*Shakes head* Everton again.

[Lurtz]

25 minutes ago, DalyanPete said:

What an excellent read.

 

I found it very easy to masturbate to. 

[an tha]

The way they kept lurching from excuse to excuse and attempted justification to attempted justification says it all about their guit and their reckless, unsustainable model.

 

As that article says "Everton's arguments became a fanciful last defence of a club with nowhere left to go"

[littletedwest]

26 minutes ago, Reckoner said:

They were worried about the psychological well-being of a certified nonce more than playing by the rules. Heart warming. And he didn’t have the money either.

That was an actual argument. From a lawyer.

It's a ridiculous excuse.

A) they didn't sue him

B) they may not have won

C) they wouldn't have got 10 million if they won

D) even if they did he wouldn't have ten million quid 

It's like saying " I think we can forgot me being skint as I was going to win the lottery. I haven't because I didn't buy a ticket as I don't believe in gambling"

 

[Barrington Womble]

8 hours ago, Fallen Angel said:

It will be interesting to see their u-turn when the Citeh findings are published, particularly if title-stripping is amongst the potential punishments - and awarding such titles to the second-placed team. 
 

The whole protest now serves two purposes; a) get the points deduction lowered as much as possible (hence secure PL status) and, b) play the victim card (again!) to prevent further action (scapegoat position I’ve heard over from their fan-base).

 

They’d be far better cutting a deal that the 10 points is it (it won’t relegate them unless DCL is injured on Feb 1st and out for the rest of the season) - and draws a line under all matters up until the sale is complete. I don’t think they want the full extent of ‘Uncle Uzzy’s’ (taps nose) involvement coming out. The only motivation I can see for him dropping millions on Moshiri is money laundering. Moshiri may have been a shill from the off - but why then did Usmanov remain in the shadows after he extricated himself from being up the Arse. 
 

What the relegated clubs do now is another matter which may hinder the sale - unless he takes another massive financial hit (pointing to the shill argument again). He can’t just be such an incompetent businessman surely? 

 

They're protesting because they genuinely believe they're being victimised and they believe the whole of English football is on their side. They're convinced there'll be protests up and down the country. When you ask them why, they say "but what about city". It's literally the basis of all their complaints and the reason they're running with that is they think they'll get the likes of us, arsenal,.man united all on their side because we want city punished. All them getting punished 10 points does is fans of non-cheating clubs saying "good. Now let's see the same level of punishment for city". I for one am all on board with them being deducted 10 points for one charge and city getting 1150pts deducted for their 115. 

[VladimirIlyich]

3 hours ago, Anubis said:

Non-paywall version of that Telegraph article. 

 

As the perilous nature of Everton’s finances became clear in the spring of last year, and the distinct possibility emerged that it would break the financial rules that govern all 20 Premier League members, the club formulated a plan.

 

The idea was to demonstrate to the Premier League’s governance department that sufficient costs were deductible from Everton’s huge losses. If the club could do so, Everton’s finances could come in under the threshold of £105 million permitted losses for the monitoring period in question. It would not be easy, so Everton’s compliance department had to be creative.

 

Just how creative was demonstrated in the full judgment published on Friday that detailed the case – prosecuted by the Premier League – which led to Everton’s 10-point deduction by an independent commission.

 

Everton sought to remove no less than £94.2 million of losses from their financial fair play calculation – now known as profit and sustainability rules (PSR) – in a few clicks on the spreadsheet. What they proposed stretched the credulity of the Premier League’s lawyers beyond breaking point, and one item will be hard to forget.

 

Everton claimed that they could have made £10 million from suing a player whom they had been forced to dismiss for breach of contract the previous year, 2021. The individual, known only as Player X, was an asset and Everton believed it should be rewarded for not taking legal action against him.

Everton had announced in 2021 that they had initially suspended a player after he was arrested by Greater Manchester Police on suspicion of child sex offences. After a two-year investigation the player was not charged and faced no further action.

 

On August 26 last year, Everton’s legal department sent that point regarding not taking legal action, and three others, arguing for a total £94.2 million reduction to the losses in its PSR calculation, and waited for a response.

