No, mate. Twitter.X
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
I use the word misdemeanour because misdemeanor in the UK law is a civil offense that doesn't involve any criminal charges
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
My guess is a 28 day window has now opened from the appeal verdict for compensation claims for clubs to try. Someone may have a go on a nothing to lose basis.
Was discussed at length in a separate thread after the first verdict. My view of both verdicts is that the reason the sporting sanction is harsh is in large part to head off specific financial claims:
It is based on “unquantifiable” sporting advantage and that’s the key word because any award of compensation would require that sporting advantage to be quantified: ie you would have to show what would have happened but for our spend. The ICs say you can’t.
So I think the intention of the ICs is that this should be a severe sanction because restitution is impossible and so that makes it very difficult to then award restitution on top. That needn’t stop clubs from trying though but the legal argument would be a bit more convoluted.
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
I don’t downplay our alleged breaches indeed I have already stated that I see a significant points deduction coming.
Lets just wait and see what the PL or FA do re these allegations and the change of ownership makes no difference in terms of the possibility of charges.
efcfanwirral
Player Valuation: £25m
A nice cold concert test event this time next year would be interesting!!
efcfanwirral
Player Valuation: £25m
can look at it another way, if we'd had the circus of a stadium move in March for the last 6 games in either of the last two seasons (which is realistic if they're completing it in December), we'd probably have gone down. We could barely scrape through as it was without that level of disruption. And the finance situation becomes critical then
Tipp blue
If I agreed with you, we’d both be wrong.
If Clubs start calming from other clubs you might as well just bin football altogether..
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
It would be an unbelievable can of worms and I’m sure the PL will be keen to prevent it being opened.
Jacko93
Player Valuation: £35m
Maybe then we can take the PGMOL to court over the points we've lost due to officiating errors that they have admitted they got wrong.
Marius57
Player Valuation: £50m
I agree. I also think that they made it clear in both reports that financial penalties are a no go. I think the window opened after the first hearing personally and it was widely reported that clubs were dropping the claims.
The commission could have awarded compensation through the hearing and stated that it would be dependant on proof of losses etc. But they didn’t award any or make any suggestion of it.
Tony’s Carp
Player Valuation: £40m
May also be why the club seemed so pleased to have any finding of bad faith overturned.
Tipp blue
If I agreed with you, we’d both be wrong.
They havnt been found guilty yet
Llyrap
Player Valuation: £2.5m
Nope - "misdemeanours" or civil "offenses" are not used as terms of art in UK law.
Everton provided information that was wrong to the Premier League about PSR calculations. Their accounts were correct it is simply the treatment of certain payments. And they did not act contrary to a duty of good faith.
Whilst we do not know much about what is happening at Chelsea a BBC article states they broke the rules by "submitting incomplete financial information" during 2012-2019.
Setting aside any criminality or breaches of company law if true it should be much more serious than our breaches particularly as Chelsea won the league twice during the relevant period. They also won the FA cup and league Cup.
The key question is why did they do it? What advantage did they gain? There must have been some advantage for them doing it? I am assuming that they did something as otherwise they would not have self-reported.
Whilst a significant mitigation will be the self-reporting Chelsea, if found in breach, should face a significant punishment for their breaches appear to have :-
a) concealed it from the PL
b) provided false PSR calculations
c) it took place over 7 seasons.
d) obtained an unquantifiable sporting advantage.
e) Possibly spent more than PSR allowed.
In essence who do you punish the most? A team that because of inept financial management breached the rules over a two year period or a team that deliberately concealed information over a number of years when they won a number of trophies - which they may not have won otherwise.
Logically a points deduction in this season make little sense and neither does a financial penalty. If they are fined lets say £20 million how is that fair. If they breached PSR during those 7 years and been able to win trophies and have higher league positions a fine of that magnitude means that it was worth doing it. What kind of message does that send to the remainder of the league.
IF and it is a big IF that they were in breach of PSR during those periods, you would think that expulsion from the league would be the only punishment that met the minimum required, unless the breaches were very modest indeed.
It should also be the case that every other team in or around Chelsea in the league table during that period should be entitled to compensation for loss of league position and prize money.
There are teams in the Premier League during the seasons 2012-2019 who may have won competitions or finished higher in the league if Chelsea (and assuming that they did not) had stuck to the rules.
I do not expect the above to happen by the way.
Toffeeslam
Player Valuation: £35m
Can’t sue the refs
No club can sue due to legal clauses for being part on any of the pro leagues.
Same as no club can sue another club just the football league or Premier league I think (actually you can’t even sue them).
Actually didn’t someone try to sue West Ham for the Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascarano signings that were dodge ?
