Maguire is in a privileged position because of his expertise and resultant access to an audience. He went on a national sports radio station expressing the view that a points deduction was the most likely outcome, so he was inferring guilt by expressing that opinion. I made the exception of tuning in live, and that was my take.
I'm aware that subjudice restrictions are not going to apply here but the principles of natural justice should. The people who will eventually sit on the panel do not live in caves. It's not enough to say we expect professionals to cast aside the noise and hear the evidence impartially, people are human and are subject to inference.
I think its important as the clubs future is on the line here. Punishment could well result in our relegation next season. Peoples jobs could be on the line, and I'm not talking about millionaire footballers. I don't say this to suggest the club are above scrutiny and criticism, absolutely not. But that's the problem here, it will be the club, the institution, the fans, us, that are at the receiving end of whatever punishment is meted out. As to the outcome of this hearing, our interest and the clubs interest are completely aligned (or surely, should be) in wanting to avoid and/or minimise punishment. There is no contradiction whatsoever in saying that and holding steadfastly to the belief that the owner and board have been an absolute disaster for the club and they should be removed immediately.
I just don't see how Maguires intervention serves the club in any way when it is in such a vulnerable position., and whatever our custodians have done, we should expect factual reporting. Maguire veered off that course by giving his personal opinion, which carries at least some weight by virtue of his background. He could have provided an analysis of the situation without acting as judge and jury.
Thats a fair and reasoned post mate and has some salient points.
The "influence" felt should in no way dictate the outcome but it inevitably may have some bearing.
My take from reading and staying mainly silent, as I'm not savvy nor intelligent enough to add anything of note, is that, if they make an example of us within the confines of the rules then it sets the precedent and should dictate any future actions against others found in breach.
Being biased, I cant see an even and fair process being the case for any future cases but that is a Blue Tinted specs view but may be nearer the truth than we care to admit.
I fear any external influences, as
@davek is pointing out in that article, may well have some bearing on ours though and that to me is without debate the main issue for us all.
Having said all that someone rightly stated commentators will commentate and we cant stop those opinions being sought or spoken, you just hope that if it does exert any influence the professional bodies that oversee it all do not let such things sway their outcome.
All we need is a fair and proper outcome. I fear any points deduction will hit us harder than any financial penalties, especially if coupled with "transfer embargos" etc.
The whole future of Everton is at stake effectively. Which may seem doom and gloom but it would be a terrible consequence for absolutely abysmal mismanagement on the part of those responsible for its long term success.
