Sustainability index - only Forest below us

All this sh*t going down......the PL is basically finished as a credible entity...come on for Christ Sake..it's all now about the moves to a Euro Super League...the pressures are being applied by the MONEY men.
No b@stard is going to slap penalty points onto Manbagchester Utd or Manchester City or Arsenal are they Batman ?
We know where it's going.....a World War in that sense is not so bad a thing....shut the sh*t down for a few years...!
 
Last edited:
I’m sorry but this is a joke.

The rules are ‘allegedly’ supposed to be in place to ensure profit and sustainability.

Forest reject a 35m offer for Johnson in June, they wanted to hold out for a higher fee later in the window which they believed was attainable (they were right as they end up selling for 12m more than they were initially offered.)

If they accept that Johnson offer in June they pass the ‘profit and sustainability’ rules but they miss out on £12m.

How does losing out on money make a club more ‘sustainable?’ The whole system is a joke tbh.
 
Waz afcb said:
I’m sorry but this is a joke.

The rules are ‘allegedly’ supposed to be in place to ensure profit and sustainability.

Forest reject a 35m offer for Johnson in June, they wanted to hold out for a higher fee later in the window which they believed was attainable (they were right as they end up selling for 12m more than they were initially offered.)

If they accept that Johnson offer in June they pass the ‘profit and sustainability’ rules but they miss out on £12m.

How does losing out on money make a club more ‘sustainable?’ The whole system is a joke tbh.
Click to expand...
Agree, surely the cut off dates should be outside transfer windows. But Forest would have been aware of the rules and the risk they were taking. There was no guarantee they would get more money or even that a transfer would ultimately happen.
 
redharry said:
Agree, surely the cut off dates should be outside transfer windows. But Forest would have been aware of the rules and the risk they were taking. There was no guarantee they would get more money or even that a transfer would ultimately happen.
Click to expand...
True, but clubs are naturally going to have to end up selling players under market value to avoid breaking the rules with the way this system is set up, it’s certainly not about sustainability.
 
Waz afcb said:
True, but clubs are naturally going to have to end up selling players under market value to avoid breaking the rules with the way this system is set up, it’s certainly not about sustainability.
Click to expand...
So the rule should be, you have to comply by June, unless your selling a player who you might get more money for if you wait 3 months.
 
Waz afcb said:
I’m sorry but this is a joke.

The rules are ‘allegedly’ supposed to be in place to ensure profit and sustainability.

Forest reject a 35m offer for Johnson in June, they wanted to hold out for a higher fee later in the window which they believed was attainable (they were right as they end up selling for 12m more than they were initially offered.)

If they accept that Johnson offer in June they pass the ‘profit and sustainability’ rules but they miss out on £12m.

How does losing out on money make a club more ‘sustainable?’ The whole system is a joke tbh.
Click to expand...
It's not binary though is it?

The period finishes 30th June.

They sold Johnson 1st Sept, over 2 months later, and even played him 3 times this season.

Their owner was a dick, when they went up. Like a kid in a sweet shop, spent way too much, and just one year later, here we are in consequence land.

The Johnson thing is a smokescreen, because they broke the rules, and they have had to cone up with a tenuous justification.

I don't expect them to ask that the proceeds are removed from this year's accounts, this time next year, do you?
 
Last edited:
We should be supporting Forest and Everton on this affair..
...all this is to deflect attention from Manchester City....and probably sh*t that's gone down at Manchester Utd .
 
CherryBare said:
So the rule should be, you have to comply by June, unless your selling a player who you might get more money for if you wait 3 months.
Click to expand...
No the rule should be that you have to comply my the end of August, when the transfer window closes. I struggle to see how any sane minded person couldn’t think the same. In fact I’ve just read that that actually will be the case from this Summer onwards.
 
Waz afcb said:
No the rule should be that you have to comply my the end of August, when the transfer window closes. I struggle to see how any sane minded person couldn’t think the same. In fact I’ve just read that that actually will be the case from this Summer onwards.
Click to expand...
Whether it makes sense or not, they knew the rules, it finishes end of June, like many players contracts. Forest signed way more players than they could even register, cook wasn't even in their squad. Surely this is behaviour the rules are trying to stop.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
It's Lorient it's not some kind of fancy shampoo.

I've no idea about the ins and outs of it but clearly transactions and deals between these clubs are not like other transactions and that some owners have used these connections to bypass FFP as far as I understand it.
Click to expand...
I’m not au fait with fancy shampoo.

I get what you are saying and am open minded to it but can’t see it anywhere or nobody has been able to explain it on here. Also does Bill actually own L’Oreal Pantene? Thought he was the largest minority guy but still in minority.
 
NWCherries98 said:
I’m really struggling to see how we’re not going to be the next club in trouble after our recent spending? Can anyone more educated than me explain more lol.
Click to expand...
This is why foley is flagging summer sales as a possibility. Also get to 55 points and a 10 point deduction isnt a big issue!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;