6 + 2 Point Deductions

[barneygumble]

We built a stadium, and the interest got us.

£19.5m, the majority of which didnt include transfers is ludicrous.

The non-legal matter says there's no leg to stand on. But im sure there is something in it, as @Lanolin mentioned.

Just hope the case is not strong enough. What a farce. That said, I am sure TFG would be aware of this beforehand and will be fully prepared. We are not a clown college any more.

 

[Tipp blue]

in the 2 seasons before relegation Burnley went from 54 to 39 then in the season in question 35 (relegated) points, they were on a provable major downward trajectory that had nothing to do with us. Any competent judge would punt this case after the opening statements.

 

[Tipp blue]

I agree, the consequences of a judgement in Burnleys favour and any degree of a significant reward would open up a huge can of worms.

It was interesting to begin with that Leeds and Leicester decided not to pursue this. Was it a case of people in glass houses and/or just deciding not to open up a hornets nest?

We could not be left open to an indefinate period of other potential claims if this goes against us. It would amount to being scapegoated yet again. We did receive a significant punishment, twice. And it was noted we acted in good faith.

I wonder if there is an appeal process here if required, but even if not, the club might seek redress of their own and on other grounds and it would get very messy.

Ultimately this is a reflection of the PL's failure of oversight and consequences of a lack of independent regulation.

Manchester City were a yo-yo club for years before they got taken over, if they are found guilty then Every club that finished below them over the years in question could have a case.

 

[hallamblue]

This Burnley case is the whole reason why financial penalties or suspended points deductions should have been imposed. Richard Scudamore managed the league so much better than this Muppet.

 

[Lapeno77]

Yeah, best of luck

View attachment 325551

How is that not a conflict of interest?

 

[hallamblue]

How is that not a conflict of interest?

Well given how well we were run at that time she's probably useless! Also she won't be able to use any documents from her time at Everton as there will have been a confidentiality clause in her contract

 

[Tipp blue]

Burnley's case is essentially "The timing of Everton's punishment didn't suit us" If we can't win this case then I have no idea what's real anymore.

 

[hallamblue]

Burnley's case is essentially "The timing of Everton's punishment didn't suit us" If we can't win this case then I have no idea what's real anymore.

There is no case, it should be over in a couple of days

 

[Simon Buttle]

There is no case, it should be over in a couple of days

Sounds like there is, Moshiri blabbing that we needed a new midfield in the first hearing appears to be what they are clutching at, but they won't get anything like £50m, sounds more like £10m tops if that.

 

[RD2910]

Burnley's case is essentially "The timing of Everton's punishment didn't suit us" If we can't win this case then I have no idea what's real anymore.

I doubt it is. An argument that our points deduction should have been applied to the season in which Burnley went down is impossible to support. Their argument must be that the inferred 'sporting advantage' was enough to be the cause of our finishing above them - I would say that's also pretty much impossible to prove but looks like they're going for it.

 

[Del-boy]

That Stefan financial fella has just been talking about this on TalkSPORT. Said Burnley do have a case but not for anywhere near £50m. Said he expects it to be settled for under £10m. More likely around the 5-6m mark.

 

[Cjplennon]

It would make sense for this to fail, as it would open a can of worms that nobody really wants. If Burnley are successful, then I imagine Leeds and Leicester would also push for compensation. Then teams like Liverpool and Arsenal would look for deals against Chelsea and City.
That being said, we will probably be found guilty have to pay Burnley a small fortune and then a rule change will come into force to protect the rest of the league.

Not sure any rules change could stop a club taking someone through the civil courts?
Not sure this Burnley nonsense has got anything to do with the premier league rules. IMO if Burnley didn't like the rules and the sanctions for breaking the rules they should not enter the competition. Case closed.

 

[mikel_88]

That Stefan financial fella has just been talking about this on TalkSPORT. Said Burnley do have a case but not for anywhere near £50m. Said he expects it to be settled for under £10m. More likely around the 5-6m mark.

Hopefully get 0 so we can end all this rubbish.

 

[Rehnman]

Sounds like there is, Moshiri blabbing that we needed a new midfield in the first hearing appears to be what they are clutching at, but they won't get anything like £50m, sounds more like £10m tops if that.

Can’t we just give them Iroegbunam in an out of court settlement then?

 

[Simon Buttle]

Can’t we just give them Iroegbunam in an out of court settlement then?

Or give them McNeil back.