Everton FFP

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Kev Gee said:
This.
There should be no "grey" areas. Or wriggle room.

There shouldn't be a need for lawyers or appeals. If the rules and punishment was set in stone. Then everything would be clear.

Do the crime - you do the time.

But of course that probably wouldn't be good for the big six.
Click to expand...
The "how many points shall we deduct" issue shouldn't come into it. You break the rules, you know what your punishment will be, whether its just 1 or 120 charges.
 

Just repeating much of what's already been written. £20 million or £200 million, there's a reason why the rules exist. If there's any rethink on this subject then woe betide future breaches of the rules. This could set a precedent that would make a mockery of those who regard themselves as fit and worthy to run football throughout the professional ranks.
 
There's a precedent for relegated clubs to claim compensation from cheats who stay up, we were successful with West Ham. If Everton are forced to pay millions in compensation they could go into admin (prob. Not this season) and receive an automatic 9 point deduction
 
Dkc said:
There's a precedent for relegated clubs to claim compensation from cheats who stay up, we were successful with West Ham. If Everton are forced to pay millions in compensation they could go into admin (prob. Not this season) and receive an automatic 9 point deduction
Click to expand...
We would have been better off with West Ham being punished properly than being paid £4m, but think about the irony of being charged with overspending & then being allowed to be let off the one punishment they fear by paying out more money . Shear stupidity of bending the rules to accommodate the richer clubs
 
I still can’t believe they were only about £19m over based on some of the things I had seen previously, I thought it was about ten times that.
 
I believe Kieran Maguire is going on a deep dive on this some time tomorrow
 
Frank the tank said:
seems to be a lot of sympathy with everton in the media which surprises me
might as well scrap the ffp rules and just let clubs go to the wall
Click to expand...
The media reaction is bizarre. I’ve seen many a comment about how Everton will be fine because the bottom 3 are shit, without a single critical thought that maybe the gap in quality to the bottom 3 (with the lowest wage bill) is there precisely because clubs like Everton defy FFP and build squads they’re not entitled to build.
 
YES Blade said:
You’re talking about a team that’s survived by a margin of 2 points last season and 4 points the season before. There is no way Everton should stay up this season after a 10 point deduction, but the fact that there are 3 utterly useless teams means they probably will.

If we can’t finish above Everton this season, it’s no one’s fault but our own. Wanting a bigger deduction to increase our chances is a bit embarrassing. This is Everton FFS, a club that’s wasted shit loads of money on crap players and regularly in the relegation battle. If we had anything about us we’d be able to finish above them without a points deduction!
Click to expand...
But sadly we haven't and we won't.
 
I had very interesting conversations with Evertonians, apparently they’ve not cheated… adamant they are lol
 
A Storm of Blades said:
Again, assumptions made for things I haven’t said. I’m talking about Everton in isolation and in context of this season, which the panel clearly are aware off. 10 points (a figure nobody seems to know how they came up with), is clearly doing to do very little this year. My point is, if the punishment would have relegated them in the past 2 seasons, then the punishment should be relevant and appropriate to the situation this year, given you have 3 clubs without limitless budgets. I would have focused less on a points figure and more on putting them in a position fitting the breach. Personally, I would have put them on -10.
Click to expand...
Or, for simplicity and appropriateness, relegated to L3
 
Addison said:
Having briefly speed read the Independent Commissions written reasons its a very complicated case. Unfortunately as its the first of its kind, this being the first FFP sanctions imposed by the EPL, there is a likelihood the Commissions findings are open to challenge on appeal. Not least because the EPL does not have written into its rules a points sanction matrix which the EPL have. The EPL agreed as late as August this year to consider adopting a similar approach within its rules.

The Commission are dismissive of Evertons mitigation regarding Covid, the Ukraine War, reduction in player sales values. They make reference to them being "less than frank" in providing information on the cooperation point that the Pigs won on appeal.

Everton wanted a financial penalty after admitting late in the day financial breaches yet still tried to dumb down the overspend to single figure millions as opposed to the EPL's calculation of £20 million plus. The Commission found for the EPL on this point.

