Financial Fair Play investigation

[John from Bootle]

Ah got you. The thing is though, we are quarter of the way through the season, we have had a lot of, relatively, easy fixtures and we are on 7 points, that puts us on course for 28 points for the season. It seems unlikely that we can survive a 12 points deduction.

If you take into account how we have played this season, we will probably just about have enough to stay up, but only because there are 3 terrible teams in the division this year and we've already played 2 of them and gained the princely amount of 1 point from those 2 games. Do you see where I'm coming from?

I do mate. I just believe we'd be capable of getting 3 more wins and a draw than Luton, and so on.

Everything you've said is true, but then I can say we've won 3 of our last 5 games in all comps, and I don't think we're looking that bad right now.

Just to reiterate though, i am aware of how difficult it would be, and I'm in no way staying we would defo do it. I do believe we could turn it into a 'straight up' relegation fight going in to the tail end of the season though.

 

[CheshireBlue]

We've been averaging far less than a point per game, we are on 7 points from 9 games, which puts us on course for 28 points not 38.

It is quite a frightening read that, were we not in a similar position in the middle of last season? Then put in a couple of shock wins to take our average above that? I'm just going off our average numbers historically and factoring in that I think we are up against lower quality rivals this season which surely has got to be worth another 3-4 points across those fixtures when we play them - the so called 6-pointers.

 

[PITA]

Some of the tosh on here about conspiracies, agendas, being made an example of etc is proper tin foil hat stuff. The nonsense about protecting the big 6 etc is right up there with mainstream media and deep state nonsense.

We were one of the original gang that broke away to form the PL. Broke away. The PL wasn’t some cosy fireside chat amongst all 92 clubs. We led a breakaway that shafted the Football League and created the huge disparity in finances between PL and EFL. So let’s not pretend we’re not part of the problem and if we were still where we were in 1992, we’d have been looking at the Super League.

As for FFP, we’ve run up huge, eyewatering losses, been badly run, now living hand to mouth with loans to pay the bills. The idea that we’re being picked on or made an example is laughable. If we’ve broken the rules then we should face the punishment, accept it, apologise and start the work to rebuild our club and reputation.

I just want it done now. Even if we’re found not guilty, it’s probably on a technicality. In my mind we’ve not just broken P&S rules, we’ve blown them up but may yet still escape.

I just want to take any punishment, get the club sold, get through the next 18 months and move into the new stadium. Kenwright has gone (RIP), Morishi soon to follow, the huge spending era is over. Whatever happens with FFP will now hopefully draw a line under a disastrous period in our clubs history and we can get back to a better place.

And as for City and their 100+ changes….theres a lot of whataboutery. We don’t know the context of their breaches. The quantity of breaches is meaningless at this stage. It could be 117 minor technicalities whereas us could be 1 serious breach. It’s all just speculation.

Neither club passes the smell test. It all stinks. City have probably cheated better as they’ve managed to operate in a legally grey area with their funding and some very expensive lawyers will be arguing they’ve not technically broken any rules no matter how much it stinks.

Including by you. Lots of words to say sod all.

 

[Blue peter]

I pretty much regret not investing in a local bed sheet company a few years ago to replace the piss stained sheets and the sheets used for protesting, but by the looks of it, we still have a few good years of protesting left, so I’m starting to invest.
* starts research on Investopedia

 

[John from Bootle]

And as for City and their 100+ changes….theres a lot of whataboutery. We don’t know the context of their breaches. The quantity of breaches is meaningless at this stage. It could be 117 minor technicalities whereas us could be 1 serious breach. It’s all just speculation.

Irony alert: Or (genuine question) am i missing something and we, or you, know the context of our breaches?

 

[Blue peter]

Media are fickle mate, their job is to create drama, once a punishment/or not is known they will go where the next story is and whatever view point sells the most or perpetuates a news cycle.

Which will probably be us again

 

[Blue peter]

You do realise if we get relegated that stadium probably becomes a white elephant and we face administration

Every cloud and all that

 

[Market trader]

@Bluerover
Man City argued the danger of the Commission being influenced by the media, to the Court of Appeal who ruled out the argument, having examined the EPL methods for selection of Commission members (or jurors) and their roles, and the nature of the candidates. Also, the Commission is chaired by a KC to keep everything in order. I suggest this ruling sets a precedent.

 

[Bluerover]

@Bluerover
Man City argued the danger of the Commission being influenced by the media, to the Court of Appeal who ruled out the argument, having examined the EPL methods for selection of Commission members (or jurors) and their roles, and the nature of the candidates. Also, the Commission is chaired by a KC to keep everything in order. I suggest this ruling sets a precedent.

Fair enough - but has what was reported last week been prejudicial?

Still no definite clarity as to whether EPL did make this recommendation or not.

 

[Marius57]

It is quite a frightening read that, were we not in a similar position in the middle of last season? Then put in a couple of shock wins to take our average above that? I'm just going off our average numbers historically and factoring in that I think we are up against lower quality rivals this season which surely has got to be worth another 3-4 points across those fixtures when we play them - the so called 6-pointers.

Except we drew with Sheffield and lost to Luton already.

