New Premier League spending rules could be in place for next season

It gets better, the new model is likely to limit clubs to a wage-to-turnover-ratio of 85%. And yes Everton's is 89%.

So next season we can look forward to staying in the same situation. No doubt a ban on signing any players, and no doubt further sanctions for being over a % that was not in place when we gave out the contracts.

We really are a basket case assuming we even survive relegation, administration or anything else in the offing.

Why Everton Football Club are not taking legal action for what has been done to them is beyond me.

That's a whopping £510M that they can spend on new players, while Everton, for example, only generate about £180M each season, and can therefore only spend about £154M on new players. Surely that can't be fair?

They would not or will not deduct points from any club that will take them on to the very limit. We held our hand out for a slap on the wrist and hot kicked in the bollocks.

Sadly, I think that the incompetence that landed us in shit was monumentally outdone by the feeble, utterly inept response.

Good thinking!!!

I'm certain both the standard and the consistency levels would dramatically improve overnight, if they were forced to Miked-Up the ref, and it completely baffles me why they won't do this.

What the fuck needs to happen to wake our club up.

We should have got more than 4 points back but, once again, we just rolled with the ruling and took the decision, the Premier League decided "You buck up and we will keep you waiting for the okay for the new owners. And you guys keep borrowing money while we make sure you get into as much debt as possible before we give you the okay." We should be suing them for revenue lost while waiting for their decision.

Personally, I think every Everton and football supporter around the world should write a letter to the sporting minister to step in and take control of football due to the bias against the so called smaller clubs and turn the other cheek to the Top 6 clubs.

The new ruling would make trying to win any silverware impossible. Man City, Liverpool, Man Utd, Chelsea would have minimal £250M more to spend on players every year. Clubs like Everton will be competing just to stay in the league or make the odd cup final.

If a club is one or two years into the three year cycle and would have fallen foul of PSR if it was still in place next season, why should they not be judged as having the same playing advantage that Everton or Forest are being hit for??

Somebody please explain that to me, surely if it's a 3-year cycle, the old system has to stay until the end of the cycle?

Otherwise they most certainly do have the sporting advantage?

Are we therefore likely to see that only Everton, at this point, have been made an example of?

That would leave them 7 behind us. Providing we don't get anymore than 2, I think we should be alright.

But to replace it by saying you can spend 85% of your income on transfer fees and players wages assumes that 15% covers all other costs, with the same present exceptions, ie, new grounds or improvements, Academies, women's football,etc?

Is that annual income or as at present over a 3-year period and if you make a profit then that is carried over, or can you just go hell for leather on say, super-duper lawnmowers, Agents fees or players who are Agents with a lawn mowing business on the side?

Johnny Haynes, George Eastham and Marc Bosman must be wondering what it was they achieved albeit there has to be a modicum of sense even in an uneven playing field.

I keep using the analogy of George Orwell's Animal Farm. Some are more equal than others.

Aligning to something relating to Uefa's FFP is even worse. All that has served to do is keep those at the top at the top with little chance for others to break through.

They need regulating rather than making their own rules up as they go along to satisfy their own egos.

I would bet that Forest get between 2 and 4 points deducted.

I wouldn't be surprised to see us get between 2 and 6 points deducted… and then hit with additional points as it is our second offence!

I know it's absurd but I wouldn't bet on these clowns not doing this.

I just wish the Sly Six would just piss off and let the rest of us get on playing real footie and not the corrupt Premier League that's for Sky Sports' target audience and the station's sponsors and advertisers.

On another point, if Everton sell Branthwaite for less than £90M (plus add-ons to total £100M), they will need their asses kicked good time. Branthwaite will captain England and, if he stays fit, will win over a 100 caps. I just hope he goes to Real Madrid if he does go and enjoys a glorious career.

As for Onana, £60M minimum for a full Belgium international. Our days of selling cheap are surely over… aren't they?

Us and the other remaining clubs will then put a greater emphasis on developing young players.

Whether this is workable, I don't know.

If anyone still doubts that the Premier League aren't corrupt, they need their head seeing to.

Moshiri is clearly telling our club to say nothing because he wants 777 Partners approved by Premier League.

Masters knows this, keeps delaying the 777 decision while he literally shapes things and winds down the clock so Everton are relegated.

That is what is staring me in the face.

Didn't take long, did it?

No competitive advantage? Of course they haven't been charged yet, and never will as the old PSR method will only apply to those already charged...

Of course, in the meantime, Everton will have been done twice in a 3-year cycle... Hmm, just a tad unfortunate aren't we?

This cannot be allowed to stand, it's one rule for us, another for those they want to keep sweet. I keep saying it... wipe all the slates clean, it's the fairest way. Otherwise, it just confirms what we have said all along: Corrupt.

