Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £50m
I’ve thought the same about point one and imagine it’ll have been picked up on. If you are going to treat the two Covid years as one you need to do so in all contexts, so they should’ve said three years. We don’t know what effect that has on the sanction as they give so few details on how they arrived at it but it is at least a small mistaken factor we should be pouncing on.I have read the written reasons a few times and it wasn’t till this morning a couple of things jumped out at me and I am not quite sure the implications
1) When the IC handed out the sanction it. talked about sporting advantage . Ok that’s a bone of contention but what the IC said that they judged that sporting advantage to have been over 4 years . Yes the three periods covered an average of the 19/20 20/21 years alongside 21/22 & 22/23 . My point is surely it’s not correct to even mention the 4 years when reaching a level of sanction
2) The numbers in 2018/19 weren’t disaster an accounting loss of circa £13 million when you factored in the allowable sums for things such academy ladies football and depreciation in P&S terms almost certainly that resulted in a positive number . Alas that year has fallen off the calculation.
I am trying to get my head around is that 2019/20 year was a13 month trading period meaning the 2019/20 and 20/21 losses covered a 25 month trading period. Ok a lot of expenses will be adjusted such as amortisation but things like wages will be a matter of fact ie 25 month’s salary paid but would there have been any boost to income of note . In effect surely a mitigating factor