 

On Dec 9 last year, it came from Jamie Herbert, the Premier League governance director. He called to say the Premier League board was emphatic in its view: the £10 million rebate for Everton not suing Player X would not be accepted.

 

Neither would the other £82.2 million in the loss reduction for which Everton applied. That included £61 million claimed in Covid player trading losses; £17.4 million Everton believed it had recouped by charging interest on an inter-company loan; and £5.8 million that the club thought it could set aside on a universal transfer levy all 20 clubs pay.

 

On March 1 of this year, and despite the view conveyed from the Premier League board, Everton submitted a revised PSR calculation including some of the items it had been told were not admissible. This time the club said it had made losses of £87.1 million for the period in question – £17.9 million below the permitted threshold of £105 million. The Premier League felt it had no option but to charge the club with a serious PSR breach.

 

Much of what was revealed in the judgment suggested Everton’s finances were a slow-motion catastrophe. Despite the excuses and the explanations that were thrown in the way, impact was finally reached with Friday’s judgment. Whether a 10-point deduction sends Everton down in May after 70 years in English football’s top flight remains to be seen. What is not in doubt is that the club and its owner, Farhad Moshiri, were given plenty of chances to get their house in order.

Everton owner Farhad Moshiri spent millions to make the club competitive - Alex Livesey/Getty Images© Provided by The Telegraph

Indeed, the club were given meetings and asked to formulate plans. Allowances were made for the anomalies in their situation, especially around the Bramley-Moore stadium project. In Aug 2021, they signed a bespoke agreement with the Premier League. But the club just kept spending on players.

 

It is telling that in March of this year, when Everton’s lawyers hit send to submit their PSR calculation, they claimed to be compliant. By the time it reached the pre-trial hearing on Oct 4, they accepted they no longer were. Their argument had changed dramatically. They accepted that in fact they were £7.9 million over the £105 million threshold. But, Everton said, there were mitigating factors.

 

Come the end of the hearing, with the case proven in the Premier League’s favour, Everton were pleading that they should have a financial and not a sporting sanction. The club even suggested they should get a transfer ban of some sort. By then the three-strong commission led by David Phillips KC had seen enough – a points deduction was, in their view, the only credible sanction.

 

While many will say that Everton have been dealt with much more swiftly than Manchester City’s alleged PSR breaches, and attendant refusal to disclose, which date back to 2009-2010, one could hardly argue that the Merseyside club’s case has been fast-tracked. The first concerns, relating to the investment in the new stadium, came in early 2019. These were addressed by the Premier League.

 

They would be the first of a number of allowances that the league made for Everton, its precarious financial position and Moshiri whose investment in Everton – the commission heard – now totals around £750 million.

 

The problem with the new stadium was unusual. The former Unesco World Heritage status of the Merseyside seafront threw up an anomalous accounting problem. Because the Unesco status – since revoked in light of the stadium build – meant planning was not assured, Everton’s investment could not be capitalised on the balance sheet. Instead, it was booked as a loss. In August 2021, the Premier League came to an agreement that those costs incurred before planning was granted – £39.3 million – should not count as PSR losses.

The Bramley-Moore stadium project has impacted the Merseyside seafront's Unesco status - Mark Seddon/Everton FC© Provided by The Telegraph

It did so conditionally that Everton would not breach PSR with other costs. The club had a strategy, devised by the now departed sporting director Marcel Brands, which included selling eight players for a net profit of around £50 million. None of this happened as planned.

 

By early last year it was clear that the club were, in spite of the agreement struck the previous August, heading for a PSR breach.

 

Accordingly, other clubs would, the commission heard, “drive a hard bargain” on player fees. Everton believed the sale of Richarlison would earn them £80 million in the summer of last year. That they received just £60 million from Tottenham Hotspur was, the club said, “directly attributable to [Everton’s] PSR calculation difficulties”.

 

Even so, the decision by Everton in March this year to ignore the Premier League advice, and submit a PSR calculation the club had been warned would not be accepted, did not help the cause. The Premier League said the claim was an aggravating factor and raised the breach to £124.5 million.

 

Also in March, Premier League lawyers said that they wanted the case concluded by the end of the 2022-23 season. Had it done so Everton would have been relegated in 19th position and Leicester City – who finished two points behind them – would have been saved.

