6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Jokerdan]

If he played we would of finished higher, he would of got probably 7 goals an 7 assist in a season, which is probably 6-12 more points which in turn is a few places and loads more money

So, in essence, we were disadvantaged in footballing terms hence don't see how other clubs can now argue to the contrary that any financial misdemeanours somehow contributed to their downfall. Basically, they just were not good enough...on the pitch!

 

[Jacko93]

No.

Everton did terminate his contract.

Everton decided against suing him.

They then tried to claim £10m back in the P&S due to loss of transfer value, loss of paying wages and they said if they had have taken Player X to court, they could have got that back. The Commission - absolutely fairly so - said that there was no way to prove that. Meanwhile, Everton elected to terminate Player X's contract. It was the right decision, but they still made that decision, and since they didn't pursue any of those losses back from Player X, it was a rubbish case of mitigation.

It was probably the second-weakest of the lot, apart from the really, really desperate attempt at the transfer levy thing.

I might have to read it over again, but I'm pretty sure the PL suggested we sue him for approx £10m. We said no, with concerns over his mental health, but can we instead have that as mitigation on losses? They then said no.

 

[duncs pigeon]

... or maybe he really cares about Everton as his whole family are Evertonians (I believe he's an Evertonian too / not the Sky persona Red-Carra vs. ManU-Nev BS). We need every voice we can get, mate. It's a cynical way to look at life, if you assume everyone has an agenda.
Btw if anyone would gain most from City getting done, it's Man United (charges from 2009-2018).

The same person who said he wished he was born a red. Im not cynical enough to think they all have an agenda but a large majority rs do not care we have this 10 point deduction, but want City and Chelsea punished.

 

[Tipp blue]

Financial penalty for a financial breach - pretty straightforward really, but our owner is soooooooooooo rich that they couldn’t do that?!?!?!?!!

The fact that they basically said that in the findings really wound me right up.

 

[Tipp blue]

I might have to read it over again, but I'm pretty sure the PL suggested we sue him for approx £10m. We said no, with concerns over his mental health, but can we instead have that as mitigation on losses? They then said no.

And what would he have done when charges were dropped?

 

[Bristol Blue]

 

[Ivo]

Surely we kept paying gilfi? Pretty sure without any actual charges the players union or whatever they're called would have been all over us. His wages for that period must have been a few million, plus we might have sold him for a few mill before his contract ran out.

 

[Tipp blue]

Good man Gary Neville.. Roy Keane on the other hand is nothing but a Rat who walked out on his country.

Neville describes Premier League as lawless and defunct

The 10-point penalty imposed on Everton shows the Premier League is a "defunct organisation", former Manchester United defender Gary Neville has said.

www.rte.ie

 

[Jokerdan]

I might have to read it over again, but I'm pretty sure the PL suggested we sue him for approx £10m. We said no, with concerns over his mental health, but can we instead have that as mitigation on losses? They then said no.

Full of heart these corrupt ********!

 

[Jacko93]

I might have to read it over again, but I'm pretty sure the PL suggested we sue him for approx £10m. We said no, with concerns over his mental health, but can we instead have that as mitigation on losses? They then said no.

I did in fact have this wrong. I mis-remembered.

Valuation is pretty easy to do though in terms of lost revenue. He cost us £50m and was 4 years into a 5 year contract. Their assertion that it can't be considered a mitigation due to the fact that players get injured...... clubs take out insurances on player injuries, would be a bit suspect if they took out insurance for suspected noncing.

 

[Toffeepot]

Even though I think the clubs potentially suing us have little chance of success, can someone explain to me why Forest are including themselves in the scavenge? How do they think they were affected?

 

[Jacko93]

And what would he have done when charges were dropped?

No idea.

For the record, I think we did the right thing not suing him. Bit disappointed we explored the option before any proof of guilt tbh.

 

[Jacko93]

Even though I think the clubs potentially suing us have little chance of success, can someone explain to me why Forest are including themselves in the scavenge? How do they think they were affected?

We probably signed Maupay when they wanted him, and were able to offer more cause of financial misgivings.

 

[Toffeepot]

We probably signed Maupay when they wanted him, and were able to offer more cause of financial misgivings.

We should sue them for not trying harder lol

 

[Blue peter]

Right...

- He had, at the time of his absence, less than a year left on his deal. He was 31, about to turn 32, so immediately there's no chance we're getting a big fee for him, especially when you chuck on he was on what, £120k+ per week?

He was described as a star player in the report because Everton described him as a star player, not because the IC suddenly decided to rate our players.

They dismissed it as mitigation because there is no way Everton could prove they would have got that money back by suing him. Because... they didn't sue him. So to then claim a complete hypothetical back as £10m was pretty wishful thinking IMO.

Also regardless of that reason - we lost a player … all clubs lose players whether that be for a season or more or less - the reason was largely irrelevant. I’m sure there are other clubs who have lost players to a season long injury entering the final year of their contract which is what the IC alluded to