Financial Fair Play investigation

[perth_blue]

Time will tell on that score.

If I were a gambling man I’d say City will get off lightly in general, and in comparison to us, but that will say more about the PL not wanting the headache of asterisk titles for the last 5 years, and not wanting to deal damage to their most rapidly growing brand, than about any insidious plot against the most non-threatening, perpetually vanilla no-marks of the league who nevertheless continue to make them a prettier penny than any Championship replacement would.

I dare say they will be docked something like 30 points.
Season ending for half the league, but for them and their points total, would mean they most likely miss out on Europe. Whilst the panel can say they handed down the most severe penalty in Premier League history.

 

[ValBlue]

So the media doesn’t give a rat’s arse if we’re down, but the PL wants us down because it’ll make them a load of money via the associated stories in the *drum roll* MEDIA???

Your argument is incoherent and conspiratorial nonsense.

Newcastle, Villa, Leeds and West Ham have all been relegated in the past and it was news for 5 minutes.

Middlesbrough were relegated as a direct result of a points deduction and there was barely a sniff.

Everton’s continued participation in the league and the revenue it brings - pretty sure the Merseyside derby has the highest recorded viewership for a PL game on Sky - is worth FAR more to the PL than our relegation and any associated stories.

Also where is the source for that claim of the highest views game?

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

…an agenda that favours a certain few clubs means there’s an ‘anti-agenda’ against the others.

Eggs man, you were arguing a couple of posts back that the agenda was that they might not want another big club in Liverpool to challenge their dominance.

Don’t act like this was your meaning all along.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

In the context of the bigger clubs, we’re nobodies. In the context of a story, it’s massive.

I’m pretty sure the derby had high viewership because it was the Liverpool derby, not because Everton were in it. Ask any casual who Liverpool’s rival is and they’ll say United.

It’s not conspiracy, the premier league could care less about if Everton is in the league so long as Arsenal, Liverpool, city, United, spurs and Chelsea are all in it. We make up the numbers along with everyone else. Why are we trying to convince ourselves like we’re some incredible asset? We’re nothing to them. They’ll be thrilled to make an example of us whilst doing nothing at all over city or Chelsea.

Liverpool play 38 games in a season. Why are those numbers bigger than fixtures against any of their other 18 opponents?

Nobody is saying we’re an incredible asset, simply a more profitable one than any potential replacement. Why would a business be THRILLED to lose money over a virtual non-story, let alone the cost of the nefarious processes involved in making it happen?

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

Also where is the source for that claim of the highest views game?

It’s a literal Google search away.

 

[ValBlue]

Liverpool play 38 games in a season. Why are those numbers bigger than fixtures against any of their other 18 opponents?

Nobody is saying we’re an incredible asset, simply a more profitable one than any potential replacement. Why would a business be THRILLED to lose money over a virtual non-story, let alone the cost of the nefarious processes involved in making it happen?

Turns out it the number was massively inflated because it aired for free and was also 3 years out of date

7 most-watched Premier League matches ever as Everton vs Liverpool breaks record

Everton and Liverpool drew 0-0 on Sunday evening behind closed doors at Goodison Park and a record number of fans watched the action on TV as Sky Sports broadcasted it live for free

www.dailystar.co.uk

Everything with the last 3 years was City, United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

I dare say they will be docked something like 30 points.
Season ending for half the league, but for them and their points total, would mean they most likely miss out on Europe. Whilst the panel can say they handed down the most severe penalty in Premier League history.

I highly doubt their penalty will be so severe in terms of points.

I imagine there’ll be a fine that sounds big, but their owners will cover with cash from the back of their couch, and maybe a transfer embargo for a window or two.

A points deduction that massive would drive viewers away from an otherwise competitive title race and that’s all the PL are ultimately arsed about.

 

[Eggs]

Eggs man, you were arguing a couple of posts back that the agenda was that they might not want another big club in Liverpool to challenge their dominance.

Don’t act like this was your meaning all along.

….I really have no idea, I generally don’t tend to be cynical but when something seems clearly unfair it just makes me wonder why.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

I highly doubt their penalty will be so severe in terms of points.

I imagine there’ll be a fine that sounds big, but their owners will cover with cash from the back of their couch, and maybe a transfer embargo for a window or two.

A points deduction that massive would drive viewers away from an otherwise competitive title race and that’s all the PL are ultimately arsed about.

The Premier League want to see a competitive title race, as their previous CEO admitted.

Take City out of that equation and it's likely more competitive than ever.

In my opinion, the Premier League's current agenda is to maintain as much control as they can over the regulation of their clubs.

That agenda is best aided by setting a tone. Irresponsible, non sustainable spending needs punishment - the timing dictates that's now - and seemingly Everton have given an open goal.

Wolves come very close to 'doing an Everton last summer', and I suspect Nottingham Forest are in the same boat next summer.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

….I really have no idea, I generally don’t tend to be cynical but when something seems clearly unfair it just makes me wonder why.

On what basis is it unfair though mate? We’re literally the first to be punished under these rules. You’re basing your perception of fairness on an assumption of what will happen to City.

 

[ToffeeTim]

I have no idea what the result of the process will be, but I think there has been a real lack of transparency.

 

[GBracey77]

So where was this shady action in the 2000s when we WERE actively threatening Liverpool’s position in the city?

I’d argue that a money-spinning local derby at least twice a season benefits the PL more than relegating us would.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

The Premier League want to see a competitive title race, as their previous CEO admitted.

Take City out of that equation and it's likely more competitive than ever.

In my opinion, the Premier League's current agenda is to maintain as much control as they can over the regulation of their clubs.

That agenda is best aided by setting a tone. Irresponsible, non sustainable spending needs punishment - the timing dictates that's now - and seemingly Everton have given an open goal.

Wolves come very close to 'doing an Everton last summer', and I suspect Nottingham Forest are in the same boat next summer.

Looking at the current league table, you make a fair point.

I can’t imagine they’d love the hassle of the implication any such punishment would have on City’s previous title wins, but I suppose they’d gamble on that not driving viewers away in their masses on principle alone.

The latter is the important point. If the PL are consistent with punishing teams have spent excessively, then time will quickly tell whether our punishment was “fair” or not.

 

[Brett Angell Delight]

View attachment 235484

I withdraw my earlier comment.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Looking at the current league table, you make a fair point.

I can’t imagine they’d love the hassle of the implication any such punishment would have on City’s previous title wins, but I suppose they’d gamble on that not driving viewers away in their masses on principle alone.

The latter is the important point. If the PL are consistent with punishing teams have spent excessively, then time will quickly tell whether our punishment was “fair” or not.

If they have those considerations mate then they're punishing to an agenda and it's then, unfair.

I think it's why it's all intentionally lacking any transparency. A panel that moves and changes. Heck, we don't even know what the alleged breach is for. The times say the FFP charge was related to interest payable on loans to build the new stadium?

But ultimately;

"Any points deduction would be the first of its kind in England’s top division, and is likely to trigger panic among rival clubs.

In February, champions Manchester City were charged with breaching 115 regulations over 14 seasons from 2009/10 to last season."

If the Premier League are saying 12 point deduction for 1 breach, then what for City and their 115? Not to mention Chelsea's shenanigans?

When there's no transparency, when there's no clear framework and no precedent, when punishment is to a discretion of an anonymous panel - you're setting up for all kinds of finger pointing.

I just have this lingering feeling that Everton are made a point of, and by the time Chelsea and City are dragged to the regulator, it's a totally different approach.