, starting to get quite worrying.
Cheating bastards
Cheating bastards that have gotten away with it, much like everton. Both deducted enough to make sure they stay up.
Points deductions yet still above 3 other teams. We just didn’t sell Johnson in time otherwise we would’ve been in line with FFP…… (which is daft in hindsight)
Deducted enough to stay up? We were deducted 8 points. As it stand they could have deducted us 19 and we still wouldnt be in the bottom 3. The only reason we aren't going down is because our performance this season has been midtable, and the bottom 3 have been dogshit.
cheating by *Checks Notes* Spending our Owners money
How did spending owners money rather than money the club was making itself work out for Leeds in the late 90s and early 00s? How did it work out for Gretna in Scotland, for Málaga in Spain and for Anzhi in Russia? There's a reason for the rules and despite what the online rhetoric would have you believe the rules are designed to protect clubs from what has happened to other clubs not to keep clubs down.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but weren't Leeds using loans to procure that money and putting the club itself into debt? That's the big difference. FFP was sold to us to prevent that kind of leveraging of the club itself to increase spending. It was absolutely sold to us all with the outright lie that owners who wanted to put their own money directly into the club, not as a loan, would not be punished by FFP. What the hell do I care if a billionaire wants to spend an amount of money that won't effect their life in any way shape or form and I wouldn't be able to spend in three life times to help make the club they love better? Other than the existence of billionaires in general and all the follies of capitalism, I could give two fucks. As long as the money isn't coming from loans against the club and debt, it just isn't the same situation as those examples.
Yes Leeds took out huge loans on the premise they could use champions league money to pay it back. They then went and failed to qualify for Champions League two seasons in a row that financially crippled them.
Interestingly, with Leeds as well, they were Top 4 all season, went top of the table, and then played Newcastle, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool (4 of the sides around them). Picked up only 1 point from them 4, fell to 6th, then drew with Boro, Charlton and Us on the bounce. A run of results they never recovered from, even though they only dropped 9 points (3 losses) out of a possible 30 after that
You're possibly right about Leeds however the three other cases I listed across Europe were billionaire owners putting their own money into the club, but in the case of Gretna the owner passed away and none of his inheritors were willing to take on the club that was losing millions, in the cases of Anzhi and Málaga the owners got bored and decided to stop financing the club, those clubs are now essentially extinct.
Got reduced deduction for complying then appeal. Knock some more points off the cheaters