 

[bobbymill]

Some of the tosh on here about conspiracies, agendas, being made an example of etc is proper tin foil hat stuff. The nonsense about protecting the big 6 etc is right up there with mainstream media and deep state nonsense.

We were one of the original gang that broke away to form the PL. Broke away. The PL wasn’t some cosy fireside chat amongst all 92 clubs. We led a breakaway that shafted the Football League and created the huge disparity in finances between PL and EFL. So let’s not pretend we’re not part of the problem and if we were still where we were in 1992, we’d have been looking at the Super League.

As for FFP, we’ve run up huge, eyewatering losses, been badly run, now living hand to mouth with loans to pay the bills. The idea that we’re being picked on or made an example is laughable. If we’ve broken the rules then we should face the punishment, accept it, apologise and start the work to rebuild our club and reputation.

I just want it done now. Even if we’re found not guilty, it’s probably on a technicality. In my mind we’ve not just broken P&S rules, we’ve blown them up but may yet still escape.

I just want to take any punishment, get the club sold, get through the next 18 months and move into the new stadium. Kenwright has gone (RIP), Morishi soon to follow, the huge spending era is over. Whatever happens with FFP will now hopefully draw a line under a disastrous period in our clubs history and we can get back to a better place.

And as for City and their 100+ changes….theres a lot of whataboutery. We don’t know the context of their breaches. The quantity of breaches is meaningless at this stage. It could be 117 minor technicalities whereas us could be 1 serious breach. It’s all just speculation.

Neither club passes the smell test. It all stinks. City have probably cheated better as they’ve managed to operate in a legally grey area with their funding and some very expensive lawyers will be arguing they’ve not technically broken any rules no matter how much it stinks.

Finally someone talking a bit of sense in here

 

[WestStandLower]

My final contribution to this particular issue - not the thread!

I have repeatedly said this is not a court, civil or criminal but a quasi- judicial process with formidable powers to investigate, determine and impose serious negative consequences on a respondent- in this case Everton FC., where a determination is that the respondent has breached the rules or in this case the FFP that is under investigation

"Nemo iudex in sua causa applies here to the EPL. They cannot be judges in their own cause. By giving this to a plenipotentiary Commission, one would think they had fulfilled this requirement, but if it is true that they have interfered by making recommendations as to punishment BEFORE conclusion and determination of the hearing, then Everton have a strong case for arguing undue influence/prejudice. Anyone know who is paying the members of the Commission btw?? I really don't know the answer to this. Are they truly independent of the EPL??

Whether the Contempt of Court Act 1981 also applies to these as "Other Proceedings" under the Act is unclear. but I believe it should certainly be examined by Everton's Counsel.

From an Irish solicitor's site - I believe the same would apply in England and Wales, as we share the same fundamental common law foundation. (The Scottish legal system is different, and I am unfamiliar with its intricacies, but I would be surprised if Natural Justice Rules were much different).

"Many quasi-judicial tribunals or bodies rely on the surety that those making decisions must always consider natural justice in decision-making and use fair procedures throughout.

Essentially, natural justice requires that a person receive a fair and unbiased hearing before a decision is made that will negatively affect them. This concept applies to a judicial and quasi judicial forum.

The main requirements of natural justice that must be met in every case are adequate notice and information to be provided, a fair hearing with a right to reply (as it is all so hush hush it is for Everton's legal team to say whether or not they think they got a fair hearing and that the rule 'audi alteram partem' was properly followed by the Commission- i.e must hear the other side), no bias by the decision makers and the right to appeal. It is paramount that these basic considerations are applied in all cases".

Based on your first line I guess you won’t reply

City challenged in the HC the competence independence, ability and indeed the whole PL disciplinary process as agreed for and paid for by all stakeholders.They City failed in that challenge. Would Everton succeed where City failed?
The clubs agree collectively who the independent head of the regulatory body is and that appointed is ratified at each AGM and the clubs jointly fund the cost.

 

[Bluerover]

Based on your first line I guess you won’t reply

City challenged in the HC the competence independence, ability and indeed the whole PL disciplinary process as agreed for and paid for by all stakeholders.They City failed in that challenge. Would Everton succeed where City failed?
The clubs agree collectively who the independent head of the regulatory body is and that appointed is ratified at each AGM and the clubs jointly fund the cost.

Market Trader made much the same point and I said fair enough (as regards the independence of the Commission) - see above.

Everton may still have grounds that the EPL and/or various media made prejudicial remarks while the Commission was deliberating.

 

[Market trader]

@Bluerover
The Court of Appeal have ruled on this. (Man City were not encouraged to take it to the Supreme Court.) The media will not prejudice the Jurors was the ruling.
I am quite prepared to accept the ruling of the Court of Appeal and will not comment again on this topic.

 

[Bluerover]

@Bluerover
The Court of Appeal have ruled on this. (Man City were not encouraged to take it to the Supreme Court.) The media will not prejudice the Jurors was the ruling.
I am quite prepared to accept the ruling of the Court of Appeal and will not comment again on this topic.

Fair enough- have a good weekend.

We have a B/H on Monday although weather is horrible.

Let's hope our brave blues give us something to cheer us to morrow.

Don' forget to put back the clocks -an extra hour in bed