6 + 2 Point Deductions


Tipp blue said:
There was no quantifiable sporting advantage yet they gave us a quantifiable sporting punishment...
There was an inferred sporting advantage so why not an inferred punishment.
Click to expand...

Quite.

The case they used was Sheffield, they were £18m over £39m losses in a 3 year period. They got 6 points as that was what their sporting advantage was deemed to be. (Reduced from 12 on appeal).

We were £19.5m over a £105m loss in a 4 year period (2 Covid years averaged).

If they can infer a sporting advantage from the Sheffield case, then surely they should be taking a lead from the sporting advantage that they were adjudged to have had.

They were 47.5% over budget, we were 18.5% over budget. using the Sheffield case as an example, as they did, any inference should be calculated in line with that, unless they have any more evidence of level of sporting advantage gained. Basically, we gained 39% of the advantage that they were deemed to have gained.

39% of 6 is 2.3, they'd probably round it up to 3. If they'd have done that I think they would have covered most bases and much of the media/others would have accepted it as fair. They also would have had an actual basis for their numbers rather than just finger in the air and 'coincidentally' is almost exactly the same as the newly created and conceived prem suggestion that they said they would in no way follow..

Not that I think that we should have any points deduction at all by the way. You cant punish the fans for decisions that not only did we not make, we have actually been protesting against for 3 years or more.
 

blue to the bone said:
Click to expand...

Good read.. it gives me hope that with reasonable arguments the whole lot will be overturned.. I especially like the bit every it states that there is no section in the P&S rules that mention that they are sporting rules and no concerns mentioned of sporting advantage.. these are solely financial rules not sporting rules.. the punishment must fit the crime.
 
Billy Dean said:
Just finally read the full report. A bit farcical that there is no explanation of how 10 points was reached if they supposedly rejected the PL suggestion. Appeals IMO should highlight the stadium and it's value to the economy and English football, and the issue with 'Player X'. Either we could have sold him for decent money, or we would've been able to use him on the field and thus negate the need to spend money on another player.
Click to expand...
That one mitigating factor alone should be more than enough to make a nonsence of any 'inferred' sporting advantage.
 

sbbefc said:
Conspiracy theory here. Part of me feels like they've given us this punishment to add some interest to what would have otherwise (possibly) been a drab relegation battle. Could have had three teams set adrift before Christmas. But with us in the mix it'll add some value to these relegation games.

If we're 5 points behind come February they might give us 4 back to make it competitive again.
Click to expand...
It's certainly a decision that has positive consequences for the "narrative", that's for sure.
 
Inappropriate Language
marnie said:
Matty you are on a permanent Menstrual Cycle. xxx We will have to keep fighting and see what happens. I think there will be a reduction .... how many points... nobody knows this or when it will happen.
Click to expand...

i know mate - it’s f n everton gets in my head and booom.

i hope so mate it’s so unjust thank you i know i do all your heads in x
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top