To be fair it's a PED related oneFirst post on your return and you're back with a moan. Never change.
To be fair it's a PED related oneFirst post on your return and you're back with a moan. Never change.
That’s one of the major points of an appeal. The second IC, like the first IC, failed to make use of existing precedents from the EFL and instead chose to make up their own rules. The appeal board said the first one was wrong and the second one might too. It’s worth a crack because if successful we get zero.Hmmm the IC saying the EFL’s rule of punishing twice in the same season can’t be used but our appeal panel said the first IC overlooked use of the EFL’s rules.
The whole thing is a joke.
we may be better served by going the civil courts under tort law. We have been wronged by these amateurish arbitrary rules and it will cost us millions.That’s one of the major points of an appeal. The second IC, like the first IC, failed to make use of existing precedents from the EFL and instead chose to make up their own rules. The appeal board said the first one was wrong and the second one might too. It’s worth a crack because if successful we get zero.
No, never!as i’ve bored you all with
does it matter that we are a mess of the field that we can’t fight it etc?
The only thing your filling is your kecksthe worry is mate 1 win in 3 months
it’s not filling me with confidence
This should be challenged through the courts. A discussion in private concerning the possible penalising one of the members of the 'Company' should be made public, once an Inquiry Commission has ruled, and that decision is adverse to the member.….lets not forget, some months ago the Parliamentary Select Committee asked Masters for the minutes of the PL Board Meeting where Everton’s points deduction was discussed. A few weeks later the Select Committee chair received a letter from PL saying ‘we are a private company and not required to provide you with the minutes of Board meetings’
Clearly something to hide, those minutes could be dynamite if they haven’t already been shredded or doctored.
(By the way, it’s great to see you back, Dave.)
The Premier League aren't subject to freedom of information legislation I'm afraid.This should be challenged through the courts. A discussion in private concerning the possible penalising one of the members of the 'Company' should be made public, once an Inquiry Commission has ruled, and that decision is adverse to the member.
Should not an application be made under the 'Freedom of Information' rules? If the Premier League refuse, then drag them through the courts for unfair practise, potentially prejudicial to the daily operation of a business, which is what all clubs must be classed as nowadays.
I'm just surprised the club hasn't piled into the Premier league yet...
How come our GD improved by 1?The PL are rewriting history, as this decision in effect, means we drew with Burnley 0-0 on Saturday.
![]()
If that is the case, then the FOI legislation is fatally flawed...The Premier League aren't subject to freedom of information legislation I'm afraid.