Everton deducted 10 points for PSR breach (reduced to 6) | Deducted further 2 points for second breach

FootballHQ said:
Ah it went to CAS did it, Man. City will certainly go down that avenue again whenever their FFP punishment is decided.

Is CAS a realistic available option to Everton for this punishment?
Click to expand...

No they can't go to CAS. They can appeal but not to CAS.

So whatever was time barred, they better have a good defense for that
 
FootballHQ said:
I meant it if the points deduction holds. For example you replicate 21/22 and finish on 39 points, that would mean 29 points in current circumstances and very optimistic to think that would survive comfortably.
Click to expand...

That makes more sense.
 
SilentWitness said:
That makes more sense.
Click to expand...

For context:

22/23 - 35 points enough for safety (Everton - 36 points)
21/22 - 36 points enough for safety (Everton - 39 points)

I think it's encouraging that even after losing 10 points, you're a) not bottom, and b) a win away from escaping the bottom three. However, accounting for the deduction, it does look like you'll need to have earned 45-50 points to ensure safety.
 
The Purley King said:
Given what has just happened to Everton , city are in for one hell of a beating, danish commentator 1981 style
Click to expand...
I really hope so, and they undoubtedly deserve it. But I fear a tiny slap on the wrists. Money and corruption is their speciality. Their lawyer is a freaking Lord. They seem untouchable. But yes they do deserve that beating.
 
Some of Everton's arguments are a bit ludicrous. They wanted the Gylf Sigurdsson situation and their retaining of a player they gave a new contract to (probably Michael Keane) considered against the acceptable losses cap.

If only that had worked! We'd have been able to say we lost an £80m player in Greenwood for nothing and couldn't shift McTominay for £50m.
 
didz said:
Some of Everton's arguments are a bit ludicrous. They wanted the Gylf Sigurdsson situation and their retaining of a player they gave a new contract to (probably Michael Keane) considered against the acceptable losses cap.

If only that had worked! We'd have been able to say we lost an £80m player in Greenwood for nothing and couldn't shift McTominay for £50m.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's ludicrous. The report states that Gylfi was banned by the FA initially which makes it sound like we had no say in it. That's the loss of a very sellable asset as the previous season he scored 8 goals and got 10 assists in all comps. There is no doubt that there would have been suitors if we chose to sell. Subsequently this player has gone on to be dropped of all charges and exited the club on a free.

Now, we can all argue about the morals of the situation but we have seen with Greenwood that there are/were many interested parties for him despite what happened.

Also yeah, you have to take things into context when it comes to selling players, it was widely known we were toeing the line with FFP and needed to sell, that's why Richy was sold when he was sold to balance books as much as possible and why he was arguably sold for a fee a bit lower than we could have got in the market of the last 3ish years.
 
SilentWitness said:
I don't think that's ludicrous. The report states that Gylfi was banned by the FA initially which makes it sound like we had no say in it. That's the loss of a very sellable asset as the previous season he scored 8 goals and got 10 assists in all comps. There is no doubt that there would have been suitors if we chose to sell. Subsequently this player has gone on to be dropped of all charges and exited the club on a free.

Now, we can all argue about the morals of the situation but we have seen with Greenwood that there are/were many interested parties for him despite what happened.

Also yeah, you have to take things into context when it comes to selling players, it was widely known we were toeing the line with FFP and needed to sell, that's why Richy was sold when he was sold to balance books as much as possible and why he was arguably sold for a fee a bit lower than we could have got in the market of the last 3ish years.
Click to expand...

https://www.evertonfc.com/news/2193203/club-statement

We've loaned Greenwood to Getafe and are paying the bulk of his wages. Are you suggesting we should have held out for a big fee? Because I don't think that seemed at all likely to work.

And as the PL say in the report, the fee you may have been expecting to get was just a target valuation, rather than an actual one.
 
What is 10 points though? If they carry on with the form they are in now they should stay up, and just carry on regardless next season, same with City and Chelsea, a 30 point deduction will just be a minor distraction, not the monumental punishment the media will no doubt make it out to be. The way some of the ,media have gone on you'd think they'd been dropped 2 leagues already.

Rules are there for a reason, so if most of the other clubs have stuck to them, with the consequences been that they have missed out on Europe or been relegated, then to me alot of them might look at this and say a 10 point deduction is a risk worth taking if it means we might stay in the Premiership by spending a bit beyond our means.
 
The PL have done this well. On the face of it a harsh punishment but timed to have zero effect on them.

Should really have been done last season and they would be in The Championship now. It's delayed to this season so they won't go down, and if by some miracle they do end up in the relegation zone the appeals process will take a few points off the deduction to help them stay up.

