To build out further on the arguments presented up-thread about the stupidity of the rolling 3-year period without including provisions for preventing double jeopardy:
Let's say you have a period of years as so:
Year one: break even
Year two: £5 million profit
Year three: something goes horribly wrong for whatever reason - £200 million loss
You get punished at the end of year three because of the 3-year cycle being high above the allowed £105 million losses. Ok, fine.
Year four: despite your likely points deduction, you somehow manage a miracle and post a £20 million profit
Your reward: a second punishment, because you've still lost more than £105 million total in years 2+3+4
Year five: again, despite another points deduction, you somehow manage another miracle and post a £25 million profit
Congratulations! A third punishment, because year 3 is still on the books (3+4+5 this time) and your last two years of profits haven't been substantial enough to cover the one year of massive loss.
So, five year cycle -
three draconian punishments for the same single year's offense when you lost nothing the other four years. This scenario is entirely plausible, and is at least akin to the situation we are now in (though not with profits for ourselves but only smaller losses).
Yes but the crux was down to a minor accounting error based on loans we allocating to a different "bank account".
We have a very good case, which makes the fact we have now twice admitted guilt unforgivable.
Exactly right. And in addition, given the absurdity of the system in place as outlined above, if we can't come up with a good enough team of lawyers to challenge the whole kit and caboodle, or if we don't have the stomach to even try...then the club deserves everything coming to it and we fans should feel no remorse if we decide to wash our hands of the whole thing.