Not only will they have an enormous advantage based on turnover, but the Mancs' latest cunning plan is to get the British taxpayer to pay for their new 'National Stadium of the North'. My arse! England will play there once a season at best in exchange for up to a billion pound taxpayer handout.

Shame we missed this trick and have basically ended up being docked points for trying to absorb our new stadium costs in the accounts.

And let's not forget they now expect to get Branthwaite for a knock-down price into the bargain following our receivership or relegation.

The Premier League = Rotten and Corrupt and making up the rules and sanctions to suit. Remember that the Premier League in 2020 secretly allowed Man Utd and Liverpool to vet the candidates for the Chief Executive's post. Masters is their glove puppet.

There is usually a rat in most serious situations. Masters is the obvious one, in this case. But, it isn't always the most obvious person(s). Any offers on who else might be culpable?

Premier League financial fair play rules explained and what restrictions are there on clubs spending what they want

Everton are just going to have to deal with the Profitability and Sustainability Rules they breached. The owner's so-called guarantee of funds is in the FFP section of the Premier League handbook. There are doubts regarding implementation.

As for other teams, they will have to go through the process. But Man City in 2020 were given a 2-year ban and a £30 million fine by Uefa for breaches of FFP rules, which they subsequently got overturned at a Court of Arbitration for Sports to just £10 million on the grounds of time-barred events. So we know the road they are going down with no independent commission timeframe in sight.

Sadly Everton are a long way from European Competition and it may be they are not interested. Ancelotti was the last one that was interested and he found himself a mile in front of his army.

1) The current rule will apply for this season. Any change will not be retrospective so there is every chance we get a third charge next seson!

2) I suspect any change will be phased in, like Uefa. They brought it in at 90%, after 1 year moved to 80% then 70%. Given we have recently been running at salary cost of 90% of income, we might be grateful for that!

3) The actual rules are 'The cost control rule restricts spending on player and coach wages, transfers, and agent fees to 70% of club revenues.' So it is important to note it is not just transfer fees. Whilst it will still leave us behind the "Big" clubs, the move to the new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock should massively improve our situation as it is key to increasing our revenues.

My own view is that the relegation places would have already been sorted if they hadn't taken such extreme measures, so Forest had better take some more points off Luton on Saturday before the league take some points off them!

I am a person who has been saying it wouldn't bother me if we were relegated but maybe that's because I have never thought we would be in any real danger (we still could be). I have seen quite a few Championship games recently and the standard is absolutely miles away from the Premier League.

Onto another tomorrow, and tomorrow is another day, they say. But I don't want another day, I want to know what's going on with the sale of Everton and the suspense is absolutely awful

Remember the days when what happened on the pitch was the most important thing?

The precedent from the EFL is 3 points for exceeding allowable losses and a further 3 points for excessive losses, so it's likely to be either 3 or 6 points deducted.

The Premier League's own precedent from this season pretty much ensures that a points deduction is the outcome. They have dismissed our mitigating circumstances.

I don't know what Forest's losses are, and it's possible their mitigating circumstances will be accepted.

There are a lot of moving parts, but I suspect 10 points on the board will only take us to 29 points after the next deduction. Should Forest escape a points deduction, or only face a 3-point deduction, that would likely not be enough to stay up.

If Forest got off more lightly than us, there would be a massive public outcry from the same folks but others too who have already spoken up on our behalf. It would reach Parliament. It would be a huge own-goal for North Wharf Road as the argument for external regulation would be close to absolute.

From what I've read, Forest have been caught red-handed and lack the sort of mitigation we pressed – like working with the Premier League. Mind you, that only did us a little good and even then only at the appeals stage.

As far as I'm aware, Forest only have the one mitigation they can use in their defence, the sale of Brennan Johnson which they want backdating prior to the end of June, and which if they had, albeit at a reduced fee, then they would probably not be facing any charge.

I hardly think even the corrupt Premier League will buy that excuse. Forest should get a minimum 6-point deduction, maybe more depending on their overall loss.

It will come down to the extent of Forest's breach – and they have a lower allowance than we do.

Personally, I don't think we'll have an issue this season. Luton are brave but out on their feet. Forest will get a significant points deduction and we'll get a double jeopardy type 'bonus deduction' for the past year.

We're probably not too far from safety. And we'll drag out a few goalless draws to make sure.

Our bigger issue is the ongoing running (or non-running) of the club.

Exciting times.

Forest will argue that they turned down an offer that was £20M below market value before the PSR deadline so they would become compliant when selling 2 months later for true market value.

