A “lack of mitigation” was a key reason for Nottingham Forest’s appeal against a £750,000 fine for misconduct being dismissed.
The Reds had been brought to book by the Football Association over an angry social media post published after last season’s controversial 2-0 defeat at Everton. The visitors had been left outraged last April when referee Anthony Taylor waved away three penalty appeals at Goodison Park and was not instructed to go to his monitor by VAR Stuart Attwell.
The club posted a furious statement on X immediately after the final whistle questioning the integrity of Attwell, who they accused of being a fan of relegation rivals Luton Town. A regulatory commission imposed a £750,000 on Forest last October, although the FA had sought a punishment of at least £1 million.
The Reds appealed against the punishment and claimed the fine was “manifestly excessive”. However, it has now been announced an independent regulatory commission has upheld the original verdict.
In its written reasons, the appeal board stated: “On any view, it was a heavy penalty, albeit significantly less than that for which The FA was contending. But in our view, a heavy penalty was entirely merited for this very serious offence.
“To allege that a Match Official’s decision is infected by actual bias against or in favour of one of the teams is an allegation of behaviour that undermines the foundations on which competitive sport is based. It is particularly serious in the case of professional football and even more so in relation to decisions made in a crucial fixture which is likely to determine issues such as promotion and relegation to or from the Premier League where the stakes are extremely high.
“An aggravating feature of the offence was that the tweet was viewed by millions of people. In short, it went ‘viral’. This was predictable and no doubt intended. It was also predictable that it would cause great distress to the match officials and their families. We agree with the Commission’s assessment of culpability and harm. As we have already said, we did not understand the assessment to be challenged by NFFC.
Get breaking Forest news sent direct to your phone
Join our Nottingham Forest WhatsApp group and get the latest breaking news, interviews and opinion sent straight to your phone, plus matchday team news and live updates of all the action. Just click here and select ‘Join Community’ to get started. The only proviso is that you must have WhatsApp on your phone to participate. No one will be able to see your personal information and you will only receive messages from the NottinghamshireLive Reds writers.
We will not spam your WhatsApp feed with constant messages, but you will receive updates from us daily with the latest Reds stories. If you later decide to opt out, just go to the name at the top of your screen and click 'Exit Group'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. If you are curious, you can click here to read our Privacy Notice.
“The principal submission advanced by NFFC is that the fine was manifestly excessive because it was substantially higher than any other fine that has been imposed by The FA or the Premier League in any other case. It is said that the figure of £750,000 was conjured out of the air.”
Forest’s tweet after the game against the Toffees had said: “Three extremely poor decisions - three penalties not given - which we simply cannot accept. We warned the PGMOL that the VAR is a Luton fan before the game but they didn’t change him. Our patience has been tested multiple times. NFFC will now consider its options.”
In subsequent posts, the Reds stated they had made a formal request for the VAR audio from the Everton game to be released. They also called for referees’ body (Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL) to take into account “contextual” rivalries when appointing officials to matches.
The appeal verdict report added: “In addition to the seriousness of the offence, the Commission was entitled and right to give very considerable weight to the need for deterrence and the fact that NFFC had no mitigation. The lack of mitigation was particularly striking. The post has never been taken down. That puts into context NFFC’s reliance on the second and third posts on which it relies as somehow mitigating the damaging effect of the first post.
“The Commission was not impressed by this. Nor are we. The fact is that NFFC has never apologised for the tweet and has never accepted that it committed an offence.
“If we were deciding the level of fine for ourselves at first instance, we might have arrived at a lower figure than £750,000, although we would have had difficulty in deciding on an appropriate figure. But we are a reviewing tribunal. Allowing a margin of appreciation and reminding ourselves that the burden is on NFFC to persuade us that the fine was excessive, we have decided that the appeal against sanction should be dismissed.”
The FA had alleged the comments: “Constituted improper conduct by implying bias and/or questioning the integrity of the match official(s) and/or the video assistant referee and/or bringing the game into disrepute.” The appeal board dismissed Forest’s appeal in relation to both liability and sanction, and also ordered the club to remove the tweet.
Forest appear to have taken down the post as the link to it on X is no longer working. The club are not expected to issue a comment on the appeal decision.
What do you make of the appeal board's decision? Click HERE to have your say