6 + 2 Point Deductions

[WestStandLower]

Losses as per the report were £10m in 2022 & must be over £40m in 2023 to have breached the £105m again.

My guess is that the statutory losses will have to be over £70 million

 

[Tony’s Carp]

Hasn't he just got his dates wrong, stating 20-22 when he means 19-21, which totalled £114m?

The dates are right in terms of what carries onto the 23 calculation. I don’t know if this is a correct interpretation of the rule or a misunderstanding about what “capped” means.

 

[Baggzio]

Not arsed because Forest's have to be far worse just by the nature of it. They're 1 point behind us now, any sanction that we get is fine as long as they get one that is at least 2 points more, that only benefits us to a certain extent.

I think we'll get 1, Forest will get 8 and go down without much of a fuss.

 

[WestStandLower]

The buying club would have to recognise the liability/creditor/future payment as soon as the obligation became contractually binding. The selling club does not recognise good news/income/profit until the transaction occurs.

Same for all areas of accounting. Recognise bad news when reasonably likely, recognise good news when it happens.

If a customer signs a contract to buy a car in 1 months time, even if they pay in full, the dealership only recognises the sale when handover of the car occurs. I.e. risk and rewards of ownership of the asset have transferred fully to the customer. Never before.

For all periods a player is still contractually owned by a club, and they bear all the risks of injury, form, disciplinary etc they can never ever record the benefit of a future sale until his locker is emptied and he has gone, irrespective of obligation to buy in X month time

Cheers

That’s correct under FRS but the PSR&FFP submissions deviate from international accounting standards

 

[efcste97]

It was bizarre. He was all over the place. For Forest he said:

A possible reduction from the standard 6 points, because 2 of their 3 years were in the EFL.

But then an increase because their breach was blatant.

But then maybe a deduction for the Brennan Johnson issue because of the Sheffield Wednesday stadium precedent. Or maybe not. Basically he hasn’t a clue.

For us, he seemed to accept we might get only 1 or 2 points because we have already been punished for 2 of the 3 years (though he said this was not the same as double jeopardy). But we might get an increase as we are trending in the wrong direction.

No mention of his beloved Man City at all, nor any acknowledgement of the fact that his previous prediction that we wouldn't get anything back from the appeal was proved incorrect.

'tending in the wrong direction' doesn't seem to be a good enough reason to increase the deduction, doubt that reason would hold up on appeal.

 

[Lob]

If double jeopardy is to be treated as a major factor and we are below 35m loss for that years accounts, then there wouldn't be any deduction whatsoever so do one Joyce. Once a RS always a RS.

 

[RD2910]

If double jeopardy is to be treated as a major factor and we are below 35m loss for that years accounts, then there wouldn't be any deduction whatsoever so do one Joyce. Once a RS always a RS.

How will we have breached if the accounts are below £35m?

 

[nick_waters]

The dates are right in terms of what carries onto the 23 calculation. I don’t know if this is a correct interpretation of the rule or a misunderstanding about what “capped” means.

You're probably right in pinpointing the 'capped' meaning. In which case Myers is saying that the £55m will now be capped at £35m, whilst the subsequent £10m doesn't need capping, making a total of £45m to 'count' for 2 years before the 22/23 figures are added to complete the rolling three years.
Whether he's right or not is another matter entirely.

 

[Evertonthat]

If double jeopardy is to be treated as a major factor and we are below 35m loss for that years accounts, then there wouldn't be any deduction whatsoever so do one Joyce. Once a RS always a RS.

Exactly this. If 2 of the 3 years have already been punished then it's only the new year that can be assessed. No case to answer for the second charge, provided the new year is under the threshold.

 

[Somerset Blue]

Yes, they will. Although from a PSR perspective you’d like to think we’re now being much more careful about what is and isn’t directly for the stadium.

Thanks…you would hope so!

 

[Lob]

How will we have breached if the accounts are below £35m?

Exactly. We have only currently been accused of the 2nd breach because of the 3 year roll. Remove 2 years double jeopardy from that and there is no breach. Charges dropped etc.

 

[Joey66]

I see the clubs around us are whinging - thet we're very quiet when we got 10 points deducted. & Forest overspend is far greater than ours - & our next one is double jepody TBF all the clubs should be called innthis season as then prem have made this season a mockery

 

[Baggzio]

Only because you refuse to cooperate. Tbh i hope you continue to do that. You've quite clearly cooked the books but so what. You were never ever going to get where you are today without spending beyond what your club generates. If the club have owners and the funds then balls to the like of platini arsene wenger and bayern who didnt want any newcomers blowing them out of the water.
The whole system is about preservation
Everton tried to better themselves. Made as pigs ear of it as you could have with recruitment. I dont agree you should get penalised for that. Anyone who sticks two fingers up to this grubby premier league isnt going to get criticised by me.

100% this, frankly I couldn't care less about City, good for them in my opinion. Fact is, I'd love to be them. Out of the "super 6" they are legitimately arguably the least dodgy simply because of how open their cheating has been. There's almost something commendable about how shameless they are with it. As for us, like you say we've made a balls of this ourselves, the only reason we even care about this charge is that it *could* relegate us and end the club. If we were any bit savvy this conversation would actually be about how annoying it might be to miss out on the Champions League.

Honestly if I were watching my team win trebles, dominate leagues and arguably become the greatest team of all time I'd probably be a knobhead about it too. Frankly I hope City keep on winning and winning, for me they're the best team which I hate least, I'd be delighted to watch them just buy trophies and make other fanbases cry about it. I couldn't give a toss about the integrity of the league or anything like that anymore, the PL had numerous chances to put their foot down, they chose not to so now they can reap what they sow.

 

[GoldenToffee]

We're almost certainly 'only' getting penalised for 1/3 of the accounting period for this second breach, whereas Forest almost certainly went miles over what we did and are being judged on the whole three-year cycle.

The Premier League has a precedent set of 6 points for £19m, so once we know the amounts involved we should be able to make a decent guess as to what both teams get - them definitely getting their arses tanned to the tune of 10+ points.

I say 4 more wins does it for us for sure, 3 could even do it from here.

West Ham, Burnley, Forest, Brentford, Sheffield United at home, Luton and Bournemouth away - if you can't take 12+ points from that you won't deserve to stay up.

Also don't discount Luton dropping like a stone: three defeats on the bounce now with City and Villa next up before some more 'winnable games'.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

You're probably right in pinpointing the 'capped' meaning. In which case Myers is saying that the £55m will now be capped at £35m, whilst the subsequent £10m doesn't need capping, making a total of £45m to 'count' for 2 years before the 22/23 figures are added to complete the rolling three years.
Whether he's right or not is another matter entirely.

Yeah, that’s my interpretation. He’s stated that if the EFL rule is adopted we are not in breach, and we know that as the numbers are we apparently are in breach, so clearly the EFL doesn’t make things worse.

So logically the 55m is capped at 35 as it’s been punished, but the 10m remains the same.