Nottingham Forest hit with four-point deduction, falls into relegation zone

Nottingham Forest faces a significant challenge in the Premier League as they are set to receive a four-point deduction for violating the league’s profitability and sustainability regulations, pushing them into a precarious position in the relegation battle. This penalty, expected to be officially announced later on Monday, March 18, will reposition Forest from 17th place with 25 points to 18th, falling beneath Luton Town with a reduced tally of 21 points.

This development puts Forest in a tighter spot as the season nears its end, with Burnley trailing by four points and Sheffield United by seven, intensifying the relegation scramble.

Forest becomes the second Premier League club to be penalized for such breaches this season, following Everton, which initially faced a 10-point deduction. However, Everton’s penalty was later reduced to six points after an appeal.

The decision was made after a hearing took place on March 7 and 8, and it is anticipated that Forest will seek to appeal the decision in hopes of a reduced sanction.

Since their promotion to the Premier League in May 2022, Forest has been notably active in the transfer market, acquiring 42 players and spending a record sum of £250 million. This spending spree was instrumental in keeping them out of the relegation zone until this juncture of the season.

The Premier League’s financial rules permit clubs to incur losses up to £105 million over three years, but Forest’s allowable losses were capped at £61 million due to their time in the Championship during the assessment period.

The club faced scrutiny from an independent commission at the beginning of the year over these financial dealings. Forest, committed to cooperating with the Premier League, enlisted the expertise of prominent sports lawyer Nick de Marco to argue their compliance with the financial rules. This included strategies around the sale of Brennan Johnson to Tottenham Hotspur, which Forest argued was within the regulatory framework, especially regarding the timing of the sale to maximize revenue. Despite these efforts, the defense did not sway the independent panel’s decision.