Birmingham points deduction

[Sheffsteel]

It’s being reported that Birmingham City have agreed with the EFL to accept an immediate 9 points deduction as punishment for ignoring the FFP. It was initially feared that they would receive the usual 12 points deductionm which would put them right in the relegation battle.

It made me think that often these punishments are just for show paying lip service and not serious punishments.

Regards the Birmingham City case, the EFL realise that a 12 point deduction would our them in to a relegation battle, so they’ve relaxed the punishment to “give them a chance”, so they are more likely to accept the punishment without resorting to expensive legal action.

Regards West Ham in 2007, they were stuck at the bottom of the table, so any points deduction would mean instant relegation. Even with no points deduction it still looked massive odds on that they would be relegated.
The PL took the unusual step to “give them a chance” by giving West Ham a massive fine instead of the normal points deduction.

My point is these punishments always seem to be negotiated between the EFL, PL and the club, so that all parties come out a winner, so then it’s not such a history changing punishment.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

THREAD MERGED WARNING AHEAD.

 

[bornablade]

They should have been given a 9 or 12 point reduction next season.

 

[Sheffsteel]

They should have been given a 9 or 12 point reduction next season.

They mentioned the league rule, that there’s a cut off date.

Points deduction applied before (think it’s 28th March) must be applied this season.
Points deduction after the cut off date are applied next season.

 

[Sheff de party]

Taking 9 points off the does put them in a relegation battle to be fair, especially considering their next three games.

Unfortunately gives them something to play for when they play us, but at least they have Leeds first.

 

[Topplayersleave]

It’s being reported that Birmingham City have agreed with the EFL to accept an immediate 9 points deduction as punishment for ignoring the FFP. It was initially feared that they would receive the usual 12 points deductionm which would put them right in the relegation battle.

It made me think that often these punishments are just for show paying lip service and not serious punishments.

Regards the Birmingham City case, the EFL realise that a 12 point deduction would our them in to a relegation battle, so they’ve relaxed the punishment to “give them a chance”, so they are more likely to accept the punishment without resorting to expensive legal action.

Regards West Ham in 2007, they were stuck at the bottom of the table, so any points deduction would mean instant relegation. Even with no points deduction it still looked massive odds on that they would be relegated.
The PL took the unusual step to “give them a chance” by giving West Ham a massive fine instead of the normal points deduction.

My point is these punishments always seem to be negotiated between the EFL, PL and the club, so that all parties come out a winner, so then it’s not such a history changing punishment.

The punishment for West Ham might have been fair at the time if they stopped playing Tevez and Mascharano until their contracts were made legal, a £5.5 million fine was sufficient.

What then should then happen to a club, who having received a £5.5 million fine promise that they will rectify the offending 3rd party contracts, then tell the football authorities that they have rectified the offending 3rd party contracts, then it is found that they didn't rectify the offending 3rd party contracts

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

It's a fucking joke to be honest.

Now you have piglets saying they've not broken the rules as much as birmingham and complied when under an embargo so perhaps a slap on the wrist or a suspended points deduction for us.

Seriously, it's a pathetic punishment, what's the fucking point of these rules if teams can flagrantly break them with absolutely fuckall comeback.

 

[BushBlade]

They’re also under an embargo and are still being investigated for signing Pederson, according to Sky.

 

[Lmaobob]

Bad timing probably, will make them fight even harder to try and avoid relegation. They will give everything they've got to beat us. Much more of an incentive now.

 

[Beans]

Bad timing probably, will make them fight even harder to try and avoid relegation. They will give everything they've got to beat us. Much more of an incentive now.

I don't think it changes much in terms of our game with them - I'd say they have about the same chance of going down as they did of making the playoffs pre-deduction. IE very slim both ways.

There is no chance they go down - they'd be 5 points ahead of Rotherham now and I'm not totally sure Rotherham will get 6 points the rest of the season. Remember in terms of playing staff nothing has changed - it's a midtable team that will pick up points at a midtable rate and finish on about 52-55 points.

I'm actually really annoyed about this. If I was a financially-reckless owner - and there are a few - this ruling essentially says "spend away lads, we'll adapt whatever punishment comes your way so it doesn't make too much of an impact, and give it to you at the most convenient time". Birmingham wilfully broke the FFP rules; I'm sure plenty of clubs will just be able to do more "creative accounting" and feign innocence / ignorance and get an even lesser punishment.

Bah. It's already hard enough competing at this level, this to me just seems like giving carte blanche to those spending beyond their means.

 

[BushBlade]

Bad timing probably, will make them fight even harder to try and avoid relegation. They will give everything they've got to beat us. Much more of an incentive now.

Or make them more nervous.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Harry Redknapp - "It's not my fault"

 

[PaulHalfway]

Harry did it to Pompey and then Birmingham unfortunately

 

[I should coco]

Harry Redknapp - "It's not my fault"

"It woz my dog wot dun it".

Clever dogs them bulldogs, opening secretive Swiss bank accounts when you think they've just disappeared to fetch a stick.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Harry did it to Pompey and then Birmingham unfortunately

QPR?

