6 + 2 Point Deductions

[PhilEFC]

I personally think they will double down and stick with the 10 points. They will expect it to be old news soon enough.

Who decides? A new panel or more of the PL's lackeys?

A new panel of the PL lackeys I think.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

I personally think they will double down and stick with the 10 points. They will expect it to be old news soon enough.

Who decides? A new panel or more of the PL's lackeys?

Even they aren't stupid enough to ignore the holes in their original unbiased judgement. How can 1 breach of arbitrary rules be more serious than going into administration?

 

[Mrbluenose]

Even they aren't stupid enough to ignore the holes in their original unbiased judgement. How can 1 breach of arbitrary rules be more serious than going into administration?

The condemnation the punishment has received from some quarters has been pleasantly surprising. But I don't think it's enough to put the PL under pressure. We aren't important enough to their product sadly. Thats why I think the deduction will likely stand.

Hopefully it doesn't, but even then I think we will only be a few points better off. Minus 8 makes it less than administration so that's that argument dealt with.

I just cannot see the deduction being halved let alone dropped to 3 points as mentioned previously.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

The condemnation the punishment has received from some quarters has been pleasantly surprising. But I don't think it's enough to put the PL under pressure. We aren't important enough to their product sadly. Thats why I think the deduction will likely stand.

Hopefully it doesn't, but even then I think we will only be a few points better off. Minus 8 makes it less than administration so that's that argument dealt with.

I just cannot see the deduction being halved let alone dropped to 3 points as mentioned previously.

I get where you are coming from but there is no logical argument for it to stand and the scrutiny they have already been subjected to by political figures and leading names in the game will only be magnified if they let it stand. The whole thing is a joke from start to finish they decided what to do before the first piece of evidence was heard and now they have the temerity to put the exact same panel in charge of deciding if clubs can pursue compensation and for how much.

Not one single person even those who ridiculously agree with a points deduction can put forward a coherent case why it should be 10 points, the findings they came to and the report they published has more holes than the Open and Masters put together.

 

[riddick]

I do worry about this.

If we get a 6 point deduction and a 2 window transfer ban, it will kill us. That is worse than the 10 points. We desperately need reinforcements.

We've desperately needed reinforcements for about 8 years running.

 

[PITA]

Honestly how this is going I do just wish we sacked the game off. Tell the players to come out and sit on the floor. Refuse to play.

Best not do that else United would be awarded a 0-3 win.

 

[PITA]

Please don't associate me with that lot in the tags please.

I've said we need to contest the punishment. But, we need to change tact at the appeal.

Look who liked your post.

 

[mccole]

10 wins needed to escape if these 10 points don't come back.

Home form is horrific YET again for the multiple season in a row. This needs to be addressed immediately because despite wins at Brentford and Palace, we won't get 30 points on the road.

 

[overkill]

Read the report.

The premier league publicly pushed for 12 points, the contents of the report don't change that.

 

[Martin Alvito]

The condemnation the punishment has received from some quarters has been pleasantly surprising. But I don't think it's enough to put the PL under pressure. We aren't important enough to their product sadly. Thats why I think the deduction will likely stand.

Hopefully it doesn't, but even then I think we will only be a few points better off. Minus 8 makes it less than administration so that's that argument dealt with.

I just cannot see the deduction being halved let alone dropped to 3 points as mentioned previously.

Any pressure will have to come from the government threat of an independent regulator. That's not the outcome we want (yet). What we want is a backroom deal where Parliament hands the league the conditions of reducing our punishment sharply, punishing Chelsea similarly for self-reported violations and throwing the book at City as the price of continued independence.

The way the Prem gets the government to accept that deal is by tying their own hands as the government demands. It is now plain for all to see that the Prem is operating a star chamber for disciplinary purposes. They are free to write and remove rules as clubs see fit. That would have to change, and the government is also likely to force them to make good on promises for revenue to trickle down to grassroots football.

They get fourteen votes for changes to the governance structure and the bottom-line hit by showing clubs whatever unpalatable alternative the government puts on the table. Most of the Prem's revenue may come from overseas, but MPs are in the business of votes, not revenue. Most matchgoing Prem fans live less than ten miles from the stadium, with the exceptions being the rich clubs, so there are a bunch of MPs where this is a real issue for their constituents.

 

[Mrbluenose]

I get where you are coming from but there is no logical argument for it to stand and the scrutiny they have already been subjected to by political figures and leading names in the game will only be magnified if they let it stand. The whole thing is a joke from start to finish they decided what to do before the first piece of evidence was heard and now they have the temerity to put the exact same panel in charge of deciding if clubs can pursue compensation and for how much.

Not one single person even those who ridiculously agree with a points deduction can put forward a coherent case why it should be 10 points, the findings they came to and the report they published has more holes than the Open and Masters put together.

I agree with everything you've said.

It's their temerity as you put it which makes me believe they won't back down.

 

[PhilEFC]

I agree with everything you've said.

It's their temerity as you put it which makes me believe they won't back down.

I think they’ll definitely try to double down. They’ve got their client journalists and Sky backing them now.

Hopefully the likes of Andy Burnham etc and the pundits who back it gets us somewhere.

It needs sorting either way sooner or later for the players and fans sake. There needs to be a clear timeline.

 

[Tipp blue]

As a leeds fan, I think I have 4 takes on this.

1 - The 10 pts mean very little this year. There are 3 terrible teams in the league, you'll stay up with 30 points probably. Can't see the penalty resulting in relegation.

2 - You broke FFP. You did so knowingly and then tried to cover it up with dodgy accounting. The penalty is fair enough - You got caught and lied about it. Suck it up.

3 - Your big problem isnt the 10 pts, its Burnley and Leicester. Leeds, Southampton etc.....have very small claims, which amount to a couple of million for being 'cheated' out of a place in the league, but neither resulted in a substantial impact. Burnley and Leicester however..........You could easily be looking at a couple of hundred million compensation and all the fun and games that come with that.

4 - This is for the 21-22 season. Your still not compliant with FFP today, so need to fix that pronto or you'll be proper hammered. As a result, there is an urgent need to sell players and reduce the wage bill - and forget about strengthening. I think this (and the 3rd point) are your main issues. The 10 pts won't mean a whole lot and is short term - a big compensation bill and a wage bill that is hugely out of kilter with your revenue are longer term problems that could bury you for a good long time.

Leciester have no case whatsoever... their whole argument is based on "if the punishment was handed out last year we'd have stayed up" didn't they also break financial rules to get into the PL in the first place? Burnley are the only ones with any legitimate claim but then the commission stated that we got no sporting advantage from the overspend this is the same panel that gave us the deduction in the first place.. I actually hope that they do award compensation as they'd be contradicting their original findings.. and we can bring the whole thing to a real court and get away from show trials and the PL kangaroo court.

 

[RD2910]

Leciester have no case whatsoever... their whole argument is based on "if the punishment was handed out last year we'd have stayed up" didn't they also break financial rules to get into the PL in the first place? Burnley are the only ones with any legitimate claim but then the commission stated that we got no sporting advantage from the overspend this is the same panel that gave us the deduction in the first place.. I actually hope that they do award compensation as they'd be contradicting their original findings.. and we can bring the whole thing to a real court and get away from show trials and the PL kangaroo court.

It didn't state that we got no sporting advantage. That's just wrong.

 

[PhilEFC]

It didn't state that we got no sporting advantage. That's just wrong.

It didn’t say we did either.