6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Tony’s Carp]

The entire point of the rule is to safeguard a club so it doesn’t overspend and risk financial ruin or administration.

And the punishment for breaking the rule is to shove a club into financial ruin and administration.

It’s absolutely bonkers.

Absolutely crazy. The rule exists to prevent a greater harm (insolvency / administration) yet the punishment is not only worse than for the greater harm actually happening, but makes the greater harm more likely. But I don't know how you even argue about it logically when you're dealing with an organisation that's out of control.

 

[allezlesbleus]

two deductions mate we can’t claw it back

If that’s how it pans out, it would be so hard. But you have to play each card as it falls. We have not lost the first appeal yet and we don’t know the details of this alleged second breach yet. Obviously we are up against the powers that be but we have to see the details first.

 

[MACCA75]

Mate, we had a centre half booked today for not fouling a player, don't search for sense where it doesn't exist.

Think he was booked for Luiz pushing him!

 

[leningan]

Think he was booked for Luiz pushing him!

Commentators said it was for "adopting an aggressive attitude"... Is that actually in the rulebook?

 

[davek]

I 'kin loathe that Ornstein. He's not just the messenger, he relishes this.

If we're charged, Everton fans should get tickets for every game in the PL this season (every fixture of every club) and invade the pitch and ruin the PL 'brand'.

There'll be hundreds of thousands willing to pay their fines for them.

 

[Dymak]

Am I right in thinking that this new P&S figure is the first one to include the loss of sponsorship caused by the embargo on trade with Russian entities?

It could perhaps explain why we have struggled to keep within the limits. It should also be considered valid mitigation for doing so. I know the commission have previously given that claim short shrift, but that response is really subject to challenge.

It’s preposterous to expect clubs to prepare for hypothetical trade embargoes that are impossible to predict, and are caused by geopolitical events that are totally beyond the control of Everton.

In truth, it's an extremely strong mitigating factor, and I believe it may have become a lot more relevant because the previous breach didn't include the loss of sponsorship income, but this new breach does!

 

[blulouie]

I 'kin loathe that Ornstein. He's not just the messenger, he relishes this.

If we're charged, Everton fans should get tickets for every game in the PL this season (every fixture of every club) and invade the pitch and ruin the PL 'brand'.

There'll be hundreds of thousands willing to pay their fines for them.

Go for it Dave

I'le follow you

 

[Lob]

The entire point of the rule is to safeguard a club so it doesn’t overspend and risk financial ruin or administration.

And the punishment for breaking the rule is to shove a club into financial ruin and administration.

It’s absolutely bonkers.

Yep but in reality it is there to ensure that the elite stay the elite. That is it's only purpose. The peasants get hit with relegation threatening punishments for minor ffp breaches , meanwhile the elite get very small voluntary fines for major issues (non ffp) or their can kicked down the road (ffp) until the rules are adjusted enough so as to not threaten their eliteness.

 

[Thomasc]

I’m not honestly overreacting or being dramatic when I say that right now my life would be a lot less stressful without Everton in it.

The club brings me zero joy.

Football now brings me zero joy. In fact I despise what the game has become.

I’ve loved football all of my life. Enjoyed playing it as a kid and at a reasonable level as an adult.

Loved the 80’s, 90’s and early 2000’s. AC Milan and Juve, Spain 82 World Cup, Euro 96 etc etc.

Enjoyed our rise again under Moyes as the underdog, it was probably the last time I’ve enjoyed Everton.

It’s a pale imitation of what it once was as a sport and a pastime.

The PL is a joke and a cabal and I want no further part of it. Happy to see us go down, it’s much better than having to endure this garbage week after week.

 

[Goat]

I 'kin loathe that Ornstein. He's not just the messenger, he relishes this.

If we're charged, Everton fans should get tickets for every game in the PL this season (every fixture of every club) and invade the pitch and ruin the PL 'brand'.

There'll be hundreds of thousands willing to pay their fines for them.

Christ.......

You gonna do it Dave?

 

[davek]

Christ.......

You gonna do it Dave?

If need be.

 

[Thomasc]

Yep but in reality it is there to ensure that the elite stay the elite. That is it's only purpose. The peasants get hit with relegation threatening punishments for minor ffp breaches , meanwhile the elite get very small voluntary fines for major issues (non ffp) or their can kicked down the road (ffp) until the rules are adjusted enough so as to not threaten their eliteness.

A friend on social media wrote this a whole back. I screen shot it to keep for a moment like this, it sums it up perfectly.

 

[Goat]

Am I right in thinking that this new P&S figure is the first one to include the loss of sponsorship caused by the embargo on trade with Russian entities?

It could perhaps explain why we have struggled to keep within the limits. It should also be considered valid mitigation for doing so. I know the commission have previously given that claim short shrift, but that response is really subject to challenge.

It’s preposterous to expect clubs to prepare for hypothetical trade embargoes that are impossible to predict, and are caused by geopolitical events that are totally beyond the control of Everton.

In truth, it's an extremely strong mitigating factor, and I believe it may have become a lot more relevant because the previous breach didn't include the loss of sponsorship income, but this new breach does!

We knew we had lost the money when we signed 5 players in the Summer.

Will be the response.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

Okay.

Para 117 of the previous charge document states we were using “positive trend” in terms of PSR compliance as mitigation. I.e. trying to get closer to compliance.

The doc states the PL were refuting this for reasons such as it was an EFL mitigation, no such rule applied to PL PSR etc etc. Importantly “any positive trend is not continued into 2023.”

So despite all the waffle about negative net spend, presumably due to crippling interest (which they will just say affected all businesses in 22/23) the PSR loss was going backwards, not improving as everyone assumed.

 

[Lob]

View attachment 241949

A friend on social media wrote this a whole back. I screen shot it to keep for a moment like this, it sums it up perfectly.

Boss that and absolutely spot on.