Under The Lights
ORDER NOW
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Pretty sure what's why we hired a top Silk a few weeks ago..we need the worlds best solicitor so we need to borrow of city
Its not, its total nonsense and everyone know it including the corrupt ones.Mentioned it yesterday. If the club were in clear financial trouble in the first place how much do they expect it to be turned around in 1 season unless you sell off half your team. How is that sustainable?
Did I say they did?Thinking the Prem believes in the rule of law is a mistake.
That's been true for twenty years, for some reason since Everton shouted foul play by the sky 6 Everton have been targeted.Sorry mate our owner has lied, our board lied, they have been a bunch of criminals to the fans. Disgusting.
It took 8 months for the 'Independent Commission' to to a decision.
There's the appeal in now which will take 'n' time and these charges should surely not be looked at until the appeal process is over.
If the appeal is successful and say they completely remove the points deduction that means this charge is completely redundant because it's based on the original charge.
Everton should have done what Man City did and argued the toss at every turn.
Nice guys act didn't work.
Absolutely not, but the question is surely would we be in breach if we were not building a new stadium. Because if the answer is no, then there is no possible argument of a sporting advantage.
I imagine our wage ratio is thankfully a good bit less than that now, or at least I hope so.
The key question I am asking the league is should a team investing in a new stadium, and bringing much needed investment to an area, really be subject to charges on sustainability rules?
Can't see us getting a points deduction. They might suspend 5 points and then take them back for breaching the rules again.