Financial Fair Play investigation

[davek]

You're all over the place here. You're basically admitting he's right, but just don't like him saying it? That is literally a non-argument!

Yes, he works at Liverpool University teaching courses and conducting research relating to football business and finance. Writing various papers and book on the subject. That's why all the major newspapers and various other media have asked his opinion for years, not just his own blogs or "light entertainment" at all. He hasn't predicted the outcome of the commission .... and his only reference to "potential" punishments is precisely that, a reference straight out of the PL handbook, all in response to direct questions on the subject. All of which is comfortably within his professional remit. Commentators commentate.....!

He is also perfectly at liberty to report being contacted by the club and if necessary reveal the entire content of that conversation. It wasn't him contacting them or trying to illicitly coerce or share information. So, if that can be framed as harassment, that's entirely the club's fault, like the whole sorry mess we find ourselves in, nothing nuanced at all..... just one more misguided error of judgment to add to the never ending list.

If he's misrepresenting anything or behaving inappropriately (as you claim), then they can sue him, report it to his employer(s) or any representative professional body. They didn't (and won't, because non-arguments don't work in court and can prove very expensive), they contacted him directly at midnight, so he owns that conversation and can use it as he sees fit. End of story!

Let's face it, he's not the first commentator/reporter that has had his wings clipped by Kenwright and Co. The difference of course is that Maguire is not a snotty nosed reporter from the Echo, nor is he subservient to the club in any way.

You keep on saying two things:

1/ "he hasn't predicted the outcome of the commission".

But he did. He stated on TalkSport that Everton would be handed a points deduction. It's there on their archive anytime you care to go and listen to it. Can there be any more conclusive proof that he's prejudged the Everton's referral than that? (By the way, I FULLY expect you to ignore that piece of evidence AGAIN).

2/ "he's a professional who works at Liverpool University conducting research into football business and finance"

You say that in order to establish his authority and his objectivity....but then you also claim his profession is that of a commentator and that he's "comfortably within his professional remit" there to state what he feels because "commentators commentate". So you can see there what you're doing: claiming him to be objective - but then by a sleight of hand cut him free so he can comment subjectively. That, Tom, is where you tie yourself up in knots and why, I'm afraid, cant be taken seriously in this debate.

 

[Evertonthat]

I wonder how adding the 24M to player and 15M to club for Jean-Kevin Augustin to Leeds utd 2021/22 season overheads would affect their financial situation. Seeing how they were so concerned over Evertons, maybe we should show some interest in theirs now this has landed.

 

[davek]

I wonder how adding the 24M to player and 15M to club for Jean-Kevin Augustin to Leeds utd 2021/22 season overheads would affect their financial situation. Seeing how they were so concerned over Evertons, maybe we should show some interest in theirs now this has landed.

They've been using the 'pandemic season' argument for that loss and are trying to avoid paying.

Maybe they conveniently forgot the attack line they took on Everton?

One for the commission to ponder...

 

[Lloydaldo11]

I wonder how adding the 24M to player and 15M to club for Jean-Kevin Augustin to Leeds utd 2021/22 season overheads would affect their financial situation. Seeing how they were so concerned over Evertons, maybe we should show some interest in theirs now this has landed.

Didn’t George Graham and Harry Redknapp get their wrists slapped for this sort of skullduggery?

 

[blulouie]

What are you waiting for dumbasses........friggin report them.

 

[mahermi1]

View attachment 208421

What are you waiting for dumbasses........friggin report them.

Too busy with Everton mate.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Given I follow a range of clubs accounts, the £15m basically has already been accounted for. In either 2020-21 or 2021-22, can't remember which. Net that off.

The remainder ie the wage would be accounted for either in the year of the verdict- this season or maybe it would be amortised over the term of the contract which means you add in about £4.9m for each season. Maybe 60 pct in this year and 20 pct in each of the remaining 2 I dunno.

Their Upper Loss Limit to 2021 was about £55.5m and to 2022 £72m. To this season it's £88.5m. Remember too as for all clubs, 2019-20 and 2020-21 were aggregated and halved/averaged hence the numbers ending in £0.5m for some clubs etc.

