\n<\/p>\n
Manchester City\u2019s former financial adviser, Stefan Borson, has told Football Insider<\/em>: \u201cThe nub of it will be whether anybody can establish that the breaches created a sporting advantage. If you have a sporting advantage established, then it\u2019s likely that you end up with a sporting penalty. Now, that can be mitigated by considerations like new ownership, early guilty plea, lots of cooperation. These are all things that Chelsea are pushing out into the media as being what they\u2019ve done. That is mitigation. There\u2019s no question. The question is what\u2019s the starting point?<\/p>\n \u201cIs the starting point, well, this is very serious, and we think you\u2019ve had a major sporting advantage? The starting point is a number of points, in which case you\u2019re mitigating down percentage wise from that points deduction.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you look at something like Nottingham Forest, they had a lot of cooperation commended by the commission. Now, that was a Premier League commission, but the law is basically the same and they\u2019ll cross compare the cases. In that case, there was basically an argument where Nottingham Forest said, we should have a 50 per cent reduction on the penalty. The Premier League said, that feels a bit too much 50 per cent, maybe 30 per cent. The commission went in the end for 30 per cent. It was going to be six for Nottingham Forest and they got two knocked off for early admission and cooperation.<\/p>\n \u201cYou would think that Chelsea would be able to get 30 per cent, maybe even a 40 per cent reduction for their mitigation, adding all the bits and pieces together if everything they\u2019re saying is true about how they cooperated, admitted it, informed. So, they get very good mitigation.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n