6 + 2 Point Deductions

[DuncansPigeons]

View attachment 247268

I'm not quite sure what this is actually supposed to mean, but I thought this was interesting where it referred to the Everton FAB and wider fan base.

I think it's probably just a lot of words without saying much in truth.

It says thanks for report FAB….but it’s going in the bin

 

[Billy Dean]

Hopefully people will start calling out that Man City supporting bulb off twitter who kept going on Talksport saying we wouldnt get anything back

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Just wish they'd do away with ffp rules, things would settle down quickly, everyone would know where they stood and there wouldn't be the mess there is now.

We are building a stadium for god's sake. I mean look at the 11 players who started at the weekend and tell me that we have spent big money on payers in the last 3 years.

Pickford - bought before the 3 year period.
Tarkowski - Free
Branthwaite - 750K
Godfrey - 20M
Mykolenko - 17M
Harrison - Loan
Gueye - 2M
Garner - 9M
McNeil - 20M
Doucoure - 20M
Calvert-Lewin - bought before the accounting period.

88M pound spent on a team that is worthy of a 6 point deduction for breaking the rules.

 

[MIKE85]

It is a separate 3 year rolling time frame but 2 of those 3 years were already covered in the previous rolling time frame.

But it's still a new breach, isn't it? Of course, it depends on how much our losses are for the 2022/23 accounts or if we're making progress.

 

[Toffe3m4n]

We'd already admitted guilt, I'd assume the legal advice was you can't undo that, so try to get it reduced the best way you can.

But have we admitted guilt for the second charge? you'd hope not...

Also worth remembering that, if in the worst case we get a second deduction, we may have set a precedent that gains us 8 points vs the previous worst case scenario. that's points that LUTON have to make up. Playing the long game it may work out

We didn't 'admit guilt' per se - we just had to 'acknowledge' the second breach in relation to the mitigations surrounding the first.

 

[NathDogg]

Same as an injury apparently

Baffling to me.... but then what would I know

Can you imagine the rs not being allowed to play Salah, or City without Haaland, yet with financial prudence a club should have a 200m replacement just sitting on the bench just in case that ever happens.

It's absolutely pathetic. He was our record signing ffs so we wouldn't have had a like for like replacement

Just more examples of them pulling the process and punishment right out of their arses. It’s just insane.

Hate that we’ve took the head pat and belly rub by the looks of it - the club doesn’t represent me at all on this.

 

[Marius57]

Same as an injury apparently

Baffling to me.... but then what would I know

Apparently they do accept that knowing the precise reasons for his arrest and unavailability would be unforeseeable though.

 

[PeregrineT]

Never going to happen

Hence the "or else the powers that be can be exposed through not touching them.". One of the evil sides in this league is going to get it from this whole affair.

 

[jazzy]

Getting some points back is better than nothing and lifts that cloud from the club and players.

Just one more to go!

Agreed Bob but if we get another 6 for the next charge we are in a world of difficulty ( unless Forest gets a bigger penalty)

 

[GrandOldSte117]

I’m literally reading the report mate.

It directly states that Rabinowitz focused mainly on 2 grounds, the first being the one arguing against the suggestions that we didnt act in utmost good faith.

Yes because that's probably one of the only areas we could actually fight back on, legally.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

The focus of our appeal seemed more about clearing our name that we acted in bad faith rather than wanting points back. We just don’t want people to think we meant to do wrong.

Pathetic club.

Gave a nice PR line from the club on our statement. It still says we misled over the loans. Idiots

Got 2 points back for arguing it was stupid to be more than going bust, and 2 back for proving losses were improving.

I’d take this same IC group for the second charge to be honest. Don’t agree with all of it, but far more reasoned with clearly explanations for their decisions. And from what I’ve seen so far, happy to say the first IC was downright wrong.

 

[kenada_blue]

They asked Masters about this in that parliamentary hearing and he said all clubs agreed to it so if that’s our argument it won’t stand for long

Also...isn't that what the parliament committee wanted the minutes for and the league refused?

 

[Wat Tyler]

I thought the guess was 3points per £5m - which is why the Prem were advocating 12 points as suitable deduction prior first hearing.

So we should have a model now for Nottingham Forest - but.... do we?

Forest in ‘hotter water than Everton’ on FFP charge as £112m difference raised

Latest Nottingham Forest news from NottinghamshireLive as the Reds and Everton face charges over allegedly breaking the Premier League's Profitability and Sustainability rules

www.nottinghampost.com

So even a “football finance expert” doesn’t know what Forest breach amount is. So it’s all guesswork

 

[efcfanwirral]

We didn't 'admit guilt' per se - we just had to 'acknowledge' the second breach in relation to the mitigations surrounding the first.

Make sense. I'm hoping we have a bit more behind us to actually fight it at the hearing this time.

 

[Swartzy]

Bit random but it's made throwing 4pts away against Palace/Brighton in the last week sting even more.

We'd be 2/3 wins away from safety now.

And throwing away any possible advantage on this other charge..