6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Deulofeumygod]

Yeah....sack him

Just wish we could get a backbone. Don’t want him sacked.

 

[Connor mcloud]

Not impressed with dyche wearing the premier league badge front and centre. If he has to wear it, have it hidden at least.

Corrupt ball bags

Appeasement

 

[tellmema]

Rumours abounded that we bought McNeil to compensate for relegating Burnley while overspending

True. Forgot about that. Clever thinking. He's now worth 30m. So we've saved in the compo. Long live the mosh....

 

[Exeter_Gently]

Just wish we could get a backbone. Don’t want him sacked.

My lord... maybe he's just wearing it to make a stand against homophobia within Football which is what those multi coloured badges are.

 

[Deulofeumygod]

Appeasement

Meh.

My lord... maybe he's just wearing it to make a stand against homophobia within Football which is what those multi coloured badges are.

I didn’t know that.

I completely retract my post.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

Meh.

I didn’t know that.

I completely retract my post.

It's all good fella...am still behind your anti Prem moxey by the way!

 

[malfosse]

It’s like getting jailed for assault for punching yourself in the face and missing.

That would be so much more Everton.

 

[Tipp blue]

We supposedly used Pinsents, who are legit, at least in corporate. But it seems well known that Mosh pushed aside other club officials to represent the club himself in the hearings, so would be no surprise if he ignored half the legal advice (which will have been “shut up you idiot and let us handle this, you are paying us more per hour than your manager!!!”)

Using “our non-existent midfield” as a reason why he continued to buy players when they were authorising them but also warning against it beggars belief. Convinced he just found all of his billions in a bin when walking his dog.

I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if Moshiri was outed as a massive Liverpool fan who was happy to spend hundreds of millions just to destroy us.. there's just no way a man smart enough to qualify as an account and amass multiple billions of pounds could possibly be as useless and incompetent as he has been without sinister motivation.

 

[Dixieslaces]

Id like to see a bit more transparency with emails, documents and statements.
Something clearly stinks.
Would anyone pleade guilty if they didnt know the sentence? Where we duped?
Did we freely think handing over all our info for them to scrutinise? Or did we think it was to be a mitigating factor?
A few years back my 97 year old Dad reapplied for attendance allowance. He put down all the correct information including a pension that paid him £200 a year. The dwp got in touch with him and asked him for proof of this pension. I spoke to them. They said it was just for their records. We sent proof in.
Then then sent him a bill for £5k as hed been overpaid for 30 plus years as it wasnt on their system. We had to go to court to get this wiped off. He had told them 30 years ago, and i proved it. They hadnt accounted for it.
My point being, they lied to get the info they wanted as they already knew what they wanted to do.

Same thing happened with our family and my Nan, problem with us was we weren't strong enough and just paid the o/s 3.5k, if we had of contested we would have won as we know, like you, that all documents were submitted, sadly for me, I was too young to influence the elders at the time.

Back on topic, it seems from the outside we dud everything and went above and beyond to comply, but then get penalised anyway.

I think, it will be overturned and I believe we have opened the can, where it leads, I've no idea but I'm only interested in us, at this stage.

 

[PhilM]

Same thing happened with our family and my Nan, problem with us was we weren't strong enough and just paid the o/s 3.5k, if we had of contested we would have won as we know, like you, that all documents were submitted, sadly for me, I was too young to influence the elders at the time.

Back on topic, it seems from the outside we dud everything and went above and beyond to comply, but then get penalised anyway.

I think, it will be overturned and I believe we have opened the can, where it leads, I've no idea but I'm only interested in us, at this stage.

The club knew they were guilty as the rules are quite clear, and they admitted it as much. To do otherwise would have been pointless and detrimental.

The issue was the level of culpability and mitigation: we argued that we worked with them all along, and there were genuine mitigating factors for the overspend.

This boils down to whether they've a) had an objective process, b) rightly took into consideration mitigating factors, and c) applied a correct punishment.

From what I know, the club were in no way expecting such a severe punishment, and are confident they'll be able to appeal the sentence.

However, playing the Devil's advocate, the PL will argue that a financial punishment does not act as a suitable deterrent for clubs overspending.

If a club like City can overspend by £25m, perhaps seriously increasing their chance of success, and only get fined a few more millions than they may do that.

Our point will be that the PL themselves did not agree to the point that it gave us a sporting advantage, and an overspend does not guarantee an improvement.

I'd be content with five points docked and a fine.

 

[matty1878]

The club knew they were guilty as the rules are quite clear, and they admitted it as much. To do otherwise would have been pointless and detrimental.

The issue was the level of culpability and mitigation: we argued that we worked with them all along, and there were genuine mitigating factors for the overspend.

This boils down to whether they've a) had an objective process, b) rightly took into consideration mitigating factors, and c) applied a correct punishment.

From what I know, the club were in no way expecting such a severe punishment, and are confident they'll be able to appeal the sentence.

However, playing the Devil's advocate, the PL will argue that a financial punishment does not act as a suitable deterrent for clubs overspending.

If a club like City can overspend by £25m, perhaps seriously increasing their chance of success, and only get fined a few more millions than they may do that.

Our point will be that the PL themselves did not agree to the point that it gave us a sporting advantage, and an overspend does not guarantee an improvement.

I'd be content with five points docked and a fine.

can we pay a fine

 

[Shevin Keedy]

can we pay a fine

We can but it has to go in the submitted PL financial report review; in short - if they fine us, we tip back over the threshold and get docked another six points, plus they add compound interest to the docked points.

 

[matty1878]

We can but it has to go in the submitted PL financial report review; in short - if they fine us, we tip back over the threshold and get docked another six points, plus they add compound interest to the docked points.

not that

 

[Shevin Keedy]

not that

Well it's either that or we get sent to Rwanda!

 

[PhilM]

We can but it has to go in the submitted PL financial report review; in short - if they fine us, we tip back over the threshold and get docked another six points, plus they add compound interest to the docked points.

To my understanding, we'd have a set period for us to pay the fine, although yes it would be part of our profit and loss to the PL.

Yet, we could adjust our expenditure etc. to help facilitate this, or put simply we could sell a player in the window.