If promotion bonuses are not allowed then I fail to see how any promoted team can ever stay within the rules.
Oh, hang on, that's the point isn't it.
Edit: I am confused as that Covid add back was allowed by the EFL in the assessment then I thought. Certainly it's been in all Kieran Maguire's figures where he shows us ok (just) to that point.
Interesting to note that had we accepted Brentford's offer we'd still have been in breach, given we were almost 35M over. So not a surprise that they weren't willing to accept "we could have sold him but had to hold out for more" as a mitigation given it wouldn't have actually fixed the problem.
I'm a little surprised that Jim hasn't yet rejected the entire judgement as invalid on the basis of its use of the singular entity ("Forest has / is / was" rather than "Forest have / are / were").
I still believe promotion bonuses are allowed in the EFL's calculation and we are fine for the years to 2022, so we should be golden.
Brennan (sorry, Player A) mitigation and the talk of our lower income/allowed losses seems to have been rejected entirely, the mitigation is that we fessed up early and cooperated fully. Appeal can only look at evidence already presented, so unless we have a better argument around those, I can't see the point in an appeal.
Sales of Brennan and Mangala should give us some leeway and stop us from being over in the years to the end of this season but who knows?
I find the promotion bonus part incredible given the talk was all about them definitely being allowable... How were Everton allowed such a large COVID allowance? We're the rules changed subsequently?
Interesting bit about Sheff Wed. Sold their ground in 2020. 3 weeks after the reporting deadline. They were allowed mitigating circumstances because of it. We said the Johnson sale should be similar.