Premier League rivals expect Nottingham Forest to suffer FFP points deduction

Chief executives at rival Premier League clubs believe Nottingham Forest will be docked points due to financial rule breaches – which could have a significant impact on the relegation battle ahead.

Everton have already been docked 10 points this season and one Premier League chief executive is “adamant” Forest will suffer a similar fate.

The Merseyside club have appealed against that ruling and are expected to learn the outcome this week, which will have some influence on a second hearing into a further breach as well as Forest’s case.

When is the hearing due?

Forest will learn this week of the date for their hearing after being charged by the Premier League for breaching profit and sustainability rules (PSR) and it is expected to be within the first fortnight of March.

The club and the Premier League will have an opportunity to appeal against the outcome, which will be heard before the end of the season so that any punishment can be applied this campaign.

What are the key arguments?

Forest’s argument is expected to hinge around whether they can convince the independent three-person commission to backdate the £47.5m fee received for the sale of Brennan Johnson to Tottenham Hotspur.

Their claim is that had they sold the player within the financial window under question, when they had lower offers, they would have lost money and instead held out for a higher fee.

How convinced the three-person independent commission hearing Forest’s case are by the argument that the nature of the Johnson sale should be taken into consideration will prove pivotal not only for their case, but FFP breaches going forwards.

To recap: Johnson, now 22, joined Forest’s academy aged eight and excelled, making his debut as an 18-year-old. By the time Forest were open to offers for the forward, Johnson had made more than 20 appearances for Wales, scored 12 times in 55 games for his club the previous season and had played at the Qatar World Cup.

A highly saleable asset, the entire fee was banked as profit under PSR rules as he was a product of the club’s academy. Brentford offered around £30m within the financial time frame in question, but Spurs were also keen and Forest wanted more money. Eventually the sale, for £47.5m, went through on deadline day of the summer window. By then, however, it was, according to the rulebook, two months too late.

Fair or unfair?

Is it unfair to have a cut-off point for the financial period during a transfer window? Try convincing Spurs chairman Daniel Levy to agree to a transfer two months before the end of the window so you can comply with PSR and he will probably hang up the phone.

Should Forest simply have sold Johnson for the lower figure to comply, losing out on significant spending power already well behind rivals? Have Forest merely been the victims of trying to compete in an already bumpy financial playing field?

“In my view Forest have got a fairly raw deal in respect of Financial Fair Play,” football finance expert Kieran Maguire told i.

“They were promoted with a squad that cost £12m up against billion-pound-costing squads. They only have a £61m allowable loss for FFP purposes compared to £105m for the established clubs of the Premier League [due to being an EFL club in some of the accounting period].

“But having said that it does look as though they’ve exceeded the limits. They were pretty close to them in the EFL. They signed an awful lot of players for big fees, and others on smaller fees but with big wages.

“So certainly when I did my sums – I called them out a couple of weeks before the announcement was made as being very high risk – and it’s come as no surprise.”

The law is shaped by precedent, based on the outcomes of trials held before, on the decisions of judges, and the same is arguably happening now in attempts to curb the exorbitant and out-of-control spending in English football.

The outcome of Everton’s appeal, expected to be made public this week, will have a knock-on effect on the new hearing into the Merseyside club’s second case, for a subsequent breach, and Forest’s impending date.

As, indeed, will the outcome of Forest’s Johnson argument have on future cases.

“If they manage to persuade the commission that the sale of Brennan Johnson can be backdated to 30 June 2023, that really sets the cat among the pigeons in respect of all both current and previous FFP commissions,” Maguire adds. “But you never know with the way the rules operate these days.”

Why are clubs being punished?

A cynic could interpret what’s happening as making up the rules as they go along.

Many feel Everton’s 10-point deduction, when considering Portsmouth were deducted nine points for entering administration in 2010, was incredibly harsh. And will feel that were Forest to be handed a similar penalty for trying to fight fire with fire – or, in this case, money with money – it would be harsher still. Others will say if you spend more than £100m in a single transfer window outside your means and the rules, you deserve to be punished.

And points deductions are the only thing Premier League clubs really care about and respond to. Issue a fine and clubs either don’t care or it creates a self-perpetuating financial hole. But threaten their chances of winning the title, or making the Champions League, or Europe, or, in the cases of Forest and Everton, their places in the top flight, and clubs take notice.

The 10-point deduction imposed on Everton for spending £19.5m above the permitted £105m loss over a three-year period has sent shockwaves through the Premier League. Just look at the January transfer window, the first since Everton were handed the penalty and coming during the month Forest were charged and Everton again. A staggering 88 per cent decrease in spending on the previous equivalent window – £815m down to a shade under £100m.

Maybe this, after all, is the perfect antidote for the Premier League’s grotesque transfer spending and attitude to money. Even so, it will still be a tough pill for Everton and Forest to swallow if it costs them a place in the Premier League.