Initial 10, then reduced to 6 + 2 Point Deductions

[ashwuk76]

I think because they know their breaches are huge and borderline systemic in their operations for a long time. Our ruling will only make them more determined to make it awkward.
We obviously thought cooperating would help with the punishment(it usually does in real courts), and also by some commitment to the rules we agreed upon we cooperated in the spirit of adherence.
More fools us

the only thing its done is show the rest of the league its not worth co-operating and be honest.. no one will ever co-operate now. By punishing us for trying to do the right thing, irresepective if you believe the mitigation we put forward, they have made the whole thing worse now for the future.

 

[Toffeepot]

Everyones accounts have to be audited independently and signed off.

In this instance we are in the wrong, we even admitted guilt before the commision after saying we were innocent for months.

According to the report we were given plenty of warnings and tried to mislead them over the stadium loans.

Only thing we can contest is the level of punishment.

I understand that. Certainly too late now to be shady anyway, but you can be sure other clubs are working on collecting rugs to sweep stuff under

 

[Sussex]

Simon Jordan eluded to why there might be more than 3 clubs that might potentially sue. He said why wouldn't it be 9 clubs as this spans 3 years.

Not sure which years this covers and what teams went down and if any are back in the prem.

Plus a quick Google of the nick igoe fella who was on the panel. He was finance director at West ham when he argued why west ham shouldn't have a points deduction for the tevez saga. Oh the irony.

 

[mahermi1]

Apart from all this, there's one obvious reason why clubs like Leeds and Southampton in particular CANNOT sue us.....3 teams get relegated, they were 19th and 20th, so both would have been relegated no matter what we had done

As soon as suing is brought in the whole fabric is destroyed, what's next, he broke his leg...sue, it wasn't a pen ...sue, he broke his contract. I for one wouldn't be a referee.

 

[mahermi1]

Simon Jordan eluded to why only 3 clubs might potentially sue. He said why wouldn't it be 9 clubs as this spans 3 years.

Not sure which years this covers and what teams went down and if any are back in the prem.

Plus a quick Google of the nick igoe fella who was on the panel. He was finance director at West ham when he argued why west ham shouldn't have a points deduction for the tevez saga. Oh the irony.

Thing is if we were punished for the first season and sued, we wouldn't have been there for the second season would we.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

There will be moaning, and rightly so, if the appeal isn’t concluded before end of Jan. If the 10 points stays, one or all of the promoted clubs might see it worth the risk of a couple of £20m players in the January window. If the penalty is halved, they’d make a different decision.

 

[ashwuk76]

Simon Jordan eluded to why only 3 clubs might potentially sue. He said why wouldn't it be 9 clubs as this spans 3 years.

Not sure which years this covers and what teams went down and if any are back in the prem.

Plus a quick Google of the nick igoe fella who was on the panel. He was finance director at West ham when he argued why west ham shouldn't have a points deduction for the tevez saga. Oh the irony.

it couldnt be 9 clubs and this shows how dense this idiot is. even taking 10 points off each of any of those seasons would only ever have put 1 team out of the relegation zone... to say 9 is just ludicrus!

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

Thing is if we were punished for the first season and sued, we wouldn't have been there for the second season would we.

I’ve heard lots of other things, like only 1 club per season would have stayed up, but I haven’t heard that one. Brilliant.

 

[Moomin]

I understand that. Certainly too late now to be shady anyway, but you can be sure other clubs are working on collecting rugs to sweep stuff under

To be fair we looked guilty from the off and when we claimed losses of 170 million due to Covid when Villa documented 50 million and Arsenal said 80 million I thought we would have got pulled in then but somehow got it signed off.

The excuses we put up like Spurs signing Richarlison for 60 million instead of 80 million being a factor was poor to say the least.

 

[BainesontoastNEW]

Simon Jordan eluded to why only 3 clubs might potentially sue. He said why wouldn't it be 9 clubs as this spans 3 years.

Not sure which years this covers and what teams went down and if any are back in the prem.

Plus a quick Google of the nick igoe fella who was on the panel. He was finance director at West ham when he argued why west ham shouldn't have a points deduction for the tevez saga. Oh the irony.

Has anyone in the media reported on this? I've seen our own fans on the socials.

 

[ashwuk76]

Thing is if we were punished for the first season and sued, we wouldn't have been there for the second season would we.

ive had this thought too and whilst logically it makes sense... the fact we were there changes the thinking slightly, that why i think realistically only the clubs we would have replaced in the relgation zone can have any chance (not that i think they even do!) so essentially 1 per the season affected (although if man city and chelsea get found guilty can we then sue them and gain points back lol )

 

[Tony’s Carp]

Will be interesting if our judgement (along with other issues) can properly unite the Other 14. Yes, our punishment might benefit some other O14 clubs in the short term but in the bigger picture it shows the PL’s priority is to service the needs of the B6 by putting and keeping the O14 in their place. If as Miguel says the majority think our punishment is unfair it’s because they know it could be any one of them next.

The O14 should be bringing up the ESL at all opportunities. With hindsight they were too afraid of losing the B6 and too forgiving of their failed plot. It’s time the O14 properly stood up against them.

 

[jazzy]

The thing is and I stand to be corrected but City aren't being charged with what we were. They are being charged with inflating commercial deals for 9 seasons from what I can see and I haven't fully read what that means. But yes if proven how can it not have been a sporting advantage. And if you go by what the commission did to us in that monetary fine is appropriate due to how rich our owners are you can only assume in a years time Man City will be playing Sunday league.......

We all know they will change the rules to mean a maximum penalty of less than what we just got though...

As soon as suing is brought in the whole fabric is destroyed, what's next, he broke his leg...sue, it wasn't a pen ...sue, he broke his contract. I for one wouldn't be a referee.

You have hit the nail on the head. Where does it end?
Ok let's cut to the chase . Burnley will if they bring a claim alledge that Everton have cheated by breaching the rules on P&S.

But then again a Burnley player , let's say it's Jay Rodriguez throws himself to the floor and gets an outrageous penalty which VAR doesn't correct. Can Burnley be sued?

Can the RS who let's say lose out on the title by z points sue the VAR officials who negligently failed to give the goal v Spurs?

It would open the game to ridicule but that seems to be the way this nonsense is going.

The PL and FA must introduce a rule to that denies litigation as a recourse to it's members. To be Frank I thought they had in the wake of the West Ham / Sheff U dispute but the recent comments of the commission and the decision in May would appear to contradict this.

 

[Blue Willy]

Re Richi sale - No, the point is, Spurs (or others) may well have spent 80 on Richi. The fact that we were being investigated and lots of bad press a out our finances (eminating from the PL directly or indirectly) meant that Richi, potentially went for less than he would have done, it we werent being investigated. If you see what I mean.

 

[ashwuk76]

You have hit the nail on the head. Where does it end?
Ok let's cut to the chase . Burnley will if they bring a claim alledge that Everton have cheated by breaching the rules on P&S.

But then again a Burnley player , let's say it's Jay Rodriguez throws himself to the floor and gets an outrageous penalty which VAR doesn't correct. Can Burnley be sued?

Can the RS who let's say lose our on the title by z points sue the VAR officials who negligently failed to give the goal v Spurs?

It would open the game to ridicule but that seems to be the way this nonsense is going.

The PL and FA must introduce a rule to that denies litigation as a recourse to it's members. To be Frank I thought they had in the wake of the West Ham / Sheff U dispute but the recent comments of the commission and the decision in May would appear to contradict this.

I am pretty sure someone did say that there are rules in place that clubs can't sue each other... but i could be wrong and the fact its even potentially happening points to the fact there can't be.