6 + 2 Point Deductions

[JimmyK]

I know people are keen on the double jeopardy argument but it doesn't hold water. Every year we have to be compliant over a three year period. That means that wherever we are in a financial year we have to tailor our finances to ensure that we are complaint within that season. We were not in breach in the two years before 2022 as the breach is not based on a single year.

The Appeal board made it clear that
a) we knew that the PSR calculations we gave were wrong and accordingly we knew that we were £20 million over. Rabinowitz described it as a "pitch".
b) the minimum points deduction for the breach was 6 points.

Our losses for PSR appear to be £55 million and £10 million. That means that our losses for 2023 season would have to be less than £40 million. Clearly the Premier League do not think that this is the case.

We are therefore at risk of a further 6 points although this penalty and a) above will be aggravating features.

Lets hope therefore that

1) We are not in breach.
2) It is small.
3) That we are at least 6-9 above the relegation zone at the end of the season.

It does hold water because the argument is about being punished twice in the same season so punishing us last year and this year would be ok and this year and next year would be OK but deducting points twice in the same season for 2 different sets of accounts wouldn't be OK.

 

[Shibbywiggles]

Forest fans are in for a rude awakening. I went on one of their main forums. Most think they will only get 3-4 points max and they have mitigating factors in selling Johnson etc and Everton will definitely receive at least a further 6 points deduction.

Unless the judgement has changed the quantum then the precedent is 6 points just for the breach and the Johnson sale will not be considered as a mitigating factor as the IC essentially don't consider them based on the Everton case.

Forest will have 6 points deducted as an absolute minimum whereas Everton will be given a further 6 points as an absolute maximum.

I totally agree with your logic except for the fact that you based it on the premier league and its commission acting logically… they do whatever the f they fancy as shown by these completely unprecedented and illogical punishments.
-6 is better than -10 but it’s still grossly unfair and a punishment that does not fit the crime.

 

[matty1878]

Who knows but my point being most Forest fans seem to think they will only get 3 points deducted.

I think Forest will be given the full 12 point deduction.

I don't know if Everton will be given another 6 points.

we shouldn’t get and shouldn’t of got any
if we was a top 6 club this be laughed at
and i just wanna stay up

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

Oh Everton. Usmanov equity investment was incoming??

 

[ToffeeTim]

No mate.

Our first breach (the one we've just heard back from appeal) used Year1, Year2 and Year3.

For our next (supposed breach), Year1 will drop off and be replaced by Year4: Year2, Year3 and Year4.

If our Year4 accounts are healthier than our Year1 accounts were, then our breach would be less in terms of £.

The findings published today say the trend in FY23 was positive. Although no figures were given.

 

[efcfanwirral]

Something interesting was put forward on Talksport about the idea of

I know people are keen on the double jeopardy argument but it doesn't hold water. Every year we have to be compliant over a three year period. That means that wherever we are in a financial year we have to tailor our finances to ensure that we are complaint within that season. We were not in breach in the two years before 2022 as the breach is not based on a single year.

The Appeal board made it clear that
a) we knew that the PSR calculations we gave were wrong and accordingly we knew that we were £20 million over. Rabinowitz described it as a "pitch".
b) the minimum points deduction for the breach was 6 points.

Our losses for PSR appear to be £55 million and £10 million. That means that our losses for 2023 season would have to be less than £40 million. Clearly the Premier League do not think that this is the case.

We are therefore at risk of a further 6 points although this penalty and a) above will be aggravating features.

Lets hope therefore that

1) We are not in breach.
2) It is small.
3) That we are at least 6-9 above the relegation zone at the end of the season.

There may be an argument to only get a third of the punishment...

 

[blueblue]

I don't think you can give a suspended sentence when you've already committed a previous breach and been punished for it. Second offence will be at least equivalent to the first charge. The double jeopardy route seems to be the only viable route we have to fight our corner.

I would imagine that the scale of our loss for the final year will also be taken into account, over the last two or three seasons we have reduced wages, cut back hugely on transfers in and had quite large transfers out including Richarlison and Gordon.

 

[Swagger]

I don't think we'll be able to say too much since we argued that no punishment should be greater than 9 points. Common sense suggests it'll be between 6 and 8.

It depends if they are applying the EFL rules for P&S breaches as that is up to 12 points depending on the severity of the breach.

 

[HalfTimeSayers]

No mate.

Our first breach (the one we've just heard back from appeal) used Year1, Year2 and Year3.

For our next (supposed breach), Year1 will drop off and be replaced by Year4: Year2, Year3 and Year4.

If our Year4 accounts are healthier than our Year1 accounts were, then our breach would be less in terms of £.

Smaller breach, and additional credit for continuing the trend toward compliance.

 

[Swagger]

I totally agree with your logic except for the fact that your basic it on the premier league and its commission acting logically… they do whatever the f they fancy as shown by these completely unprecedented and illogical punishments.
-6 is better than -10 but it’s still grossly unfair and a punishment that does not fit the crime.

Agree but realistically Forest surely can't be successful with the Johnson argument as we weren't in claiming well we could have got more if we waited to sell Richarlison for more with Chelsea also interested but we sold quickly to fit in the sale within that accounting year.

 

[blulouie]

A big part of me hopes, nay, prays that this 'satisfaction' is borne of the fact that they know for certain that any second breach outcome will go more favourably for us, otherwise it's a truly baffling stance for the club to take...

This is about the only sense I can make of this atm.

Very strange word to use "satisfied".
I thought "disappointed" would have been more suitable ...unless they know the 2nd charge won't cost us.

 

[Bwana]

Also with Moyes we knew if a talent was coming through the acadamy....he would get a chance

"When he scores, we riot!"

 

[Tin-Tin]

 

[Stephen Gibson]

Too many pages to read but even if both us & Forest get these next wave of point deductions then it's still not fair. Forest need to go through the pain of 10 points taken off them for 3 months & have to fight under appeal for 4 back.

The cost of that points deduction has hung over us like a massive black cloud. It's not fair that we've basically done all the donkey work for Forest's case.

 

[Melchizedek]

What could the punishment be if found guilty?​

A fine, a transfer embargo or another points deduction. As Everton’s statement mentions, there is no rule to prevent double jeopardy in the Premier League. Therefore, the club could be docked points for a second time this season despite November’s 10-point punishment covering 75% of the period that the latest charge relates to. Everton have spoken with the Premier League about the risk of double jeopardy and bringing in measures to prevent it, as the EFL has done, but have been informed the final decision will rest with the commission that hears their latest case.


In regards to EFL rules and double jeopardy.

Making it up as they go along.
These "Independent Commissions" xan hand down whatever punishment the PL sees fit for whatever narrative they want to push.
Ridiculous that the club are happy to accept this decision.