6 + 2 Point Deductions

[allen]

I think you've misread this one pal.

Indeed I had, thanks. Already clarified and apologised!

 

[b-rad]

'Only' finishing 15th instead of 10th is >£10 million in lost revenue. We all know the clubs financial situation, that kind of money is massive.

Not sure what ongoing global conflicts has got to do with this conversation.

And £10m is potentially the difference between being P&S compliant and an 8 point deduction.

 

[Charlie Sweet]

Exactly why people are intent on fighting this as much as possible. Punish the owners, not the fans.

The owners are the club. It's a business whether we like it or not. The Premier league isn't some egalitarian olympiad and to suggest it is, or even it should be, is beyond naive given the Saudis and Abu Dhabis involvement - never mind the carcinogenic American owners in the league.

We broke the rules. It's all in the report. The only issue for me is it seems harsh but that's relative and entirely unproven until others are in the Dock. In the meantime @NathDogg is acting like we're fighting a rear guard defence in downtown Gaza.

 

[MikeH72]

Have a word mate. It's only points and realistically the only effect is we will finish 15th instead of 10th. There's wars going on around the world. We broke the rules and got penalised. Yes harshly but the only matter for consternation is if other clubs get off more lightly now for similar offences. Until then just chill.

You genuinely post some of the most mind-boggling waffle I’ve ever read with my own two eyeballs Charles.

 

[Yorkiebars89]

Well, okay, but I don’t see how you can think that AND also think the deduction is the best thing to happen to us since Moshiri took over!

Because its all been doom and gloom yet look at the togetherness on and off the pitch

 

[Charlie Sweet]

You genuinely post some of the most mind-boggling waffle I’ve ever read with my own two eyeballs Charles.

Given I've just read how you wished one of our players has a long time off the pitch with an injury - I take your comments in the best possible way.

 

[Saint Domingo]

Motivate the team to an absolutely brilliant run, then give us all our points back so we’re in European competition.

 

[hallamblue]

What specialism?

Not football finances unfortunately!

 

[Wat Tyler]

 

[EFC_FRANCIS]

Excited for when we get another 10 points in Jan and still survive

 

[Titus Bramble]

The owners are the club. It's a business whether we like it or not. The Premier league isn't some egalitarian olympiad and to suggest it is, or even it should be, is beyond naive given the Saudis and Abu Dhabis involvement - never mind the carcinogenic American owners in the league.

We broke the rules. It's all in the report. The only issue for me is it seems harsh but that's relative and entirely unproven until others are in the Dock. In the meantime @NathDogg is acting like we're fighting a rear guard defence in downtown Gaza.

Literally no idea what you’re on about

 

[Titus Bramble]

Why are we intent on fighting the points deduction?

Why wouldn’t we fight it? You’ve even given a good reason to do so in your closing sentence.

Edit: ah, I’m an idiot! Sorry, misread your post! I thought you were agreeing with the original poster!

No worries mate… it is Monday morning!

 

[allen]

Excited for when we get another 10 points in Jan and still survive

I was thinking this quietly myself the other day but didn't want to speak it in case I manifested it into being!

But yeah, I reckon we'd give surviving another -10 a crack at this rate.

 

[ClausThomsen]

I would be interested to learn how anyone can characterise the Club's defence as shambolic unless they were present during the hearing. I have worked with and against several barristers over the years, and as in all walks of life there are good and bad performers.

Be that as it may, there does seem to be a justified view that the panel summarily dismissed relevant mitigating factors that might be considered unique to Everton's situation i.e the loss of sponsorship revenue due to sanctions and the inability to trade a player for non-footballing matters. It seemed very arbitrary for the panel to give no weight to those issues given the relatively modest scale of the breach.

I would expect the Club to press heavily on those points in the appeal process.

Both those mitigating factors are known risks. The loss of sponsorship due to war/sanctions is an unusual reason but a sponsorship deal going down the pan due to outside influences is not a completely alien concept. Same with a player losing market value and availability for whatever reason - it's a known risk when you place huge financial outlays on something as unstable as a human being.

The scale may be modest but the thinking may well be that the rules already allow for huge financial losses and already generously account for infrastructure development, academies, women's teams, Covid etc. Going right up to the limit and then beyond is frankly ridiculous hence the punishment. There's really no such thing as a modest breach when there is already a huge amount of scope and leniency offered beforehand.

I guess we'll only see how harsh or lenient it truly is when other clubs have been through the same process.

 

[Bebeto]

Whilst i think we will probably get some points back in appeal, I am starting to worry about our last year accounts (22 23) which would potentially put us over the 105 losses permitted again. This would mean a further points penalty this season...I am thinking that if our mitigations for 21 22 were not accepted, then logically you would think that they wouldn't be accepted this year either meaning an extra 20 millions of losses that will have to be accounted for...