 

The commission decided such a timeframe was “unrealistic” but it would be one of the few arguments the Premier League’s lawyers would lose.

Everton docked 10 points for breaking Premier League’s financial rules© Provided by The Telegraph

By the time Everton reached October, their optimistic appeal to write off £94.2 million of losses had been comprehensively revised. Now it sought to have just £11.7 million of losses disregarded.

 

The club admitted

breaching PSR. Instead, they pleaded for mitigation. Players could not be sold, Everton said, because of Covid. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had meant that the training ground sponsorship deal with sanctioned oligarch Alisher Usmanov, £200 million over 20 years, had to be ripped up.

 

“Recklessness” was the Premier League’s lawyers’ view of Everton’s continued spending on players. As for the selling of them, it was not the case that Covid was hampering Everton in the transfer market, the Premier League said, rather it was the fact there was “no ready purchaser for those players at the prices Everton was seeking”.

 

“Unwise” said the commission of Everton’s decision to continue buying players in the hope that sales would enable them to comply with PSR. “Events,” the commission concluded, “have proved that to be a poor judgement”. This position that Everton found themselves was, the commission added, “of its own making”. The excess over the permitted £105 million threshold was “significant” and, as a result, “Everton’s culpability is great”.

 

As for Player X, whose sacking Everton argued cost them £10 million on their PSR calculation, the club said that they did not pursue a legal case in deference to his “psychological wellbeing”. The commission politely disagreed. Even in the event of a successful £10 million legal case against Player X, the commission pointed out, he may never even have been able to pay his old club the damages. That argument, like a great deal else Everton advanced, was a fanciful last defence of a club with nowhere left to go.

 

This pretty damning to be honest. I just hope points deductions now become commonplace for fanciful accounting practices.

[Fallen Angel]

32 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

 

They're protesting because they genuinely believe they're being victimised and they believe the whole of English football is on their side. They're convinced there'll be protests up and down the country. When you ask them why, they say "but what about city". It's literally the basis of all their complaints and the reason they're running with that is they think they'll get the likes of us, arsenal,.man united all on their side because we want city punished. All them getting punished 10 points does is fans of non-cheating clubs saying "good. Now let's see the same level of punishment for city". I for one am all on board with them being deducted 10 points for one charge and city getting 1150pts deducted for their 115. 

If the talk turns to city being stripped of titles and them being given to the second placed team - watch the sea change - all quality entertainment mind…

[Tj hooker]

12 hours ago, an tha said:

Damning.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/11/17/everton-premier-league-points-penalty-legal-case-playerx/

They won't like that , far to many facts in it , its not like they weren't  warned about  the consequences but the attitude inside the club seems to be we are  Everton we can do what the fuck we want and the premier league won't do shit .

As regards those other fucking cheats well the spotlight will fall on them soon I'd imagine and this is were the bitters will have a case , if they manage to squirm away from 115 charges without as much as 1 relegation then it will look like  bullying by the premier league 

[Paulie Dangerously]

As more and more comes out, it's clear that the PL - who they accuse of constantly being against them - actually did their best to support and help they avoid the means they're in. 

 

The arrogance of just submitting the accounts they were told wouldn't be acceptable is staggering. 

 

The biggest shame for the fans is the asterix against the Florida cup forever.

[Reckoner]

4 minutes ago, Fallen Angel said:

If the talk turns to city being stripped of titles and them being given to the second placed team - watch the sea change - all quality entertainment mind…

Is it true United would get 2 and we’d only get 1? Or is it 2 each? Either seems a massive injustice if you look at what happened.

[Mudface]

1 minute ago, Reckoner said:

Is it true United would get 2 and we’d only get 1? Or is it 2 each? Either seems a massive injustice if you look at what happened.

 

City stopped cooperating completely from about 2018, so the period they're being charged for doesn't cover the more recent seasons where we lost out to their cheating.

[Bobby Hundreds]

6 minutes ago, Mudface said:

 

City stopped cooperating completely from about 2018, so the period they're being charged for doesn't cover the more recent seasons where we lost out to their cheating.

