Why Juventus have been handed a Serie A points deduction

Serie A giants Juventus have been hit with a 10-point deduction for the current league season as Italy's most successful club becomes embroiled in a financial scandal.

Massimiliano Allegri had steered Juventus into the division's top three before the Bianconeri first had a punishment dished out in January, sending them tumbling into mid-table closer to the relegation zone than champions-elect Napoli.

The decision was overturned in April pending a new investigation as hopes of Champions League qualification resurfaced before the 10-point sanction was applied in May.

It's far from the first controversy in which Juve have found themselves entangled - as recently as 2006, the Old Lady had 30 points deducted en route to Serie B as part of the Calciopoli scandal. However, that debacle was borne out of undue influence over referees whereas the latest turmoil is centred around the club's accounts.

Here's everything you need to know about the ongoing chaos engulfing the 36-time (which would have been 38 without Calciopoli) Serie A champions.

• Juventus drop down Serie A table with points deduction for transfer deals
  

Why have Juventus been punished?

The press release Juventus put out in January following the first bombshell revealed the charges related to "the evaluation of the effects of certain transfers of players’ rights on financial statements and the accounting of capital gains".

Essentially, Juventus were accused of inflating player valuations to balance the club's books when conducting transfers. More than 50 transactions between 2019 and 2021 were scrutinised in the initial investigation.

In April 2022, Juventus and ten other clubs were cleared of any wrongdoing by Italy's Federal Court. At the time, the Spanish top flight, LaLiga, filed a complaint with UEFA for Financial Fair Play (FFP) breaches by Juventus.

Juve announced a record-breaking loss of £220m across the 2021/22 season and the club's entire board resigned in November. That decision came after a separate group of Turin-based prosecutors and the Italian market regulator Consob parsed through the club's financial statements. The allegations of false accounting and market manipulation prompted the Federal Prosecutor's Office to launch an appeal against the original ruling in December 2022.

The 15-point penalty was overturned in April pending re-evaluation from the FIGC Federal Court of Appeal and in May a new 10-point deduction was implemented.

How have Juventus been punished?

The first 15-point deduction sent Juventus tumbling from third to tenth without a single match taking place. Intriguingly, the punishment Juve received went beyond the recommendation of the prosecution, which was nine points.

That was then revoked and a new 10-point deduction implemented, meaning they dropped from second to seventh in May, five points off the Champions League qualification spots.

11 former and current Juventus executives and board members were handed bans from Italian football of varying lengths. Seven former Juve directors, including Pavel Nedved, were later cleared.

Key figures involved

Andrea Agnelli's uncle, Gianni, Juve's former owner, once said: “Poor footballers are certainly overpaid. The good ones never earn enough.” It seems Andrea's approach to the financial element of the club was also open to interpretation.

The club's chairman between 2010 and his November resignation has been banned from holding office in Italian football for 24 months. At the official unveiling of his Turin-born replacement, Gianluca Ferrero, two days before the points deduction was revealed, Agnelli continued to stress the importance of a European Super League. Agnelli's obsession with this money-making scheme for the continent's elite is perhaps explained by the club's evidently perilous financial position.

Fabio Paratici has been Tottenham's managing director of football since the summer of 2021 but had spent the previous 11 years in various roles at Juventus. The club's former head of technical affairs and sporting director was served with a 30-month ban from Italian football. As with all the exclusions dished out to Juve's board, these bans could be extended across all European - and world - football if requests are met.

Juve's current sports director Federico Cherubini has been slapped with a 16-month ban.

20 years after winning the 2003 Ballon d'Or as a Juventus player, the club's former vice-president Pavel Nedved was handed an eight-month ban. The former chief executive Maurizio Arrivabene has sustained a two-year suspension.

Juventus' response

In the statement which detailed the punishment, Juventus revealed: "The Company awaits the publication of the reasons of the decision and announces as of now the bringing of an appeal to the Sport Guarantee Board (Collegio di Garanzia dello Sport) in accordance with the terms of the Sport Justice Code."

The club's lawyers insisted that the sanctions "constitute a clear disparity of treatment against Juventus and its managers compared to any other company or member".

They added: "We point out, as of now, that only Juventus and its managers are attributed the violation of a rule, that the same sports justice had repeatedly recognised that it did not exist.

"We believe that this is also a blatant injustice towards millions of fans, who we trust will soon be remedied in the next degree of judgement."

In response to May's 10-penalty, Juve added: "Juventus Football Club takes note of what was decided by the FIGC Court of Appeal and reserves the right to read the reasons to evaluate a possible appeal to the Guarantee Board at CONI.

"What was established by the fifth instance of judgment in this matter, which began more than a year ago, arouses great bitterness in the club and in its millions of supporters who, in the absence of clear rules, find themselves extremely penalised with the application of sanctions that do not seem to take into account the principle of proportionality.

"While not ignoring the need for urgency, which Juventus has never shied away from during the proceedings, it is emphasised that these are facts that still have to be evaluated by a judge."