I suspect that they haven't or won't exceed limits but others might want to analyse further- selling Phillips and Raphinha absolutely will have helped to this season and beyond.

Their FFP allowances ie Academy eg across the period probably average £5-6m per year so say £16-17m in total. Empty Elland Road etc net loss probably £20-30m across 2 seasons while promotion bonuses are reportedly but not confirmed as exempt. These probably are £15-20m, reported as the latter at the time.

One possibility is that if they haven't put enough equity in they may fall below the adjusted Upper Loss Limit. No equity it's £15m, otherwise it's then somewhere between £15m and well £55.5m, £72m and £88.5m...if they stay up then £105m if equity correctly submitted. If not it's £15m or anything in between.

 

[Tom Hughes]

You keep on saying two things:

1/ "he hasn't predicted the outcome of the commission".

But he did. He stated on TalkSport that Everton would be handed a points deduction. It's there on their archive anytime you care to go and listen to it. Can there be any more conclusive proof that he's prejudged the Everton's referral than that? (By the way, I FULLY expect you to ignore that piece of evidence AGAIN).

2/ "he's a professional who works at Liverpool University conducting research into football business and finance"

You say that in order to establish his authority and his objectivity....but then you also claim his profession is that of a commentator and that he's "comfortably within his professional remit" there to state what he feels because "commentators commentate". So you can see there what you're doing: claiming him to be objective - but then by a sleight of hand cut him free so he can comment subjectively. That, Tom, is where you tie yourself up in knots and why, I'm afraid, cant be taken seriously in this debate.

I'm glad that you've at least desisted in claiming that he can't mention the club phoning him.

I have only watched a couple of his most recent sky interviews on the subject and read the articles regards the Everton call, so could've missed the one you're citing.... . In those I've seen, he was asked about what punishments the club COULD get.... he simply quoted the PL hand book with further references to what has happened elsewhere outside the PL. If he's been asked his opinion based on the recently released accounting results, he could reasonably be expected to offer that opinion on any potential violation too, but in the ones I've seen he's clearly stated that the club has not been proven guilty of anything yet.


I don't have to establish his "authority" on this subject area.... the fact that he's the one being asked by everyone because of his professional status in this field does that.... I haven't just introduced him to the world. He can also be as objective or subjective as he wants by qualifying any statement as fact or opinion based on the evidence available.

No slight of hand at all. He clearly operates in both media and academic/research worlds and they are inextricably linked. He is perfectly entitled to offer his opinion as a commentator. If the club think it's improper in the way you intimate, they can start proceedings, or even just say so publically. Have they done either? Not as far as I know!!

Feel free to post a link to his offending comments?

So it would appear that you're shouting into a vacuum, while ignoring the actual serious issue.

 

[Blue peter]

I wonder how adding the 24M to player and 15M to club for Jean-Kevin Augustin to Leeds utd 2021/22 season overheads would affect their financial situation. Seeing how they were so concerned over Evertons, maybe we should show some interest in theirs now this has landed.

I guess it just depends on whether the levels of interest we take and that specific area of focus undermines our own defence

 

[Blue peter]

View attachment 208421

What are you waiting for dumbasses........friggin report them.

I wonder if The Esk is going to write about this!

 

[bullybeef]

Tekken em long enough

 

[PhilM]

I wonder how adding the 24M to player and 15M to club for Jean-Kevin Augustin to Leeds utd 2021/22 season overheads would affect their financial situation. Seeing how they were so concerned over Evertons, maybe we should show some interest in theirs now this has landed.

I wonder if they'll be able to spread that out across the original term of his contract, or will the full amount go on one year's accounts?

 

[perth_blue]

Tekken em long enough

Heihachi is on the case.

 

[davek]

I'm glad that you've at least desisted in claiming that he can't mention the club phoning him.

I have only watched a couple of his most recent sky interviews on the subject and read the articles regards the Everton call, so could've missed the one you're citing.... . In those I've seen, he was asked about what punishments the club COULD get.... he simply quoted the PL hand book with further references to what has happened elsewhere outside the PL. If he's been asked his opinion based on the recently released accounting results, he could reasonably be expected to offer that opinion on any potential violation too, but in the ones I've seen he's clearly stated that the club has not been proven guilty of anything yet.