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

Nine points is pathetic and hardly a deterrent to other clubs thinking of flouting the rules.
Can’t say I’m that shocked though unfortunately

 

[Sheffsteel]

Nine points is pathetic and hardly a deterrent to other clubs thinking of flouting the rules.
Can’t say I’m that shocked though unfortunately

You can just imagine the conversation between the EFL and Birmingham City.

EFL: You broke the FFP rules and we need to punish you. What do you suggest?
BC: Well it cant be a points deduction because we’ve a good chance of promotion and looking good for the play-offs.
EFL: OK, we’ll suspend the punishment decision and see how you get in in the league.

A few weeks later
BC: We’ve been on a poor run recently and I think promotion is gone so we’re now happy to accept a points deduction.
EFL: Good, so we’ll give you the standard 12 points deduction then.
BC: That would put us on the brink of relegation and we have some tough matches coming up against WBA, Leeds and Sheff U.
EFL: But the guidance sets a 12 point deduction.
BC: We would appeal against a 12 point punishment and there would be bad publicity of a long drawn out legal battle.
BC: we’ve spoken to our legal people and we’re prepared to compromise and accept a 9 point punishment.
EFL: OK, if you’re happy with 9 points then we’ll set that as the punishment and hope it serves as a lesson to other clubs.

 

[PokerBlade]

Hard to say. It's nearly a fifth of the points generally required for safety, and in that context it seems like a penalty that would deter a lot of clubs. On the other hand, unless punishments are very harsh clubs will still be willing to gamble that promotion to the Prem outweighs the risk.

I've always wondered in the Wham case how much the PL thought that it looked like they'd go down anyway and they could avoid any major legal trouble by giving them a punishment Wham wouldn't contest. Instead things went pear-shaped and we suffered the consequences.

 

[Trigger Blade]

Harry did it to Pompey and then Birmingham unfortunately

QPR?

Apart from Spurs, you’ll struggle to find a club that Harry has been involved with that hasn’t been in dire straits before, during or after his tenure. Bournemouth and Southampton are two more, even West Ham, although he hasn’t destroyed all of them single handed.

 

[8lade]

I don't get it. The punishment is not supposed to be a punishment, how does that work?
Either you break the rule and get a punishment (maybe the severity could be on a sliding scale depending on how bad the infringement) or don't bother with the rule.

 

[LondonBlade89]

It's mad. It feels like they set these punishments based on what's happening in the league at that time. It'd be like reducing a bloke's punishment for a prime because he's got a kid on the way. It shouldn't make a difference.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Bring on the pigs.

 

[blade too long]

theres a bit of wiggle room with any punishment
Id hope the lesser punishment of 9 rather tthan 12 is due to the fiscal sliding scale

if say someone overspends by 15m should get less than say a club being 55m over spent , if you get my gist

Each case should be different with the bigger abusers getting the maximum punishment

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

Regards West Ham in 2007, they were stuck at the bottom of the table, so any points deduction would mean instant relegation. Even with no points deduction it still looked massive odds on that they would be relegated.
The PL took the unusual step to “give them a chance” by giving West Ham a massive fine instead of the normal points deduction.

My point is these punishments always seem to be negotiated between the EFL, PL and the club, so that all parties come out a winner, so then it’s not such a history changing punishment.

We were a 'party' to that deal, and certainly did not come out winners. And it changed our history. Handing out punishments is difficult, but they do have to consider more than the individual club receiving the punishment. The consequences can be wide-reaching.

 

[Silent Blade]

Bad timing probably, will make them fight even harder to try and avoid relegation. They will give everything they've got to beat us. Much more of an incentive now.

Their next home game is against Leeds.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

That makes our game at Brum a much edgier affair, with them now in a relegation battle......

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

You can just imagine the conversation between the EFL and Birmingham City.

EFL: You broke the FFP rules and we need to punish you. What do you suggest?
BC: Well it cant be a points deduction because we’ve a good chance of promotion and looking good for the play-offs.
EFL: OK, we’ll suspend the punishment decision and see how you get in in the league.

A few weeks later
BC: We’ve been on a poor run recently and I think promotion is gone so we’re now happy to accept a points deduction.
EFL: Good, so we’ll give you the standard 12 points deduction then.
BC: That would put us on the brink of relegation and we have some tough matches coming up against WBA, Leeds and Sheff U.
EFL: But the guidance sets a 12 point deduction.
BC: We would appeal against a 12 point punishment and there would be bad publicity of a long drawn out legal battle.
BC: we’ve spoken to our legal people and we’re prepared to compromise and accept a 9 point punishment.
EFL: OK, if you’re happy with 9 points then we’ll set that as the punishment and hope it serves as a lesson to other clubs.

Sadly I wouldn’t be at all surprised if that was unerringly accurate

 

[Beans]

This is a good breakdown of the situation.

 

[BLADES1988]

So are they actually getting a deduction or what?

 

[RammyBlade]

The ONLY real fair way is to relegate ANY club that breaks the rules - that would be a real sanction whereas Brum have got a good chance of promotion next year with the squad they have and all through cheating