6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Firhillfill]

Why should we accept any level of points deductions based on rules that the PL and clubs are acknowledging are antiquated and not fit for purpose?

Weve admitted guilt, but its guilt to rules that the clubs now accept don't work. So, it'll literally be a deduction that's exclusive to Everton (and maybe Forest) at that point.

We need to be figting for zero points deduction.

 

[MikeH72]

That's not true. We've been charged over losses for a different period second time round. If you're going to kick up a fuss, at least get your facts right. Farcical? Of course, but arguing something that isn't true doesn't help the cause.

Well we’ve already been punished for losses over the years 2020/21 and 21/22, and we’re now being punished again for them, so it’s not really correct what you’re saying is it?

 

[Singe]

It's just an ignorant thing to say at this point. How can the arguments against it be taken seriously if people can't even be bothered to get things right?

Eh?

 

[Singe]

Well we’ve already been punished for losses over the years 2020/21 and 21/22, and we’re now being punished again for them, so it’s not really correct what you’re saying is it?

We haven't been deducted anything for the second period. We've had transfer stipulations etc but no deductions. What I said is absolutely correct. Why are you picking an argument just for the sake of it? Of course it's outrageous what's happening but we still have to be real about this.

 

[Bebeto]

If we got 10points took of based on 19mil over. Forest if the so called rumoured 65mil or so they supposedly went over by should be at least double, but i doubt it will do. No doubt any deduction amount for forest will be as close to our deduction amount as pos, as they will claim its unfair or whatever. But it would be silly if teams say for example go over by 65mil and one goes over by say 10mil and both somehow get same amount deducted.

They haven't go over by 65 millions...it is rumoured to be lower than our breach.

 

[MikeH72]

We haven't been deducted anything for the second period. We've had transfer stipulations etc but no deductions. What I said is absolutely correct. Why are you picking an argument just for the sake of it?

I never said we’ve been deducted anything did it? I said we’ve been punished (or “charged” if you want to use specific language).

What you’re saying is that the rules enable us to be punished twice (up to 3 times actually) for the same accounting periods. That’s true, the rules do suggest that. So yes, we are being punished again for the same accounting periods we’ve already been punished for, which are 2020/21 and 2021/22.

 

[Firhillfill]

We haven't been deducted anything for the second period. We've had transfer stipulations etc but no deductions. What I said is absolutely correct. Why are you picking an argument just for the sake of it? Of course it's outrageous what's happening but we still have to be real about this.

Probably because what you are saying is wrong. They have already been punished for the breach for 2/3rds of the time frame, the only way it's a new breach is if it happened in last years accounts.

 

[Singe]

I never said we’ve been deducted anything did it? I said we’ve been punished (or “charged” if you want to use specific language).

What you’re saying is that the rules enable us to be punished twice (up to 3 times actually) for the same accounting periods. That’s true, the rules do suggest that. So yes, we are being punished again for the same accounting periods we’ve already been punished for, which are 2020/21 and 2021/22.

We've now been charged over two different periods, it's pretty straight forward. The whole thing is a joke, we can all agree on that and it's outrageous that it's got this far. They're not the same accounting periods, they're different. And yes, we can be penalised 3 times - but not for exactly the same periods. Your interpretation of it is wrong. Anyway, it's 10:45pm and bed time where I live so that's me done for the night.

 

[MikeH72]

We've now been charged over two different periods, it's pretty straight forward. The whole thing is a joke, we can all agree on that and it's outrageous that it's got this far. They're not the same accounting periods, they're different. And yes, we can be penalised 3 times - but not for exactly the same periods. Your interpretation of it is wrong. Anyway, it's 10:45pm and bed time where I live so that's me done for the night.

2020/21 is an accounting period mate. We’ve already been punished for it. They’ve just charged us again for a 3 year cycle that includes the accounting period of 2020/21. Goodnight god bless mate.

 

[Singe]

Probably because what you are saying is wrong. They have already been punished for the breaches for 2/3rds of the time frame, the only way it's a new breach is if it happened in last years accounts.

Not so, the second charge came after the 22/23 seasons accounts were taken into consideration. For heavens sake, we're all on the same side here but we need to get the facts right.

 

[BNJ1878]

We've now been charged over two different periods, it's pretty straight forward. The whole thing is a joke, we can all agree on that and it's outrageous that it's got this far. They're not the same accounting periods, they're different. And yes, we can be penalised 3 times - but not for exactly the same periods. Your interpretation of it is wrong. Anyway, it's 10:45pm and bed time where I live so that's me done for the night.

But it's not wrong.

We're in breach again for the 'rolling period' because they changed the rules half way through it.

I'm not excusing the shambolic performance of those in charge for sailing so close to the wind, but your argument is incorrect at best, idiotic at worst.

Hope you had a good sleep.

 

[RD2910]

Eh?

Easy mate, I was just agreeing with what you said.

 

[Singe]

2020/21 is an accounting period mate. We’ve already been punished for it. They’ve just charged us again for a 3 year cycle that includes the accounting period of 2020/21. Goodnight god bless mate.

It includes 20/21 but it's a different period overall. It's not the same. Of course it's ridiculous but that's reality.

 

[Wat Tyler]

 

[Firhillfill]

Not so, the second charge came after the 22/23 seasons accounts were taken into consideration. For heavens sake, we're all on the same side here but we need to get the facts right.

Break down which 3 seasons the initial deduction came from. Then break down the 3 seasons the new charge has come from. Do two of the three overlap?