However, the Premier League and appeal board, have already turned down our argument that we could have got £20M more for Richarlison if we weren't forced to sell before the PSR deadline.

Surely it's the same point?

The difference is they got £20M more and we didn't.

And they can evidence that they got more than was offered in the PSR fire sale. We can't.

They highlighted how stupid the rules are when they punish teams for financial irresponsibility and then force them into irresponsible financial deals. Whereas we just did the irresponsible financial deal to maintain a facade of financial responsibility.

Now we have PSR. Everton have been punished. We are likely to have another one in Forest but we are also now about to change the rules so those two will be the only ones who ever get punished for PSR.

I never have believed in conspiracy theories.

As I have posted before, Nottingham Forest's mitigation just doesn't add up. They could have had an argument if they had reigned in their spending between the PSR deadline date of 30 June 2023 and selling Brennan Johnson on transfer deadline day, 1 September 2023, but they didn't.

In between those dates they signed nine more players including Ibrahim Sangaré, Anthony Erlanga, Chris Wood, Andrew Omobamidele and Murillo, for a total of £103.87M.

As well as selling Johnson, they also brought in £13.36M in that time, so they have still increased their net transfer spend even including the sale of Johnson (which they want to count to the previous year's PSR figure as they are already way over on that).

What is more, even after getting charged, they spent the cash again in the January window, albeit on a much smaller scale than before.

As such, I would be stunned if their argument was accepted when looked against their continued transfer activity since the PSR deadline date, as their behaviour looks to be reckless.

Remember, this is a club with a relatively small stadium for the Premier League and they couldn't even get a shirt sponsor for the first half of last season.

Our appeal ruling established that a breach of PSR limits results in a points deduction, and that the starting figure should be a 6-point deduction, which can be increased if the club was significantly in breach or reduced with good mitigation.

With that in mind, I am expecting Forest to get a 6-point deduction plus possibly 1 or 2 extra points for their apparent reckless behaviour, and we get a 2-point deduction as 2/3 of the period has already been punished, plus possibly another 1-point deduction as worryingly our PSR trend must have gone back up again for us to have been charged a second time despite making a profit in the transfer market.

Personally, I don't think either club should have been charged as the PSR rules are not fit for purpose and are getting changed next season, but with us already getting 6 points deducted, that ship has sailed.

This (deliberate breach) is something we have been cleared of, so I would expect the punishment meted out to Forest to be proportionate. That means at least 6 points and probably more (noting that the precedent set with our case also means that they cannot get more than 9, with probably 8 being the maximum).

If that doesn't materialise (and unfortunately I have no faith whatsoever in the Premier League being consistent or fair in these matters), then we should be considering legal options. It's going to be an interesting couple of months!

That stinks because both clubs will receive points deductions through the incompetence of the Premier League's rules and no other club will get any although plenty are guilty of breaking those rules that were set by them.

By sentencing Everton and Forest then wiping the slate clean (Thanks, Christine), this will be their get-out in letting the more culpable clubs off the hook and restart with new rules from next August.

Also, it's not had the effect that Masters had hoped for as it's making the so-called best league in the world reduce the money spent on attracting the best players.

Yes, he can say "But the majority of clubs voted for this" – but I think most thought it wouldn't affect them, but now they know different.

The idea of the P&S rules was to try and stop owners spending money they didn't have, then walking away, leaving clubs in severe financial difficulty. But there were other alternatives to stop that happening, not least Gary Neville's plan of an owner's bond.

What was lacking was a plan for how punishments would be handed down for clubs breaking the rules, but this didn't happen.

I can't shake the feeling of déjà vu, that we are in for a kicking just to show anyone and everyone the Premier League means business.

We rant on about Man City and the injustice of other clubs getting around the system with creative accounting but will Everton be the only club to be penalised for breaking the rules on P&S?

It really has that feel, having been made an example of, an outcry from the top clubs to change the rules... it happens, they all pat each other on the back and laugh, shame about Everton though, they laugh and turn away.

Nah, it would never happen would it?

I should have done the lottery numbers that week... that they have the sheer audacity to scrap PSR because of the pressure from clubs as unfit for purpose (they are never going to say it but they know and so do the clubs) and starting before next season shift to a squad-cost ratio method.

If you haven't been charged under PSR, you're not going to be. But, wait a minute, the system is scrapped mid-cycle for the relief of many I suspect, but not for those charged, so exactly when does that stop? In another 3 years?

"Sorry about the relegation, Everton, but you voted for it... your own fault and we needed a focus point to carry the can. Oh yes, by the way, I'm afraid there won't be any parachute payments either."

If they won't wipe the slate clean for us as well, sue them. Enough of waiting for our fate from these greedy, corrupt bunch of arrogant twats (apologies but if Dawn French can use it, so can I).

