Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

6 + 2 Point Deductions

Just read the full hearing report. Two conclusions i have drawn….

1) Everton were quite creative in some of the mitigations they were trying to argue….I personally struggled to see where the decisions that went against us were unreasonable decisions if I am not looking at it with any bias. For example, brining the naming rights £10m a year conveniently forward by three years whilst still stadium still under construction without any paperwork to show for it despite us saying negotiations were at an advanced stage. Seems a little far fetched to me.…and

2) A lot of detail in the report and then just one paragraph relating to the 10 points without any breakdown or rationale - this is just very poor by the commission and will rightly give rise to being accused of ‘finger in the air’ plucking a number out of their arse to make a statement, which further gives rise to a biased agenda.

So whilst we may have ‘cooperated’ some of our arguments were creative/tenuous at best to the point where we advanced them initially and then dropped them at the first sign of trouble, and the Commission, really haven’t detailed Why the 10 points, which means we can all assume, it is to fend off Independant regulation, to make a statement and apply a sanction which acts a deterrent. In the absence of other charges and hearings that is all we can assume.

P.S I wasn’t particularly happy with Moshiri talking about a non existent midfield which almost validates the allegation of overspend on players and the account who basically admitted to being creative with his interpretation to benefit Everton….he should have just said that’s how we interpreted it without an agenda.
 
Bristol Blue said:
Yeah thought the same when I watched it. Didn’t get the impression that any of them had delved into the finer details. Maybe if they did, they’d realise why we’re so peed off.
Cant stand these so called experts who like to comment without doing their homework properly.
Click to expand...

That just illustrates the standard of football journalism/punditry/analysis in this country. That sort of podcast is held up as a benchmark of football discussion and yet none of them had bothered to read the report. Ornstein maybe the exception, but his comments on it were absurdly one sided.

Neville I think does get it and at least had a few honest comments. Carragher was wishy washy albeit at least recognised why we're so livid. Keane and Wright clearly don't have a clue about anything like this.

And that's a "flagship" podcast. Grim.
 

Blue peter said:
Just read the full hearing report. Two conclusions i have drawn….

1) Everton were quite creative in some of the mitigations they were trying to argue….I personally struggled to see where the decisions that went against us were unreasonable decisions if I am not looking at it with any bias. For example, brining the naming rights £10m a year conveniently forward by three years whilst still stadium still under construction without any paperwork to show for it despite us saying negotiations were at an advanced stage. Seems a little far fetched to me.…and

2) A lot of detail in the report and then just one paragraph relating to the 10 points without any breakdown or rationale - this is just very poor by the commission and will rightly give rise to being accused of ‘finger in the air’ plucking a number out of their arse to make a statement, which further gives rise to a biased agenda.

So whilst we may have ‘cooperated’ some of our arguments were creative/tenuous at best to the point where we advanced them initially and then dropped them at the first sign of trouble, and the Commission, really haven’t detailed Why the 10 points, which means we can all assume, it is to fend off Independant regulation, to make a statement and apply a sanction which acts a deterrent. In the absence of other charges and hearings that is all we can assume.

P.S I wasn’t particularly happy with Moshiri talking about a non existent midfield which almost validates the allegation of overspend on players and the account who basically admitted to being creative with his interpretation to benefit Everton….he should have just said that’s how we interpreted it without an agenda.
Click to expand...
Let's have the context to that: Everton's ability to get interest paid on stadium loans was, half way through this assessment period, changed from not included in FFP to being included in FFP. That was down to the PL. If Everton got creative on the stadium sponsorship then it was to offset the rug being pulled from under them regarding the stadium and FFP dealings. And in any case, bringing forward that sponsorship deal: how could the PL commission determine that wasn't the case other than by having a completely prejudicial view of Everton's intentions in that respect.

Bottom line here: don't be doing our enemies dirty work for them. Put your thinking cap on and look at every dimension to this in the round.
 
lieneverton said:
That just illustrates the standard of football journalism/punditry/analysis in this country. That sort of podcast is held up as a benchmark of football discussion and yet none of them had bothered to read the report. Ornstein maybe the exception, but his comments on it were absurdly one sided.

