6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Tony’s Carp]

Surely having different independent commission panels for every hearing is a major flaw in all of this.
Each panel is going to view and interpret certain rules, behaviours and mitigations in different ways coming up with varying decisions and penalties. Can even see that with the reports so far that one panel doesn't know how the other came up with certain decisions. Especially when it seems there is no clear format of how penalties are given nor written in stone.

To have one commission panel overseeing every hearing within a season would mean both parties are singing off the same hymn sheet. In theory it should mean that the decision of the panel's punishment for one club regarding losses etc will be proportional to the next club's hearing decision and on and on for that season. Rather than different panels coming up with totally different punishments.
Then have a different panel for the appeal hearings but keep the panel the same for each appeal hearing throughout one full season

I can understand why with something this vague you might want fresh eyes on it at some level, but yeah it would make sense for at least the appeal board (and it may well yet be the case) to be the same for each case to maintain and protect consistency.

 

[allen]

Surely having different independent commission panels for every hearing is a major flaw in all of this.
Each panel is going to view and interpret certain rules, behaviours and mitigations in different ways coming up with varying decisions and penalties. Can even see that with the reports so far that one panel doesn't know how the other came up with certain decisions. Especially when it seems there is no clear format of how penalties are given nor written in stone.

To have one commission panel overseeing every hearing within a season would mean both parties are singing off the same hymn sheet. In theory it should mean that the decision of the panel's punishment for one club regarding losses etc will be proportional to the next club's hearing decision and on and on for that season. Rather than different panels coming up with totally different punishments.
Then have a different panel for the appeal hearings but keep the panel the same for each appeal hearing throughout one full season

It seems to me that they didn't envisage a scenario where more than one club would be found in breach per season.

Maybe once every three or four years they might have to assemble one of these panels, so intra-season consistency wouldn't be an issue.

It speaks to a hubristic organisation that has never really had to show any real forethought to keep the cash flowing in. They got fat and lazy and thought they were plenty smart enough to keep this ship sailing in a straight line without too much thought.

 

[DuncansPigeons]

I dont think there will be another deduction this season

I think this may well be the case. As part of discovery the PL will have sent over their proposed penalties as will Everton. If the PL have somehow gone in low or for a suspended sentence etc then we’ll more than likely not go in as combative

 

[matty1878]

I dont think there will be another deduction this season

hopefully not

 

[Victus]

Is Silk just not needed now or what, not exactly up to date with this stuff currently.

 

[Efcjake]

Tory behaviour

Exhibit number one for why you won't find any sympathy from me to their plight.

 

[Simon Buttle]

Is Silk just not needed now or what, not exactly up to date with this stuff currently.

Sounds like he did all the prep work but can't represent us at the actual hearing due to a prior engagement. I guess it will be club people like Lonergan who is a qualified legal eagle or others.

 

[Blue Willy]

Saw that live last night, and thought yet again why isnt someone official coming out and defending our position - actually stating facts, etc.

 

[Titus Bramble]

It seems to me that they didn't envisage a scenario where more than one club would be found in breach per season.

Maybe once every three or four years they might have to assemble one of these panels, so intra-season consistency wouldn't be an issue.

It speaks to a hubristic organisation that has never really had to show any real forethought to keep the cash flowing in. They got fat and lazy and thought they were plenty smart enough to keep this ship sailing in a straight line without too much thought.

I don't think they envisaged a scenario where any club would be in breach when the rules were introduced back in 2008.

The fact that the financial breach figure hasn't moved with the times (I.e inflation of player and agent fees/salaries as well as 'real' inflation) is a factor in it only becoming a problem now, >15 years later.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

Is Silk just not needed now or what, not exactly up to date with this stuff currently.

Sounds like he did all the prep work but can't represent us at the actual hearing due to a prior engagement. I guess it will be club people like Lonergan who is a qualified legal eagle or others.

Hopefully it's some sort of indication either way that the defense speaks for itself in this particular case.

 

[MACCA75]

If we get any deduction whatsoever, we need to appeal it.

 

[Joey66]

Is Silk just not needed now or what, not exactly up to date with this stuff currently.

Just read if true he has done the preparation work for our defence this time , but no need for him to attend .....

 

[Tony’s Carp]

Sounds like he did all the prep work but can't represent us at the actual hearing due to a prior engagement. I guess it will be club people like Lonergan who is a qualified legal eagle or others.

He's certainly had the time to fit in a quick LLB since he signed.

 

[Victus]

Just read if true he has done the preparation work for our defence this time , but no need for him to attend .....

Is that normal behaviour you think? doesn't feel like it but I know so little about law etc.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

If we get any deduction whatsoever, we need to appeal it.

Unless the scale of the breach is absolutely wild (ie worse than last time) and we're bang to rights I agree, and I can't see how it would be. Maybe we'd swallow one point just to avoid the uncertainty and expense but if the total of the two breaches does not exceed Forest's one we should be appealing any further points.