I don't have to establish his "authority" on this subject area.... the fact that he's the one being asked by everyone because of his professional status in this field does that.... I haven't just introduced him to the world. He can also be as objective or subjective as he wants by qualifying any statement as fact or opinion based on the evidence available.

No slight of hand at all. He clearly operates in both media and academic/research worlds and they are inextricably linked. He is perfectly entitled to offer his opinion as a commentator. If the club think it's improper in the way you intimate, they can start proceedings, or even just say so publically. Have they done either? Not as far as I know!!

Feel free to post a link to his offending comments?

So it would appear that you're shouting into a vacuum, while ignoring the actual serious issue.

No, I haven't desisted in stating his unprofessionalism in leaking private message exchanges. I merely omitted it to make the central point concerning Maguire's dual identity.

Here's the evidence you were at pains not to look for, btw.

talkSPORT Web Player - Listen Live | talkSPORT

Tune in for Live Sports Commentaries, Exclusive Breaking News, Opinion and More. Take a look through our schedule or listen back to anything you missed.

talksport.com

...about 14.50 in he states his best guess is that Everton will be handed a points deduction for season 2023/24. Which goes way beyond what he did in that Sky Sports interview you linked where he merely states the commission can either accept the charges against Everton or dismiss them, and if the charges are accepted that they have a range of possible punishments they can use "a finger wagging, wage cap, squad cap and the next tariff would be a points deduction something done in the EFL but there's no reason the PL would take its lead from the EFL". Not a problem with that. It was a response that any football industry expert would be expected to give: providing information without committing to any conclusions. For TalkSport, however, he dons his other head-ware - that of social media entertainer - pushed into it by Jim White, he provides a guesstimate about Everton's likely guilt and the points deduction punishment they'll receive.

All of which underlines what I've been reminding you of here time and time again: his (and your) juggling of objectivity and subjectivity when it suits. That simply wont do. Being consistent isn't an option Tom, it's a prerequisite for anyone who wishes to be taken seriously in their field of work.

This cant be dismissed as dancing on the head of a pin, as you'd like, no doubt, to portray it. There is a real issue here over an individual with a large audience who has been over-stepping the line in his addressing of this matter (and turning it personal) at a time of great vulnerability for Everton's survival. You appear to applaud that because your primary obective is to get Everton's board out rather than Everton's survival as a top flight club.

 

[cantlivewithem]

No, I haven't desisted in stating his unprofessionalism in leaking private message exchanges. I merely omitted it to make the central point concerning Maguire's dual identity.

Here's the evidence you were at pains not to look for, btw.

talkSPORT Web Player - Listen Live | talkSPORT

Tune in for Live Sports Commentaries, Exclusive Breaking News, Opinion and More. Take a look through our schedule or listen back to anything you missed.

talksport.com

...about 14.50 in he states his best guess is that Everton will be handed a points deduction for season 2023/24. Which goes way beyond what he did in that Sky Sports interview you linked where he merely states the commission can either accept the charges against Everton or dismiss them, and if the charges are accepted that they have a range of possible punishments they can use "a finger wagging, wage cap, squad cap and the next tariff would be a points deduction something done in the EFL but there's no reason the PL would take its lead from the EFL". Not a problem with that. It was a response that any football industry expert would be expected to give: providing information without committing to any conclusions. For TalkSport, however, he dons his other head-ware - that of social media entertainer - pushed into it by Jim White, he provides a guesstimate about Everton's likely guilt and the points deduction punishment they'll receive.

All of which underlines what I've been reminding you of here time and time again: his (and your) juggling of objectivity and subjectivity when it suits. That simply wont do. Being consistent isn't an option Tom, it's a prerequisite for anyone who wishes to be taken seriously in their field of work.

This cant be dismissed as dancing on the head of a pin, as you'd like, no doubt, to portray it. There is a real issue here over an individual with a large audience who has been over-stepping the line in his addressing of this matter (and turning it personal) at a time of great vulnerability for Everton's survival. You appear to applaud that because your primary obective is to get Everton's board out rather than Everton's survival as a top flight club.

