Tell you what, I quite like the idea of having a rivalry with small clubs. We’re not getting any change out of our actual rivals any time soon, so I wouldn’t mind enjoying smacking these lil bishes up more than I normally would.
Times article, Burnley/Leeds threaten to sue Everton
- Thread starter neil999
- Start date
-
- Tags
- burnley leeds united
- Status
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
It is indeed . In effect how much from the total losses are not counted be it for things such as expenses on infrastructure, costs associated with the academy, with woman’s football and of course attributed to CoVID
They've asked for an independent commission not a PL commission though. Maybe this is because there is an awareness that we are subject to cost controls under E.
The independent commission bits makes no sense.
If we are found guilty, there would already be a the option of a commission to be called. So it would assume:
1) The PL have not found us in breach and are not going to
2) Burnley/Leeds dont feel the PL would support their position (that EFC have broken rules).
What we can see is that threshold hasnt been hit. Which would assume, as the club are saying, the PL have accepted our accounts with us being 81m over and within the 105m threshold.
I dont think that is in question. I think what is in question, is the PL choosing to accept our independently audited accounts.
WestStandLower
Player Valuation: £1.5m
See there is the point in the accounts over the years 19/20 & 20/21 the note in the accounts suggests that the COVID losses were combined £82 million. What the notes do say that Everton consider there were other losses due to COVID that fall outside the numbers reported and that is the nub of the issue I suspect as far as Burnley and Leeds are concerned for instance there is a significant sum in respect of impairment something that happens most years but Everton are suggesting it was exceptional due to COVID
According to the rulebook the commission would always be constituted by accountants, lawyers etc. rather than premier league board members
And the question would be, why would they want that, if we are in breach of the rules, as that would happen almost automatically.
It suggests they do not agree with the PL.
But a PL commission as opposed to and independent one.
Or Burnely and Leeds think we have been given a free ride by the PL.
The notes say Everton have lost money due to Covid. These have been independently signed off by professionals and accepted by the PL.
Leeds and Burnley, and a football journalist who doesnt even know what year goes into the accounts, seem to think that losing money due to a pandemic is not possible.
Yes. I think that's the same thing, depending on perspective.
But essentially the PL have verified Evertons accounts. That's the core fact. There can then be interpretations. That would certainly be an opinion.
But their grievance would be with the PL and their actions.
The commission would by the contract be constituted as below. The idea is that by being so constituted they would be independent. I think the term "independent" commission is a term of art being used by Leeds/Burnley
The Judicial Panel shall include:
W.15.1. authorised insolvency practitioners eligible under Rule E.36 to sit as a member of an appeal tribunal appointed thereunder;
W.15.2. legally qualified persons eligible:
W.15.2.1. under Rule E.36 or Rule F.16 to sit as chairmen of appeal tribunals appointed thereunder;
W.15.2.2. under Rule Y.7 to sit as chairmen of Managers’ Arbitration Tribunals;
W.15.2.3. under Rule W.16 to sit as chairmen of Commissions; and/or
W.15.3. Persons who have held judicial office eligible under Rule
W.57 to sit as chairmen of Appeals Boards; and
W.15.4. Persons who hold nationally recognised qualifications as accountants or auditors, who shall be eligible to be members of Commissions appointed to determine suspected or alleged breaches of Rules E.45 to E.51
And it is interesting to say why? If you feel the PL are on side, why would you not want them to run it?
- Status