Based on Everton's transfer record, that might actually harm Leeds' case.
Everton in the pooh
- Thread starter dee
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Can it be something more basic? We played by the rules and got punished. They broke the rules and escaped.
I don't think it will be. Maybe the fine (if there is any) but I'm betting the 10 points sticks, otherwise what's the point?
There is no way a points reduction gets reversed or moderated after a big announcement like that.
Anyway Everton will still stay up so there won't be much controversy
Nah. The recommendation was 12 points it's already been reduced.
I'm not sure that's true. At the hearing, the PL asked for a formula based penalty - a fixed penalty of 6 points and then a further point for each £5m over the limit. Rounding up to the nearest £5m that would give 10 points. The 12 points was from a newspaper story which looks like it was misinformed.
If the public and political outcry is loud enough I can see a reduction in the points sanction on appeal, but they need to be very careful or they could end up with this year's 18th placed team wanting to sue if they believe Everton should have been punished more harshly or even just straight relegated.
I don't think that works, because the counter argument is that even if Everton had been relegated, Leeds would still have gone down. So the only compensation they could claim would be £2m of extra merit income for finishing 18th instead of 19th, and I don't think they'd sue for that. The argument would have to involve Leeds somehow staying up, which they would have done if they'd beaten Everton at Goodison instead of losing to them. In that situation the potential compensation is huge.
In either event, I don't think their case is strong enough and if I were in Everton's shoes I'd take them on, whereas I'd probably try to settle with Burnley and Leicester.
I know it's a long long time ago, but it has happened before. I remember once Spurs were found guilty of some financial offence and were docked 12 points, banned from the FA Cup and had a fine.
It was a big deal at the time but after a few rounds of appeals, the points deduction and cup ban were dropped.
Same thing could happen here.
It was a big deal at the time but after a few rounds of appeals, the points deduction and cup ban were dropped.
Same thing could happen here.
I feel like this is partly posturing in order to show an Independent Regulator isn’t necessary.
To be fair it does seem a little harsh over a reasonably small amount, for what amounts to just shit management - although they didn’t heed the warnings to sort themselves out - it’s not like they’ve blatantly cheated and tried to cover their tracks - they just spent a shitload on crap players in the expectation they’d finish higher in the league.
I’d almost argue that having to regularly read out a list of all the players they signed and the fees paid in the last 5 years would be punishment enough.
Maybe as punishment they should have to wear a kit designed by Tom Davies for at least a season.
I hadn’t realised they’d managed to find someone willing to sign him.
To be fair it does seem a little harsh over a reasonably small amount, for what amounts to just shit management - although they didn’t heed the warnings to sort themselves out - it’s not like they’ve blatantly cheated and tried to cover their tracks - they just spent a shitload on crap players in the expectation they’d finish higher in the league.
I’d almost argue that having to regularly read out a list of all the players they signed and the fees paid in the last 5 years would be punishment enough.
Maybe as punishment they should have to wear a kit designed by Tom Davies for at least a season.
I hadn’t realised they’d managed to find someone willing to sign him.
I agrée about the posturing, but I think that’s more to do with the timing of the announcement than the decision itself.
Where I think their appeal will have some merit, assuming they’ve picked up on it, is on the matter of their punishment being seen as a deterrent. The commission actually said “…the sanction must act as a deterrent to clubs that might be tempted to breach the PSR”.
I think it would be fair to argue that they should be punished for their sins in isolation, and not treated more harshly to warn everyone else off. To the extent the commission has included a specific element in the sanction as a deterrent then I’d expect to see it reduced for that on appeal.
i'm not so sure i agree with this mate, the premier league quite clearly told them on numerous occasions that the signings were going to breach the FFP limits and Everton basically ignored it in the hope they'd be able to offset it via sales. They also blatantly took the piss with other costs and losses around the stadium that they tried to get included within their annual financial reporting which again the premier league told them they couldn't do. Not sure how anyone can sympathise with them, they clearly rolled the dice and thought they'd get away with it, they've blamed everyone else but themselves. Even now when you read the report it's how Spurs didn't pay them £80m for Richarlison or how Covid affected them higher than any other premier league club. They're taking the piss. I only feel sorry for the fans who clearly have been done over by shit management group
Yeah - I don’t disagree with you - I think the sanctions should remain - I’m just not convinced they will.
You know City fans actually like calling themselves “The Untouchables” - makes me want to vomit. My City mate keeps sending me this.
The minute they get done, I’m sending him this :
I imagine he’ll block be again.
Can’t wait.
I don't want the bitters to get even a reduction in their penalty, and it's not just because I despise them or just because I really, REALLY want them to go down so they don't keep committing GBH on our players. I want it to stand unaltered also because I'm hoping against hope that the football authorities will find a backbone and go after the bigger fish (Chavs and Citeh) properly as well. Reducing Everton's punishment would not set a good precedent for that.
it never rains
Here's hoping, but even if its effect is confined to the blueslime that'll do me. I've had it up to the back teeth with the way they've cut a swathe through our players in derby games over the years, more often than not without any real consequence. I want them down and I want them to stay down.
Rant over.
Jules has never forgiven Everton for spoiling his teenage years by signing Dixie Dean from Tranmere.
I have a feeling they'll be OK numbers wise on this one. Because this is on a rolling basis, the year that drops out will have a much bigger loss than the one that replaces it. Basically, they need to have improved their results by £20m between 2019 and 2023. In 2019, their basic loss was £111m. I reckon they'll be somewhere near £60m in 2023.
That said, I'm looking at the basic profit numbers, not the adjusted ones, so they could still mess it up, but if they do I suspect it will be close.
That said, I'm looking at the basic profit numbers, not the adjusted ones, so they could still mess it up, but if they do I suspect it will be close.
The allowable rolling loss is huge, so they should given what you know. I think that gets lost in the noise, just how much loss you can make BEFORE it is punished
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