PSR didn't work... they scrapped it, now fix the injustice. Wipe the slate clean for us too. One rule, one application for all or not at all.

But that's a stretch.

We didn't get a "kicking"...10 points reduced to 6.

"Will Everton be the only club"... sort of ignores the Nottingham Forest in the room.

Also PSR is still live for this season, if not longer, so who knows?

Mystic Meg can rest easy, Christine!

It's also going to help a lot of clubs, now that they are changing the rules, just as they have began punishing teams, but it definitely hasn't helped Everton (let's hope it's not twice, in the same season) that's for sure?

When you say PSR is still alive, Brendan, does this mean that clubs can still get punished for breaking these original rules, even though the rules will soon be changing?

That's very interesting that; I wonder how many teams will be punished?

You seem to think that losing 6 points, after having to fight to get 4 points back, is not a kicking? Well, I'm not ignoring Nottm Forest, but who else is being lined up to face any charges in the near future, while Man City are, alledgelly, going to face some charges in the Autumn of 2025 after being in the charge room for a lot longer than Everton.

Oh, and another of the ‘dodgers' Chelsea are still waiting to hear when they face going in the dock.

No set punishments were in place for clubs found guilty but introduced as they went along and are likely to be altered in August of this year before any other clubs, apart from Forest and Everton, are likely to be charged.

Since Everton were charged in March last year, Brendan, I think you have taken the line that Everton were guilty and must face the consequences even though nobody knew what the sentencing would be.

Christine and a few more of us thought the opposite of you, Brendan, it didn't mean any of us were right but, seeing what has happened and is still happening, it appears that the Premier League has made a real mess of setting these rules, what they really meant, and what the punishment was.

And it looks like the same people who changed the rules last August, halfway through the trial of Everton, will be changing them again this year in August.

I'm not convinced by the idea a 10-point deduction impacted us in any way. The 6 games immediately after the announcement saw 4 wins a draw and one defeat!!

A veritable purple patch.

We had a very good performance with an appalling VAR decision at Spurs, then a penalty given by the linesman, when we were fighting very hard to stay in the game, against an excellent on the night Manchester City, and then we looked dead on our feet at Wolves.

A small squad, then started to get a few injuries, which began to really stretch us, and I still don't think we have recovered physically, probably because of the effort the players put in during the gruelling month of December.

That's my feelings, Barry, especially because for the first time in three seasons, it felt as though our players had just begun to play without pressure, and then suddenly the pressure was put right back on them, with that very extreme (to begin with) points deduction.

I'm surprised that you have underestimated the pressure that was put on our very average squad by this Barry, unless I'm being dramatic!

So a delayed reaction, eh? Interesting hypothesis.

Forgive my cynicism but I just don't think modern players give a monkey's about the clubs they're at and therefore such matters don't really impact them.

They know they'll get a payday elsewhere.

I thought we played very well, lost one, won four, got knocked out of the League Cup on penalties, then lost the next three league games in December.

Playing eight games in December definitely took its toll and we haven't won another league game since.

I also think we will start winning a few games after we have had such a long break which should definitely physically recuperate the squad. We will see?

Forest are a smoke-screen for the corruption, they were probably going to yo-yo for a bit anyway, like most that are newly promoted.

Genuine apologies for posting, no offense intended to anyone.

With our wafer-thin squad, apart from the odd collapse, I've mostly been impressed with the performances and effort from the players this season. Sometimes they are running on empty and a lot of the matches have been close calls.

Don't start me on officials!

Frustrated at times with the punting. Those deep corners to Tarkowski at the back post that a lot of teams have sussed.

But with the now 6 points deduction removed, we'd be sat comfortable, which is a true reflection on how the team has performed in difficult circumstances.

Games and points to win.

Given that we were initially deducted 10 points I wouldn't class 6 as a kicking. Do you think the club statement after the appeal was saying we were "satisfied" with a kicking?

And sorry but ignoring Forest is exactly what you are doing.

I haven't taken the line you describe. I initially believed the club spin that we weren't in breach but when we admitted guilt and the first report came out that seemed pretty conclusive. Nevertheless I did feel at the time that the initial 10-point deduction was excessive.

Yes, when I say PSR is still alive, I mean that when clubs submit their accounts for this season they will be judged against the current PSR guidelines.

As to how many clubs will be charged... that will depend on how many breach the PSR limit.

I will also be very surprised if the Premier League charge anyone next season but maybe they will surprise me.

Lived my life not being cynical... met this guy once on a thread who just out of the blue and despite the fact he didn't like me, offered me tickets to an Everton match... for free like.

You'd never believe it but it happened to me.