Without going in to too much detail, mitigation points aside, the issue rests on the sanction and how it has been calculated. Sheffield Wednesday v The Football League was referenced;

"A sporting advantage is to be inferred so that anything other than a points deduction is inappropriate"

Words that will be of interest to Leeds. Leicester and Southampton. They've got 28 days to raise a counter claim.

Whilst the Birmingham City case was referenced re points deductions as was the EPL matrix where x £ millions overspent per point deducted was applied the Commission felt it wasn't bound by non EPL rules. Again an issue that would support grounds for an appeal imo.

After a detailed summary of why each of Evertons mitigations were being dismissed the Commission concluded a 10 point deduction was appropriate. Yet there is no written rationale as to how this number has been calculated. The Appeal has to be concluded within 3 months so we are looking at February if Everton are granted permission to Appeal.
Click to expand...
Is the appeal heard by the EPL rather than the Commission ? If so they could increase the deduction !!!
 
Snowflake said:
Is the appeal heard by the EPL rather than the Commission ? If so they could increase the deduction !!!
Click to expand...
Its held be a seperate independant panel. There is a KC who deals with the appointments from a panel of 15. They could increase the punishment yes.
 

Linekar and Shearer had a journo on their podcast today who’s all over this. He gives a really clear explanation of the issues.

You can start to understand why Man City are spaffing money on the country’s most expensive KC. If Everton got 10 points for £20m, City might be on the line for (potentially) several relegations.

https://www.goalhangerpodcasts.com/the-rest-is-football
 
Thiink I read that the Everton takeover might be affected as new owners aren't not wanting to pay £300m out in compo to relegated clubs
 
Silent Blade said:
KC?
Click to expand...

Man City have Instructed Lord Pannick KC.

Pannick invariably wins - albeit he was on the losing side in the Supreme Court decision on Rwanda deportation announced last week.

Pannick was also one of the 3 lawyers on the Arbitration Panel, when United challenged the FA Premier League decision to fine West Ham in 2007.

It may be recalled that the Arbitration Panel stated that had they been adjudicating the West Ham case, they would have imposed a points penalty on West Ham, but that because their role was only to consider whether the FAPL decision to impose a fine, was irrational or perverse, they had no power to change the punishment.

Nonetheless, the Arbitration verdict gave United the impetus to press on with the claim for compensation, with West Ham eventually settling with us in 2009.
 
LS16Blade said:
Pannick invariably wins - albeit he was on the losing side in the Supreme Court decision on Rwanda deportation announced last week.
Click to expand...
Pannick seems to float above the cab rank system and only takes briefs with massive money behind them. And it’s very true that if you throw infinite money at a case you can stack the deck very much in your favour. Hence Pannick and Man City.
 
s20Blade said:
I take it this includes the stadium cost?
Click to expand...

diplomat said:
I still can’t believe they were only about £19m over based on some of the things I had seen previously, I thought it was about ten times that.
Click to expand...
Briefly followed this on Talk Sport, don't like him in general but Simon Jordan comes into his own when we get onto legalities- anyway I believe the stadium costs have been discounted (rightly IMO) and a good chunk of other debt 'because Covid'. My issue with all of this is the random points deduction figure; is it a league point for each £2m over, or is it just enough points to look like they've been punished but not really? Both of Chelsea and Man City will be in serious trouble if found guilty now a precedent has been set with Everton and I'll wager they aren't the only ones on the line.
 

8lade said:
Briefly followed this on Talk Sport, don't like him in general but Simon Jordan comes into his own when we get onto legalities- anyway I believe the stadium costs have been discounted (rightly IMO) and a good chunk of other debt 'because Covid'. My issue with all of this is the random points deduction figure; is it a league point for each £2m over, or is it just enough points to look like they've been punished but not really? Both of Chelsea and Man City will be in serious trouble if found guilty now a precedent has been set with Everton and I'll wager they aren't the only ones on the line.
Click to expand...
It's a strange eone with Everton much like us they can't spend big. Then again I can't think of any big money players they've got apart from that lad from real Madrid that didn't work out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom