greydos Posted November 17 Share Posted November 17 Thought there would be a lot of chat in here about this. 10 points for effectively going £20m over the total permitted loss, 1-year after COVID. Seems harsh. It may be reduced on appeal. But will they stay up? Also, in their statement, Everton say they’ll watch the sentences that other clubs receive. Wonder who they’re thinking of? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrRaspberryJam Posted November 17 Share Posted November 17 (edited) 5 minutes ago, greydos said: Thought there would be a lot of chat in here about this. 10 points for effectively going £20m over the total permitted loss, 1-year after COVID. Seems harsh. It may be reduced on appeal. But will they stay up? Also, in their statement, Everton say they’ll watch the sentences that other clubs receive. Wonder who they’re thinking of? There is. Yes. Man City and Chelsea. Thank you. Next Edited November 17 by MrRaspberryJam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted November 17 Share Posted November 17 Can't believe there's been no chat about it either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted November 17 Share Posted November 17 11 minutes ago, greydos said: Thought there would be a lot of chat in here about this. 10 points for effectively going £20m over the total permitted loss, 1-year after COVID. Seems harsh. It may be reduced on appeal. But will they stay up? Also, in their statement, Everton say they’ll watch the sentences that other clubs receive. Wonder who they’re thinking of? From what I understand, Everton not only went over the £105m threshold, but in doing so they deliberately lied too the Premier League, and tried to cover their tracks. On top of this their losses were actually well over £19.5m, in total I believe it was over £300m, but they were allowed to adjust this due to covid. They over inflated the price of their players on their books to make it look like they had more value, including the player who they sacked, who they tried to claim the money back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrownBottle Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 17 minutes ago, greydos said: Thought there would be a lot of chat in here about this. 10 points for effectively going £20m over the total permitted loss, 1-year after COVID. Seems harsh. It may be reduced on appeal. But will they stay up? Also, in their statement, Everton say they’ll watch the sentences that other clubs receive. Wonder who they’re thinking of? Doesn’t look harsh at all to me. They cheated in comparison to other clubs. They should be thankful they weren’t relegated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 Been knocking around here for 18 years but still not found the Not Worthy of a Thread thread... It's probably thread worthy tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 29 minutes ago, Stifler said: From what I understand, Everton not only went over the £105m threshold, but in doing so they deliberately lied too the Premier League, and tried to cover their tracks. On top of this their losses were actually well over £19.5m, in total I believe it was over £300m, but they were allowed to adjust this due to covid. They over inflated the price of their players on their books to make it look like they had more value, including the player who they sacked, who they tried to claim the money back. I've just read the report through very tired eyes and I don't think that's quite right. It was found Everton had provided misleading and inaccurate information regarding the source of funds for the development of the new stadium. As part of their mitigation, Everton had been trying to exclude interest costs relating to the project from the equation. It is also mentioned they kept buying players in the mistaken belief they'd be able to sell enough to balance the books. Nothing about inflating players transfer fees, but there was an agreement in place where they were meant to be getting their transfers signed-off by the PL. It wasn't honoured. Everton tried to cite the contract termination of "player X" as part of its mitigation. The PL claimed they could have taken him to an employment tribunal, but Everton argued they were looking after the player's mental well-being. "Player Y" was also cited in mitigation. Everton claimed they couldn't sell him as COVID had drastically reduced his value. The PL pointed out it out it was ultimately the club's decision whether to sell him or not, regardless of the fee. Pretty funny Everton used the very in vogue excuses of COVID and the Ukraine invasion though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 If the premier league wants to continue with the farce which is FFP they had literally zero choice but to throw the book and the same will be the case for any other clubs they breach it. Ultimately, these rules are what these mugs all voted for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 (edited) I dont know any of the finer details of this, and any other club's potential transgressions, or even really the rules for certain, but this still stinks a little. If you've got rules in place they have the be enforced, otherwise there's zero point in any rules at all and its just the wild west. Whether or not those rules are fit for purpose is another matter entirely. If other clubs have broken the rules, they need to be enforced the same way they are being with Everton. If other clubs have managed to swerve the rules by exploiting loopholes, then those loopholes need closing but you cant apply them retroactively. If they've swerved them with fancy accounting, that's breaking the rules and they should be punished. The stuff coming out about the Roman years sound insane and clear rule breaking, but who knows what finer detail may get them off. Same with City. The whole thing is a fucking mess. There's no real authority enforcing this, and lumping clubs and fans with the consequences when it's individuals at fault isnt good for football. I think the authoritative bodyt needs to have much more clout and there needs to be more consequences on individuals higher up, rather than for the fans. \And it has to be enforced by law. You'd see a change in attitude then. Edited November 18 by Super Duper Branko Strupar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 Good post, Branks. I feel very little schadenfreude here tbh (pointless anyway cos they'll be fine); just morose at this latest miserable episode in the story of football governance and ownership. I'll be very surprised to see any truly groundbreaking punishments dished out to anyone. The Premier League is as glossy and as desirable a brand as you can possibly get; an English calciopoli would be hugely damaging to that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 I know we had the cheek to threaten and break it, but before Abramovich, the league was beginning to be Arsenal and Man Utd streets ahead, Liverpool were closing the gap on and off the pitch, then the rest pretty much. Two of the other clubs seemingly in the dock here, are the two clubs who had the audacity to put pay to these three pissing everything year in, year out. Posted in the other thread, just give top 3 to those three clubs every year, the rest of us know our role and let them get on with it. The occasional top 3 finish if we're lucky, and that's it. Fuck anyone else who tries to spend to break into it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Jinx Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 They were misreporting figures based on Karen style assumptions. "We didn't sue our resident sex pest and then we fired him - so we just knocked 10 million off the figures" Its like watching one of those hopeless hopefuls have their business plan torn to shreds on dragons den. It's as Hunter S Thompson alluded to.. The only thing worse than committing a crime is the stupidity of getting caught. Man City or Chelsea will never get that sort of punishment. They actually have smart people working for them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 (edited) It’s all weird. Like walls closing in and circular to me. For the most part, prior to any rules truly being in place - have at it. Then someone said nah it needs to be sustainable. Okay fine that makes sense you don’t want to bankrupt clubs because that ultimately hurts the fans. But an often posted thought needs to be said again, there was no fair market value or inter company / related party red tape limiting growth before. Now there is. And it seemingly is all motivated to stop anyone disrupting the main pack + their London friends. (palace). It’s crooked as fuck. Edited November 18 by Kanji Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 We're having to fudge our sponsorship deals just to comply. Pretty much having to fix sums "not quite on par with the 'big 6' but above the rest" etc. It's all bullshit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToonCanuck Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 (edited) easy to "pick on" Everton tbf,lets see what happens to chelsea. Edited November 18 by ToonCanuck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizza Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 (edited) 3 hours ago, greydos said: Thought there would be a lot of chat in here about this. There is: Edited November 18 by Bizza Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maineblue Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 3 hours ago, MrRaspberryJam said: There is. Yes. Man City and Chelsea. Thank you. Next ha ha, different case involving City, were being accused of under the table payment to Mancini and false sponsorship deals, when we get proven innocent I can’t wait to drink all those salty tears from the red clubs and the media. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 1 hour ago, Maineblue said: ha ha, different case involving City, were being accused of under the table payment to Mancini and false sponsorship deals, when we get proven innocent I can’t wait to drink all those salty tears from the red clubs and the media. Why? You lot are guilty of those charges though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maineblue Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 1 hour ago, r0cafella said: Why? You lot are guilty of those charges though. Er no we’re not that’s why we’re fighting the charges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 Just now, Maineblue said: Er no we’re not that’s why we’re fighting the charges. Bro, stop it. the third party payments were proven by Uefa (you got off on a fine bar, a technicality). as for the shell company sponsors, that’s also known and been proven. Don’t get me wrong, I think FFP is a protection racket and any club outside the those old big clubs were absolutely mugs for voting for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maineblue Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 5 minutes ago, r0cafella said: Bro, stop it. the third party payments were proven by Uefa (you got off on a fine bar, a technicality). as for the shell company sponsors, that’s also known and been proven. Don’t get me wrong, I think FFP is a protection racket and any club outside the those old big clubs were absolutely mugs for voting for it. Shell company sponsors? You’ve lost me on that one, as for UEFA we took that to CAS and an independent panel found us innocent of all charges after scrutinising our accounts, this is just a witch hunt by the rags n dippers orchestrated by Richard Masters, when our Chairman Chairman Khaldoun says we’ve done nothing wrong - I 100% believe him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAK Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 Maybe now FFP is biting people on the arse the Other 14 may want to reconsider and see it was set up to protect the established clubs. Being selfish this could turn out to be a positive thing for us in the long run, maybe less inclination to support the Big Six with their attempts to bring in restrictive rules. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
r0cafella Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 11 minutes ago, Maineblue said: Shell company sponsors? You’ve lost me on that one, as for UEFA we took that to CAS and an independent panel found us innocent of all charges after scrutinising our accounts, this is just a witch hunt by the rags n dippers orchestrated by Richard Masters, when our Chairman Chairman Khaldoun says we’ve done nothing wrong - I 100% believe him. You might want to read up about what you’ve been up to before taking the word of your owners. I can’t even believe we are debating these points. CAS threw out your case because it was time barred, you kicked the can for so long UEFA couldn’t do anything. And yes, some of your many sponsors are names on paper with no business operations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy84 Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 16 minutes ago, Maineblue said: Shell company sponsors? You’ve lost me on that one, as for UEFA we took that to CAS and an independent panel found us innocent of all charges after scrutinising our accounts, this is just a witch hunt by the rags n dippers orchestrated by Richard Masters, when our Chairman Chairman Khaldoun says we’ve done nothing wrong - I 100% believe him. Sorry mate but you sound delusional Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maineblue Posted November 18 Share Posted November 18 8 minutes ago, r0cafella said: You might want to read up about what you’ve been up to before taking the word of your owners. I can’t even believe we are debating these points. CAS threw out your case because it was time barred, you kicked the can for so long UEFA couldn’t do anything. And yes, some of your many sponsors are names on paper with no business operations. Look City we’re banned by UEFA from European competitions for 2 seasons. City took the case to CAS - Court of arbitration for Sport. The ban was overturned and a fine of £8m reduced from £26m was imposed. CAS said - most of the allegations were either not established or time barred. Uefa were trying to shift the goal posts to say we had failed ffp before ffp existed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now