Premier League 23-24

[only2garners]

On 21/03/2024 at 08:05, Blue blood said:

Agree. They are really trying to get it a closed shop. 

Reading about Forset I was astounded by how unfair these rules actually are. I mean I knew they were, and the City debacle is showing what a farce and how much favouritism is in play, but looking at this case brought it to a whole new level. 

Firstly Forest have a lower loss allowance as they were in the Championship for 2 of those seasons. Significantly less losses allowed. That really seems to be weighting the dice against promoted clubs. They try expanding to be premiership level but must have Championship level losses? Very unfair imo. 

Secondly the Johnson transfer doesn't count when they delayed the sale to the end of the window where they could ger more money for him - thus being outside of the accounting window (marginally.) That's apparently a business decision not a mitigating factor. My business knowledge is sketchy but even I know that accounts and financial judgements DO make reference to factors outside of the accounting period. Loans that are to come in, big repayments coming up - they are a factor! Bizarre that FFP says otherwise. Sucking the soul out of football. 

I agree that the rules are not fair. But Forest knew what the rules were from the outset, but they carried on buying players. They bought 44 players in 15 months, including 5 goalkeepers and three players who have never played a minute of league football for Forest. They were told by their own FD in January 23 that they needed to sell in that window but they bought some more. The Johnson transfer was not marginally outside the accounting window - it was two months later.

[Polky]

Waggott would love this!

[simongarnerisgod]

im`e more concerned about them trying to con the government and the taxpayer into funding it

[Oldgregg86]

I’d be fuming if they let the red rats play at our home

[simongarnerisgod]

10 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

I’d be fuming if they let the red rats play at our home

ditto everyone else in the north west😆they can always **** off and play in gillingham,loads of utd fans in kent

[Oldgregg86]

Play at Wembley because no one wants you

[Moptop1]

It’s the kind of thing Venkeys would do and let them use Ewood. God forbid.

Waggott’s already making arrangements and fucking off us fans. Why wouldn’t he consider this to the red scum?

[simongarnerisgod]

9 minutes ago, Moptop1 said:

It’s the kind of thing Venkeys would do and let them use Ewood. God forbid.

Waggott’s already making arrangements and fucking off us fans. Why wouldn’t he consider this to the red scum?

he undoubtedly would🥺however he should consider,if you keep annoying and poking the bear,it will eventually go beserk and rip your head off,in football context you can only get away with so much before the fans start really going for you steve,even the most mild mannered fan will only put up with so much,beware maggott,football fans can get very poisonous if you **** them off to many times

[Blue blood]

On 23/03/2024 at 16:44, only2garners said:

I agree that the rules are not fair. But Forest knew what the rules were from the outset, but they carried on buying players. They bought 44 players in 15 months, including 5 goalkeepers and three players who have never played a minute of league football for Forest. They were told by their own FD in January 23 that they needed to sell in that window but they bought some more. The Johnson transfer was not marginally outside the accounting window - it was two months later.

Sorry missed replying to this originally.

Some good points, and I'd be the first to admit Forest haven't been that prudent. (Although speaking to Forest fans it's perhaps less reckless than it appears. For example the number of loans when they went up and the keeper situation to name two.) However whether known or not the fact that the rules aren't fair and limit promoted clubs more is both unethical and creates a glass ceiling. I'd disagree that 2 months outside the accounting period shouldn't be factored in - business accounts factor in things from much longer periods in my limited experience. So I think it's harsh of them not to allow this and counter to general accounting principles. 

[Blow-in]

16 hours ago, simongarnerisgod said:

ditto everyone else in the north west😆they can always **** off and play in gillingham, all utd fans are kents

Fixed it for you.

[wilsdenrover]

Forest had two choices:

Sell the player within the relevant accounting period for a fee which allowed them to comply with FFP regulations or 

Sell the player at a date of their choosing to try to maximise the fee (but in the knowledge this would mean them breaching FFP regulations)

How can making a decision in the full knowledge this means you’ll be in breach of the rules possibly be a mitigation for that breach??

