Albion has acknowledged the points deduction from the Club Football Reporting Panel but will not appeal. The club expressed frustration over the lengthy compliance report process, which delayed the punishment until the season's end.
Mentioned in this story
[Getty Images]
Albion have "acknowledged" rather than accepted the publication of the independent Club Football Reporting Panel's (CFRP) written reasons for the points deduction.
There is clear frustration from the club over the timeline of events. That is understandable, as is their decision not to appeal and their desire to move on after they, in their own words "settled it on the pitch".
The club submitted its annual accounts on 3 December yet it took 112 days for a compliance report to be issued. That meant the punishment came in the final days of the season after a swift video conference hearing.
That timing was far from ideal for all parties involved — including Albion's relegation rivals at the time.
The written reasons reveal Albion argued that, if a sporting sanction was to be handed down, it should be suspended until the start of the 2026-27 season because of the delay.
The club also highlighted the "tireless" efforts of owner Shilen Patel in reducing losses. When he arrived, they were projected to exceed the three-year P&S limit of £39m by around £30m. In the end, the breach stood at just under £1.97m — the smallest ever recorded across the Premier League or second tier.
It is notable that Albion's engagement with the governing body was judged only as "reasonable" and therefore not worthy of a point being given back for co-operation. That's despite Patel's Bilkul group working to a business plan in conjunction with the EFL ever since completing their takeover in February 2024.
The written reasons do, however, acknowledge the club did not act in bad faith.
Rather than holding on to prized assets to push higher up the Championship, which would have risked a more serious breach, Albion sold the likes of Torbjorn Heggem and Tom Fellows in an attempt to comply.
Those decisions had a detrimental on-field impact, contributing to their slide into a relegation battle only avoided by a remarkable run of form under James Morrison.
Outside of their legal representatives, no EFL official attended the remote hearing.
Albion's points deduction was a result of the independent Club Football Reporting Panel's findings regarding their financial reporting.
Albion decided not to appeal due to their desire to move on and focus on settling matters on the pitch.
It took 112 days for Albion to receive the compliance report after submitting their annual accounts.
The points deduction was announced in the final days of the season, shortly after a video conference hearing.

Celtic's penalty sparks debate: worst VAR decision ever?
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz criticized FC Barcelona's Lamine Yamal for waving a Palestinian flag during a victory parade, claiming it incites hate against Israel. Yamal's actions come amid heightened tensions following the recent conflict involving Hamas.
See every story in Sports — including breaking news and analysis.
The independent CFRP did hear evidence from Patel though, as well as executive director Mark Miles, Rob Lake of the Albion Foundation and former Stoke City and Bristol City executive John Pelling. He was brought in by the Baggies for his football finance expertise.
The panel sided with the EFL on most decisions.
One of the key arguments centred on recharging £5.2m in interest on a loan to parent company Bilkul rather than the football club. The CFRP rejected Albion's case, viewing responsibility for the loan as a "direct and natural consequence" of the takeover — a decision that effectively added £5.2m to the club's losses.
Patel has invested tens of millions to clean up the mess he inherited, including the MSD loan, so in one sense he can feel hard done by. It was taken out before his arrival to keep the club afloat.
But the American businessman did tell me in an interview in March 2024 that he came into the situation with "eyes wide open". The lesson is a harsh one, reflected in the EFL's claim the recharge was "an illegitimate attempt to rewrite history".
The club's major point of contention was what it viewed as a retrospective change in the interpretation of community development expenditure. Albion's in-kind contributions to the Albion Foundation were accepted as genuine but — apart from £86,061 — just over £2m claimed as a "community add-back" was disallowed.
The CFRU admits it made a "new and different decision" when it looked again at previously submitted accounts for 2023-24.
According to the written reasons, the unit says it was "obliged" to look again but the Baggies argue in-kind benefits had previously been accepted as being exempt from P&S calculations.
The written reasons also claim the unit didn't know until February 2026 that the club's accounts for 2024-25 didn't include in-kind benefits as part of their losses and that this was new information.
In a season that also saw sanctions for Leicester City and Sheffield Wednesday, alongside Southampton's ongoing 'spygate' controversy, the EFL clearly has its hands full. However, differing interpretations of complex rules and the contrasting time taken for decisions to be reached do not appear helpful to anyone.
Clubs are due to vote on a new squad cost ratio model, which will better align the EFL with the Premier League, League One and League Two. Hopefully it proves to be less complicated but for Albion their priority now is looking forward.
As their statement put it, they have "closed the chapter" on one of the most stressful periods of the club's history — and are confident the future will not bring a repeat.