6 + 2 Point Deductions

[Lloydaldo11]

Putting aside the noise on here tonight with some ripping planning applications off unrelated cases via Wikipedia to prove some sort of warped point, I definitely thing there’s two outcomes here…

The PL use our appeal as an off-ramp to get out of this, say they’ve reflected and are putting a more robust and fair process in place from next year and quash the judgement in the appeal stage whilst also shutting down the noise and focus on them whilst trying to avoid an independent regulator.

Or

They double down and hide behind “rules are rules”.

Masters performance today shows he’s massively out of his depth and lacks the foresight to spot the optics on this and everything suggests another kangaroo court being lined up to cement their stance.

Hopefully our legal team will not just do the business in the hearings but also be wise enough to leverage the optics which put the PL in an untenable position that option one becomes the PLs only viable option.

That said, we only have about 16 weeks before the end of the season. Tick tock dicky…

 

[ashwuk76]

It means he said one thing to the Independent commission and another to government today.

So he is lying and making it up as he goes along.

Colour me shocked!!! Mr Masters lying

 

[Rob17896]

They adopt a fixed starting point of a deduction
of 6 points. There would be an increase from that starting point of one point
for every £5 million by which the club had exceeded the PSR threshold of
£105 million. Further adjustments could be made to reflect aggravating or
mitigating features. The rationale for this view is given in the evidence of Mr
Masters.

I am past worrying. They change the rules when they like, apply the rules how they like and are a shambles of a 'governing body.'
'Rules' and VAR have also destroyed the game and Moshiri has destroyed the club. He will now try to continue a sale to other cowboys.
The pity is that Dyche has brought some respect back to the team but all for nought I think.

 

[jinkyali]

I'm not sure a punishment at the hands of independent commissions will stand.

What if one commission gives clubs different punishments for the same offence?

I think and hope between them the lawyers reiterate that.

 

[Moomin]

It’s not irrelevant as each club must be treated in a consistent and equitable manner with regard to what is permissible to be excluded from PSR calculations.
Regardless of a club’s proximity to the PSR threshold the same policy must apply to all
clubs. If a club or clubs are allowed to deduct pre-planning costs from PSR prior to Everton’s case being heard then the same principle must be applied to us.

Did Spurs really have its pre-planning costs removed from PSR?

 

[Runub]

We ran into the perfect storm. Incompetent owner/Board meets incompetent and/or corrupt Premier League. Not a good mix

 

[Walken]

Putting aside the noise on here tonight with some ripping planning applications off unrelated cases via Wikipedia to prove some sort of warped point, I definitely thing there’s two outcomes here…

The PL use our appeal as an off-ramp to get out of this, say they’ve reflected and are putting a more robust and fair process in place from next year and quash the judgement in the appeal stage whilst also shutting down the noise and focus on them whilst trying to avoid an independent regulator.

Or

They double down and hide behind “rules are rules”.

Masters performance today shows he’s massively out of his depth and lacks the foresight to spot the optics on this and everything suggests another kangaroo court being lined up to cement their stance.

Hopefully our legal team will not just do the business in the hearings but also be wise enough to leverage the optics which put the PL in an untenable position that option one becomes the PLs only viable option.

That said, we only have about 16 weeks before the end of the season. Tick tock dicky…

As we've seen with masters stuttering performance and the holes poked by Burnham and the FAB, its a case there to be made. My big concern is the case is being heard by a PL selected 'independent' board. We can win the argument and most likely will and they could still kill us off to suit their own ends.

 

[Moomin]

It's not really answering my question though, is it?

Not really happy with it, they say it's independent but it's by name only.

It's a boys club at the end of the day.

 

[Joey66]

So you want our barrister to question the credentials and integrity of a senior silk, a judge and a former PL finance director.

Give me strength.

It happens in a court of UK law - yes if they have nothing to hide -no harm done - then you don't cry after the decision.....

 

[Goat]

As we've seen with masters stuttering performance and the holes poked by Burnham and the FAB, its a case there to be made. My big concern is the case is being heard by a PL selected 'independent' board. We can win the argument and most likely will and they could still kill us off to suit their own ends.

Call me naive and I am certainly not an expert on the fella, but I very much doubt such a high profile KC as the fella we have got will stand for being Kangaroo courted.

As I keep stating, there is so much legally to get right into the whole pack of cards.

 

[Joey66]

That would have happened from the off.

Last hearing - that was debatable after the event

 

[kenada_blue]

Dear Mr Masters

Thing is...I give the lad credit for sticking at it. He's re-enforces why we got a point deduction. No one is really questioning that.

What he teeters into is that I think he believes we deserves a bigger punishment. He also won't acknowledge the fact that when it was all said and done we were £19.5mill over.

 

[Walken]

Call me naive and I am certainly not an expert on the fella, but I very much doubt such a high profile KC as the fella we have got will stand for being Kangaroo courted.

As I keep stating, there is so much legally to get right into the whole pack of cards.

I hope so, but what is to stop the prems so called independent panel watching our KC absolutely dominate the argument but then say we will still punish everton?

 

[Lloydaldo11]

Taking a step back from this. The last 24 hours has been a huge own goal for the PL.
The noise about our 10 points had died down, barely anything in the media and even on this thread it was getting like the ale house off topic and even gwladysknight returned home like a rancid pigeon back to the tin mine to play super fan with other fellow mutants.

The last 24 hours though have added fuel to the fire and reignited not just our arguments but the arguments from six or seven other clubs plus certain media outlets and journos are starting to wise up which indirectly can only be a positive thing for us as the subject is back on the table. The question is now, how does the club leverage this to put pressure on the PL using Masters disaster of a performance in front of the select committee.

FAB have done a great job in calling out the inconsistencies today, but it’s going to take much more to twist the hand of a corrupt organisation on the defensive heavily lobbied for the interests of the RS and United followed by the other four

 

[Goat]

Thing is...I give the lad credit for sticking at it. He's re-enforces why we got a point deduction. No one is really questioning that.

What he teeters into is that I think he believes we deserves a bigger punishment. He also won't acknowledge the fact that when it was all said and done we were £19.5mill over.

Is he saying we should have got more than 10 points???????