 

 

 

 

 

[Upside Down]

2 hours ago, wilsdenrover said:

Forest had two choices:

Sell the player within the relevant accounting period for a fee which allowed them to comply with FFP regulations or 

Sell the player at a date of their choosing to try to maximise the fee (but in the knowledge this would mean them breaching FFP regulations)

How can making a decision in the full knowledge this means you’ll be in breach of the rules possibly be a mitigation for that breach??

 

 

 

 

 

As per usual, no action taken against City, Chelsea, Newcastle but swift and decisive action taken against Everton and Nottingham Forest.

Honestly what even is the point?

[simongarnerisgod]

6 minutes ago, Upside Down said:

As per usual, no action taken against City, Chelsea, Newcastle but swift and decisive action taken against Everton and Nottingham Forest.

Honestly what even is the point?

no yet,though im`e not expecting much of a punishment for them,this premier league is becoming a financial monster out of control

[wilsdenrover]

18 hours ago, Upside Down said:

As per usual, no action taken against City, Chelsea, Newcastle but swift and decisive action taken against Everton and Nottingham Forest.

Honestly what even is the point?

They’re right to punish Everton and Forest.

They’re wrong not to punish the others you’ve mentioned.

As to what’s the point - I’ve not a clue!!

[wilsdenrover]

Tonali available for Newcastle next season?

I wouldn’t bet on it…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68686129

 

[K-Hod]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

Tonali available for Newcastle next season?

I wouldn’t bet on it…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68686129

 

Appreciate addiction isn’t simple, but Christ, you’d hope at least someone was on him 24/7 after the ban in Italy, to stop him doing the exact same over here!

[Oldgregg86]

How (even with VAR) is that a penalty on gordan. Phillips had no idea he was there and gordan who went for the ball was no where near getting the ball . That is an appalling decision. If anything it was a foul on phillips 

Edited March 30 by Oldgregg86

[jodrell]

How is that a penalty for Newcastle? he came from behind and falls over.

[chaddyrovers]

3 hours ago, Oldgregg86 said:

How (even with VAR) is that a penalty on gordan. Phillips had no idea he was there and gordan who went for the ball was no where near getting the ball . That is an appalling decision. If anything it was a foul on phillips 

Exactly why VAR doesn't get everything right. I would have never bought it in cos it doesn't get 100% right and left it to the ref on the field and bringing in more ex footballers who don't make it at professional level as match officials cos at least they will understand the game much better 

 

[roversfan99]

Complain about the numerous errors without VAR but wont have VAR because it doesnt have a 100% accuracy. What sort of warped logic is that.

Ex footballers has always been a wishy washy suggestion but firstly you need enough willing officials to come from that source, and would having ex amateur players make any difference anyway? Just because they played part time.

[chaddyrovers]

VAR is down to the VAR match official interpretation and that's why they get it wrong some of the time. 

Unlike Cricket where it is 99% accurate and it is either yes or No answer. Football isn't 

Plus VAR takes far too long often and zero communication with fans in the stadium about the decision and how it been reach. 

[Upside Down]

5 hours ago, jodrell said:

How is that a penalty for Newcastle? he came from behind and falls over.

💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰 💰 

[roversfan99]

The fact of the matter is that the overall accuracy of decisions increases considerably with VAR. More than an influx of former footballers (even if such a pool of willing officials existed) ever could. It isnt perfect (nor could anything ever) be but the idea that anyone would reject it because accuracy isnt 100% even though it is still much higher than without is totally illogical.

I get to an extent if people say they would prefer without, accept mistakes as talking points and ensure the delays are removed. Its one of them, either accept that mistakes will be made in favour of keeping the game pure, or strive to get accuracy as high as possible and bring in VAR. Talk of other improvements feels like a deckchairs and titanic situation.

[AllRoverAsia]

I've just seen the highlights.

The first was creative aka cheating by sticking in a leg to create the contact.

The second was a foul by the same git who plays for the Saudis.

Payday for someone.....a shameful day for football

Edited March 31 by AllRoverAsia

[Wheelton Blue]

3 games undefeated now for the Dingles, with an under strength Wolves to visit the Turd on Tuesday, followed by a trip to Everton who themselves are on a Rovers-esque winless run.

I dread to think, but they've given themselves a sniff of a chance.