I’m not overly concerned about the Watford complaint mate.
If they had a smoking gun in terms of evidence, the PL wouldn’t have invited both parties to mediation and told them to sort it out amongst themselves, if evidence was water tight. If there is clear evidence of a violation the PL are in breach of their own rules by not sanctioning and taking the mediation route.
Realistically Everton aren’t going to turn down a PL request to attend a facilitated mediation meeting, but suggesting that Everton are at fault here and have been bending over backwards to appease Watford is wildly speculative.
They could have just sat there and denied any liability, probably the case if there was no resolution. I’ve seen quotes published today saying that at the meeting it was said they had no intention of appointing Silva as manager, that is different then saying they would definitely not appoint him and it’s not in breach of rules to change an intention.
It all boils down to Watfords burden to provide proof really.
I also note it’s largely the London papers running the story, makes me think it’s a Watford media drop.
I think we’re safe in the Liver Building at the moment, unless Watford have a smoking gun. Given the trajectory of sketchy speculative events as reported, I think the PL would have escalated this a lot sooner and not gone through mediation if there was a smoking gun of evidence for a clear breach.
We’ve called your bluff really.
That’s how I read it.
It’s funny seeing Watford taking the moral high ground here, there was no such moral outrage when the Pozzos were sending ringers over from Udinese or Granada on “loans” to gerrymander the championship and get to the PL.
I think we would do well not to be taking advice on footballing morals, ethics when it comes to clubs of Watfords ilk and shady dealings.