Under The Lights
ORDER NOW
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You said you wouldn’t tell anyoneEverton are like the limp guy at an orgy.
Makes a mockery of us rolling over for a good belly rub when they cut it to 6.
I dunno, one of us sits and spends 90% of their time here talking about Liverpool on an Everton forum, in the Liverpool thread.No I think you’re a kopite because you get weirdly bent out of shape the second anyone mentions them, you police the Liverpool thread diligently complaining about people mentioning them (even though that’s the purpose of the thread), and whenever they lose you seem inordinately bothered by it.
That’s why I think you’re a kopite. Hate Everton, like Liverpool, only so many ways that looks.
We'll get 3. That's the starting point for breaking the rules. They could add an extra 3 for the 'severiity of the break', but i think even the Premier League would realise that any more would look vindictive.My guess is we get another 2 points. Puts us on 23, two ahead of Forest and one ahead of Luton with a game in hand, slightly better GD and both to play.
I wonder what the reasoning is for the Forest IC only to have two members, whereas ours had 3.
Knock it off with the kopite shouts - all they do is derail the threadNo I think you’re a kopite because you get weirdly bent out of shape the second anyone mentions them, you police the Liverpool thread diligently complaining about people mentioning them (even though that’s the purpose of the thread), and whenever they lose you seem inordinately bothered by it.
That’s why I think you’re a kopite. Hate Everton, like Liverpool, only so many ways that looks.
Still think two not going to give us -2 off beacuse of helping them make it easier. Cant even put into words how pissed off i am over this result today. Just wanted to be treated fairlyWe'll get 3. That's the starting point for breaking the rules. They could add an extra 3 for the 'severiity of the break', but i think even the Premier League would realise that any more would look vindictive.
The timeframe argument is strange on their end. Correct me if I'm wrong but for our first charge there were no agreed timeframes, hence why the PL sought to expedite the process. Us not agreeing to the expedition was not to obstruct the process, but to ensure if was carried out diligently.To me it reads....
"Forest respectfully notes in this regard that Everton appears to have avoided the prospect of relegation during the 2022/23 season by reason of initially denying the Complaint brought against it, and taking various points, including resisting the Premier League's application for expedition, such that the first instance proceedings against it could not be determined until November 2023."
They felt that if the league made a quicker decision, we would've been looking at relegation. Why mention this if it wasn't a mitigated reason to overspend?
"The need for swift decision making to assist the integrity of the Premier League means that clubs that co-operate should be significantly rewarded to incentivise others to do so and deter those who seek to delay or disrupt proceedings brought against them."
As Forest haven't "delayed" their decision and been cooperative (which accuses us of not being) they feel they should be let off a bit.
The idea to even bring that in as part of an argument to get a leaner sentence shouldn't even be used IMO
But seems to have worked.