The club should sue if that's the  case. You don't steal a million pound then use it to make 2 million pounds and that negates your initial theft. If their first titles are forfeit then all their titles are. I dont even want the titles awarded to runners up what is the point the journey and joy has already been stolen. What I would want is citys titles stripped and *no winner next to all those seasons due to Abhu Dhabi using their wealth to cheat the sport* The sportswashing should be turned into sports shitsmearing. 

[Mudface]

5 minutes ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

The club should sue if that's the  case. You don't steal a million pound then use it to make 2 million pounds and that negates your initial theft. If their first titles are forfeit then all their titles are. I dont even want the titles awarded to runners up what is the point the journey and joy has already been stolen. What I would want is citys titles stripped and *no winner next to all those seasons due to Abhu Dhabi using their wealth to cheat the sport* The sportswashing should be turned into sports shitsmearing. 

 

If they're not submitting accounts etc, they should be docked 30 points a season until they start playing ball.

[Lee909]

1 hour ago, Reckoner said:

Is it true United would get 2 and we’d only get 1? Or is it 2 each? Either seems a massive injustice if you look at what happened.

 

The case they are answering ends just as Klopp took over so it looks like 2 for the mancs and 1 for us

[Arniepie]

1 hour ago, Fallen Angel said:

If the talk turns to city being stripped of titles and them being given to the second placed team - watch the sea change - all quality entertainment mind…

Some bloo on twitter says he doesn't want city charged

[Bob]

If city lose titles they shouldn’t be awarded, just removed.

 

it means nothing to win a title unless you get to celebrate winning the title. 
 

Those titles would have an asterisk next to them anyway, so far better to be * no winner.

[Reckoner]

9 minutes ago, Bob said:

If city lose titles they shouldn’t be awarded, just removed.

 

it means nothing to win a title unless you get to celebrate winning the title. 
 

Those titles would have an asterisk next to them anyway, so far better to be * no winner.

Yeah I’ve come round to this way of thinking. Especially if the red mancs get 2 to our 1.

[Fallen Angel]

8 minutes ago, Bob said:

If city lose titles they shouldn’t be awarded, just removed.

 

it means nothing to win a title unless you get to celebrate winning the title. 
 

Those titles would have an asterisk next to them anyway, so far better to be * no winner.

I’d agree Bob - but you can see why the PL would want to negate questions about ‘* no winner’ in the future . It shines a light on their sheer incompetence, cowardice and the fact they are 100% unfit to govern the game. 

[Clem H Fandango]

Citeh wouldnt care though?

 

The original financial cheating has put them where they are now and where they will stay for the forseeable future. by all means strip them of titles but they will regain them with a little help of better accountancy.

Best thing is for them to have points deducted and demoted a few leagues (wishful thinking).

[Red74]

[Poor Scouser T]

Not been down that way for years but the Heritage market was ace. Put that in the stadium. Taco trucks, knock off Ben Shermans and somewhere to sit although I'll pass on the sitting bit. Too windy.

[Anubis]

 

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, Fallen Angel said:

I’d agree Bob - but you can see why the PL would want to negate questions about ‘* no winner’ in the future . It shines a light on their sheer incompetence, cowardice and the fact they are 100% unfit to govern the game. 

 

 

To be fair to to the premier league, they only know what city were prepared to tell them. The current charges are all related to the hacking that uefa charged them with and then fucked up with the time bar. It's taken as long as it has to get to where is it now, because city have not cooperated throughout the process and delayed and blocked wherever possible. Clearly with the Everton punishment, corrupting the process has counted against them. City have done this and more and this should be reflected in any punishment. We can't judge what happens there until we get to the end of the process. 

 

Uefa showed no cowardice and lost. And haven't yet closed the loophole that allowed them to escape. 

[Einch]

Expulsion for them both is the only acceptable punishment. 

[Scott_M]

Anytime they complain, just show them this. They admit it and then try some fanciful reasons to reduce it. 
 

Incidentally, what would a c.£12m loss have equated to in a points deduction?

 

[Jarvinja Ilnow]

Any of you gentlemen of Twitter/X able to contact their fact check department and set them on that odious wankstain Carragher re his latest:

"but when you consider 6 clubs tried to leave the PL & there was no sanction at all it doesn’t feel right."