Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[matty1878]

I suspect this maybe one of very few occasions when we are the same mind Matty lol

wow lol

 

[matty1878]

If by some miracle we have got a very positive result, the knock on effect to the second charge might be more complicated than the appeal itself. And we want a banger of a press release from the PL exonerating us.

it’s not today then is it

 

[PhilEFC]

Not especially...it means they're taking their time to come up with a decision rather than rush it through...

I would have thought they had done that by now mate.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

Gone well over my head this mate.....woooosh

 

[MikeH72]

The longer it goes on the less likely it’s going to be good news.

Yet to hear anyone explain why this would be the case.

 

[Tony’s Carp]

or how to word it. Part of my scepticism about getting points back is, will they really say they were wrong? And how will it be worded? If we're getting anything more than token they'll be looking for an angle. Never mind (hopefully) needing to work out how it impacts the second charge

They wouldn't be saying THEY got it wrong, they'd be saying the original panel got it wrong, and pointing out where other people have got something wrong is both the whole purpose of an appeal process and, I suspect, something most lawyers very much enjoy doing.

 

[GoldenToffee]

Gone well over my head this mate.....woooosh

Werner Ziegler from Better Call Saul.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

Werner Ziegler from Better Call Saul.

I only watch programmes on Food and UFOs and War,got no chance with this ha.

 

[davies1878]

Yet to hear anyone explain why this would be the case.

I suppose Because the better news you have to give, the less you have to include justifications of how you come to a decision where any decision to uphold the decision, which could result in negative media coverage possible litigation would require " all boxes ticked" response and multiple checks by Premier league lawyers etc

 

[JimmyK]

Yet to hear anyone explain why this would be the case.

I would think it would be the opposite if anything if they just wanted to say jog on they could do that straight away the longer it takes the more you'd think they're looking into it.

 

[MikeH72]

I suppose Because the better news you have to give, the less you have to include justifications of how you come to a decision where any decision to uphold the decision, which could result in negative media coverage possible litigation would require " all boxes ticked" response and multiple checks by Premier league lawyers etc

Surely they’d have to include more detail and justification as to why they overturned the initial decision and what exactly in our appeal won the case?

 

[MikeH72]

I would think it would be the opposite if anything if they just wanted to say jog on they could do that straight away the longer it takes the more you'd think they're looking into it.

Exactly this. Doesn’t fit the doom agenda though.

 

[Exeter_Gently]

I suppose Because the better news you have to give, the less you have to include justifications of how you come to a decision where any decision to uphold the decision, which could result in negative media coverage possible litigation would require " all boxes ticked" response and multiple checks by Premier league lawyers etc

Oh

 

[TGW89]

I suppose Because the better news you have to give, the less you have to include justifications of how you come to a decision where any decision to uphold the decision, which could result in negative media coverage possible litigation would require " all boxes ticked" response and multiple checks by Premier league lawyers etc

Something our KC would prevent them from doing so easily. Hence the delay

 

[jazzy]

They wouldn't be saying THEY got it wrong, they'd be saying the original panel got it wrong, and pointing out where other people have got something wrong is both the whole purpose of an appeal process and, I suspect, something most lawyers very much enjoy doing.

Well speaking as a lawyer, for most legal questions you will get a totally different answer from each lawyer that you ask.

And no I haven't got a Scooby how the appeal will go.

I will say this though - any notion that Everton were poorly represented at the initial hearing and that "shagger silk " will be able to undo all the damage because he's a top advocate are for the fairies.

Evertons solicitors first time around were Pinsents a very well respected commercial firm. I don't know the silk but you don't get to that level without being very good.

Is "shagger silk " better ? He may well be. As with all professionals there are degrees of excellence but I wouldn't be pinning all my hopes on his appointment.