Neville I think does get it and at least had a few honest comments. Carragher was wishy washy albeit at least recognised why we're so livid. Keane and Wright clearly don't have a clue about anything like this.

And that's a "flagship" podcast. Grim.
Click to expand...
Summed up perfectly!
 
lieneverton said:
That just illustrates the standard of football journalism/punditry/analysis in this country. That sort of podcast is held up as a benchmark of football discussion and yet none of them had bothered to read the report. Ornstein maybe the exception, but his comments on it were absurdly one sided.

Neville I think does get it and at least had a few honest comments. Carragher was wishy washy albeit at least recognised why we're so livid. Keane and Wright clearly don't have a clue about anything like this.

And that's a "flagship" podcast. Grim.
Click to expand...
They don't just wander into those shows. That will have been story-boarded prior to the discussion...the way they wanted to roll out that issue.

So we got an initial "That's harsh, isn't it, 10 points"...then the Ornstein intervention with totally skewed take that skipped over the punishment and focussed the bulk of the time on Everton's "excuses". Then Neville makes a general point of the PL being a mess to round it off.

Scripted.

That's what we're up against.

Carragher and Neville don't give a flying one about us. Don't doubt that.
 
Walken said:
2022 was the year we were forced to cut ties with Ussie, there is a good chance it has affected that years accounts, what is certain is that it affected our ability to increase revenue that year, a potential 200m stadium naming rights deal just one example.

You have stated you don't know what was agreed so stop taliking in absolutes like you do to try and terrify people that its going to get worse.

You've spoken on this subject with zero nuance to deliberately paint the worst possible picture to stoke anxieties, and to speak o a tribunal which has no precedence or specific structure and guidlines to follow is just nonsense.

We go back a ways and I not only nearly always find myself agreeing with you, I've often found muself educated, but you are out of order on this. It's a scary subject for a lot of people who fear they might be losing something important to them and insincerely stoking that is sunday journalist style behaviour. This isn't personal in anyway, top poster and a nice fella but I won't be engaging on this subject further as I'm not going to be dragged into your troll-asphere
Click to expand...

I'm 100% genuinely not trolling on this issue. If it comes across that way I apologise to you.

I do joke at times with regards to Everton free weekends are the dream but the reality is the opposite.

I have a pessimistic attitude, personal and professional and will look to plan for the worst outcome.

You're right we have to contest the punishment on the basis you said with regards to a lack of structure for such breaches, I'd also throw the previous board under the bus and sell the new regime as someone who wants to be transparent moving forward and point to the last few seasons of trimming the squad and wagebill as our defence.
 

gwladysnight said:
You haven't read the report properly I fear.

This was the first case. They came up with a formula, basically 6 points for a breach and then 1 point for every £5m over the PSR threshold. The commission rejected the formula because the Premier League rules basically give the commission unlimited powers.

So clearly either the formula needs changing or the rules need amending.
Click to expand...
You make a lot of presumptions about people

First case is exactly why they shouldn't suggest a formula mid match or offer unlimited powers to a commission. They did not need to wait for a breach to discuss the potential sanctions

Every party needs to know the potential sanctions before they breach a rule, and the fact they have still not got a set formula proves the process is flawed, and your theoretical common law principle doesn't apply because by their own admission they have not set a precedent.
The second case will be a renewed formula because by their own admission this approach was floated for this case in isolation and any future methodology would need to be circulated beforehand to all members. That is not fair process.

They had plenty of time to figure out sentencing and inform Everton of what lies between the brackets.
The formula doesn't need changing because they do not regard the formula as the rule, and that is the problem, there is no formula.

Where in the report does it indicate how the commission arrived at 10pts despite their supposed rejection of the temporary formula?
 
Exeter_Gently said:
He's bought and paid for...that's what i got from watching that.
Click to expand...
He's actually a blagger. Before the last match of last season versus Bournemouth, Ornstein started talking on Sky Sports about how Bournemouth players were seeking revenge after we relegated them a few years ago...

...ignoring the fact we rolled over for them and lost 3-1.

This is the level of football "analysis" and "journalism" now. I miss Brian Glanville.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top