Noisy noise annoys
Player Valuation: £60m
You’ve said similar to that, alsothis is real vibes mate
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You’ve said similar to that, alsothis is real vibes mate
It's for 75% of the same cycle I believeGetting very confusing this now, the club are saying its for the same period !?!
Everton should have done what Man City did and argued the toss at every turn.
Nice guys act didn't work.
"The club has raised concerns about double jeopardy with the Premier League but been informed that is a matter for the independent commission that will consider the latest charge. Unlike the EFL, the Premier League has no guidelines for capping losses in years that have already been subject to a sanction."
I think that's the key here. Especially with City still nowhere near resolved and Everton suffering two points deductions: that is a massive problem for a panel to argue a case for punishing Everton twice in one season.
In short: this charge has been automatically triggered because the PL don't have a double jeopardy rule in place. An independent panel will recognise that.
As said though: the big difficulty now is player attitude to this mental pressure.
Yeah, imagine if the new commission finds us guilty and issues another points deduction that then results in us being relegated. But then our first appeal is successful, and on that basis we also appeal the second punishment, likely with success, thus overturning the relegation. Imagine the uproar and probable lawsuits from any other clubs affected.I think our firat appeal has to be fast tracked now, especially if it has to be sorted before the second charge. Otherwise it throws all the timelines out.
Yeah, I don't think we need a super silk to make our case for the second charge to be at least mitigated.If they are going to pay any attention to legal principles then given there is a 75% overlap to prevent double counting the punishment for the second breach should only be 25% of the first, so if it sticks at ten it should be 2-3 more max.
You’ve said similar to that, also
Everton should have done what Man City did and argued the toss at every turn.
Nice guys act didn't work.
The esk will cover himself if we are charged by saying that we will be cleared in time. It's an easy escape route
It was also stated on a number of occasions that we misled both the Premier League and the Independent panel.It was stated in the findings that there was no deliberate breach, so this is not proven.
Yes, feels like a vendetta especially as they have suddenly become so quick and efficient at reviewing all the accounts. Took them forever for the first round...Not sure what the Premier League’s reason is for these continued sanctions but it’s starting to feel like a vendetta at this point.
I wonder if it’s the FA bearing its teeth and showing it can self regulate with the spectre of independent regulation being mooted.
Seems easier to chase the likes of Everton and Forest than go after bigger clubs with deeper pockets and considerably more political popower.
Which really was the entire point and business case for Bramley Moore Dock. Boost the matchday revenue by a 30% increase in attendances, charge a higher price for season/match tickets, food and beverage etc and a new and bigger shop, more tour income, stadium naming rights and reuse the stadium for Euro's, Europa league final, concerts etc... Some of this does start eating the lunch of our lovable neighbours in addition to the Etihad and likely similar long terms plans Man U might have for OT. No doubt each of those three want us/BMD to fail for those reasons. Could that be a discrete back channel lobbying issue here.. maybe.89% we are, new rules are 70% of turnover, we really need to be around the 50-60% range
Yeah, I don't think we need a super silk to make our case for the second charge to be at least mitigated.