6 + 2 Point Deductions

[gwladysnight]

Straws is the answer mate. Not being able to sell him may have been a better defence, maybe we tried both, dunno.

We sacked him almost immediately so we couldn't have sold him. Chelsea successfully sued Mutu and recovered £14.3m. That case though took 5 years. Deciding not to sue him and then trying to suggest it was somehow a permissible deduction was just bizarre.

 

[hallamblue]

Our sporting advantage was after selling our better players two relegation battles on the trott, with survival on the penultimate match and the last match of the season consequently. Some sporting advantage we gained there, we couldn't even do that right.

But to get back to break even we would have had to sell more players and that would have almost guaranteed relegation. This way we can maybe survive in the Premier League.

 

[radiostar]

Making stuff up now are we, be sure to get your other 'allies' into these quotes

YNWA

Bore off, sad sack x

 

[Wat Tyler]

They’re definitely to blame for the charge existing at all, but 10 points is a insanely harsh penalty imo. Especially given that the big six got a pathetic slap on the wrist for attempting to start a super league.

And considering Leicester did the same thing in the Championship and only had to pay a 3m fine.

Why didn’t the clubs that they got promoted ahead of not sue them?

 

[hallamblue]

Also needs to be stated if that’s their stance why did they fine then sky 6 for trying to leave. All 6 of there owners have more wealth and assets than ours.
Have no problem with our club being guilty, even if it’s a technical breach, but at least ensure the punishment fits the crime and treat every club the same.

It was a voluntary contribution I think, as it was deemed that they hadn't actually broken any rules.

 

[radiostar]

Just easier when you block @radiostar @GP_Monty and @gwladysnight

I've literally never even spoken to you before.

Clearly I've not missed out.

 

[mahermi1]

There was a point 135, saying a fine would be pointless because we have a wealthy owner. But surely that has to be contested?

The so called wealthy owner is selling us.

At the same time his purse strings are tightened due to where his money is (correct me if I'm wrong) as a result of the war in Ukraine he can't fund us any longer.

The mitigating circumstances should also include the loss of USM, Megafon money etc. I find that hard to believe that this is disregarded.

It just looks like they made excuses to set us as an example to others and gave us the biggest points deduction in Premier league history.

 

[gwladysnight]

I just cant see how suing the club could be proven as the reason another club dropped. I may be wrong, but plenty of clubs have been done for financial stuff over the years. I cannot recall a single time other clubs have sued for recompense. Did Celtic sue Rangers for half a dozen SPLs? Or Juventus by other Italian teams?

Sheffield United successfully got £25m from West Ham over the Tevez affair.

 

[roydo]

Sheffield United successfully got £25m from West Ham over the Tevez affair.

Out of court settlement that.

 

[mahermi1]

We sacked him almost immediately so we couldn't have sold him. Chelsea successfully sued Mutu and recovered £14.3m. That case though took 5 years. Deciding not to sue him and then trying to suggest it was somehow a permissible deduction was just bizarre.

Thought we suspended him until the investigation was concluded ?

 

[ForeverBlue92]

Sheffield United successfully got £25m from West Ham over the Tevez affair.

Tevez clearly had an influence on WHU staying up over Sheff Utd - he netted loads of gols in the final games of the season.

Our situation is completely different.

 

[Dougie]

It was a voluntary contribution I think, as it was deemed that they hadn't actually broken any rules.

Hahah can we not have that option. Saying that this club would probably sign the whole fan base up to community service if the old board was still in place.

 

[roydo]

Thought we suspended him until the investigation was concluded ?

Pretty sure thats what we did. Not convinced you can tear a contract up over an allegation.

 

[mahermi1]

And considering Leicester did the same thing in the Championship and only had to pay a 3m fine.

Why didn’t the clubs that they got promoted ahead of not sue them?

Thought the Championship regulations were supposed to be harder than the Premier leagues, that fine looks very lame.

 

[gwladysnight]

They’re definitely to blame for the charge existing at all, but 10 points is a insanely harsh penalty imo. Especially given that the big six got a pathetic slap on the wrist for attempting to start a super league.

The big six didn't break any rules when they attempted to start an European Super League though. They didn't face any punishment they came to a financial settlement to donate £25m to grassroots football as a gesture of goodwill.