I'm glad that you've at least desisted in claiming that he can't mention the club phoning him.

I have only watched a couple of his most recent sky interviews on the subject and read the articles regards the Everton call, so could've missed the one you're citing.... . In those I've seen, he was asked about what punishments the club COULD get.... he simply quoted the PL hand book with further references to what has happened elsewhere outside the PL. If he's been asked his opinion based on the recently released accounting results, he could reasonably be expected to offer that opinion on any potential violation too, but in the ones I've seen he's clearly stated that the club has not been proven guilty of anything yet.


I don't have to establish his "authority" on this subject area.... the fact that he's the one being asked by everyone because of his professional status in this field does that.... I haven't just introduced him to the world. He can also be as objective or subjective as he wants by qualifying any statement as fact or opinion based on the evidence available.

No slight of hand at all. He clearly operates in both media and academic/research worlds and they are inextricably linked. He is perfectly entitled to offer his opinion as a commentator. If the club think it's improper in the way you intimate, they can start proceedings, or even just say so publically. Have they done either? Not as far as I know!!

Feel free to post a link to his offending comments?

So it would appear that you're shouting into a vacuum, while ignoring the actual serious issue.

I'm glad that you've at least desisted in claiming that he can't mention the club phoning him.

I have only watched a couple of his most recent sky interviews on the subject and read the articles regards the Everton call, so could've missed the one you're citing.... . In those I've seen, he was asked about what punishments the club COULD get.... he simply quoted the PL hand book with further references to what has happened elsewhere outside the PL. If he's been asked his opinion based on the recently released accounting results, he could reasonably be expected to offer that opinion on any potential violation too, but in the ones I've seen he's clearly stated that the club has not been proven guilty of anything yet.


I don't have to establish his "authority" on this subject area.... the fact that he's the one being asked by everyone because of his professional status in this field does that.... I haven't just introduced him to the world. He can also be as objective or subjective as he wants by qualifying any statement as fact or opinion based on the evidence available.

No slight of hand at all. He clearly operates in both media and academic/research worlds and they are inextricably linked. He is perfectly entitled to offer his opinion as a commentator. If the club think it's improper in the way you intimate, they can start proceedings, or even just say so publically. Have they done either? Not as far as I know!!

Feel free to post a link to his offending comments?

So it would appear that you're shouting into a vacuum, while ignoring the actual serious issue.

No, I haven't desisted in stating his unprofessionalism in leaking private message exchanges. I merely omitted it to make the central point concerning Maguire's dual identity.

Here's the evidence you were at pains not to look for, btw.

talkSPORT Web Player - Listen Live | talkSPORT

Tune in for Live Sports Commentaries, Exclusive Breaking News, Opinion and More. Take a look through our schedule or listen back to anything you missed.

talksport.com

...about 14.50 in he states his best guess is that Everton will be handed a points deduction for season 2023/24. Which goes way beyond what he did in that Sky Sports interview you linked where he merely states the commission can either accept the charges against Everton or dismiss them, and if the charges are accepted that they have a range of possible punishments they can use "a finger wagging, wage cap, squad cap and the next tariff would be a points deduction something done in the EFL but there's no reason the PL would take its lead from the EFL". Not a problem with that. It was a response that any football industry expert would be expected to give: providing information without committing to any conclusions. For TalkSport, however, he dons his other head-ware - that of social media entertainer - pushed into it by Jim White, he provides a guesstimate about Everton's likely guilt and the points deduction punishment they'll receive.

All of which underlines what I've been reminding you of here time and time again: his (and your) juggling of objectivity and subjectivity when it suits. That simply wont do. Being consistent isn't an option Tom, it's a prerequisite for anyone who wishes to be taken seriously in their field of work.

This cant be dismissed as dancing on the head of a pin, as you'd like, no doubt, to portray it. There is a real issue here over an individual with a large audience who has been over-stepping the line in his addressing of this matter (and turning it personal) at a time of great vulnerability for Everton's survival. You appear to applaud that because your primary obective is to get Everton's board out rather than Everton's survival as a top flight club.

I don't like it when mummy and daddy fight