The only downside for the PL is they've backed themselves into a corner with City. A fine there will no longer suffice.
 
didz said:
https://www.evertonfc.com/news/2193203/club-statement

We've loaned Greenwood to Getafe and are paying the bulk of his wages. Are you suggesting we should have held out for a big fee? Because I don't think that seemed at all likely to work.

And as the PL say in the report, the fee you may have been expecting to get was just a target valuation, rather than an actual one.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should read the report. It says the FA suspended the player first.

I, too, thought the club did, but this report now makes it seem like we didn't and it was the FA.

I'm suggesting that it's possible that you could have sold him, just like it is possible we could have sold Gylfi. To just dismiss it completely and not consider it a mitigating circumstance is what I have issue in the report.
 
I think it is unfair. Clubs like us, man city, chelsea, liverpool, arsenal , newcastle in the future etc can spend virtually as much as they want without a problem and if the smaller teams spend less than those teams - they have sanctions. It is not fair, I hope everton will appeal and win
 
SilentWitness said:
Maybe you should read the report. It says the FA suspended the player first.

I, too, thought the club did, but this report now makes it seem like we didn't and it was the FA.

I'm suggesting that it's possible that you could have sold him, just like it is possible we could have sold Gylfi. To just dismiss it completely and not consider it a mitigating circumstance is what I have issue in the report.
Click to expand...

It's this I've been going off. Neither that, nor a go on Google, nor Everton's own statement at the time, provide any indication that it was anyone other than Everton themselves who suspended the player. I might have searched poorly, so if you've got a link where it says 'Sigurdsson was banned by the FA rather than Everton,' then fair enough. Apologies if you've already shared it and I'm just being blind.

To be honest it still all feels a bit storm in a teacup ultimately. There will surely be an appeal and a reduction in the deduction, as usually happens. In fairness, it does seem odd that the report has Everton down as being uncooperative/misleading in the investigation. We already know what that looks like, and this isn't it.
 
duffer said:
If they're found guilty, yes. We won't get a verdict for years as it is.
Click to expand...

I don't see how they cant be. Everybody knows they are and now the PL has done Everton they cant just sweep it under the rug or all hell will break loose. Before that the fans would have grumbled a bit and ultimately nobody would care, but if they try it now Everton will really go for them and very likely with support from other big clubs.
 
adexkola said:
If City's case does get thrown out it's not because their lawyers blocked justice from being served, it's because the case was shit enough that an expert lawyer was able to poke holes in it.
Click to expand...


I'm sure that''s what City fans tell themselves everyday, and pray for every night.
With a good set of lawyers and 115 cases to fight, it will run for years, so City fans should be able to sleep easy. ;)
 
11101 said:
I don't see how they cant be. Everybody knows they are and now the PL has done Everton they cant just sweep it under the rug or all hell will break loose. Before that the fans would have grumbled a bit and ultimately nobody would care, but if they try it now Everton will really go for them and very likely with support from other big clubs.
Click to expand...

People have short memories. If they drag it out for a few more years, i can see it eventually just being dropped because of a technicality.
 
didz said:
It's this I've been going off. Neither that, nor a go on Google, nor Everton's own statement at the time, provide any indication that it was anyone other than Everton themselves who suspended the player. I might have searched poorly, so if you've got a link where it says 'Sigurdsson was banned by the FA rather than Everton,' then fair enough. Apologies if you've already shared it and I'm just being blind.

To be honest it still all feels a bit storm in a teacup ultimately. There will surely be an appeal and a reduction in the deduction, as usually happens. In fairness, it does seem odd that the report has Everton down as being uncooperative/misleading in the investigation. We already know what that looks like, and this isn't it.
Click to expand...



Here. This is in the official report which is found by going through the link in the OP of the thread.

For me, the issue is that he was a 40m asset that is gone overnight through no fault of our own and suspended by the FA of all footballing activity. Subsequently as I've said all charges were dropped and he was out of contract before the charged were dropped and investigations were still ongoing. We weren't exactly going to renew his contract but also I think it's really not right to say we haven't lost out on money or mobility in the market by that loss of Gylfi overnight through no fault of our own. If it was just us suspending him and the FA did nothing I'd have less sympathy for our situation on this point but as it stands, the FA suspension and context surrounding that makes it a murky point and one which I don't think you can dismiss so easily.
 
Maticmaker said:
I'm sure that''s what City fans tell themselves everyday, and pray for every night.
With a good set of lawyers and 115 cases to fight, it will run for years, so City fans should be able to sleep easy. ;)
Click to expand...

Possibly, I wouldn't know

The concept of lawyers being impediments to justice is absurd. Even beyond this case, it's a noxious train of thought in general.
 
SilentWitness said:


Here. This is in the official report which is found by going through the link in the OP of the thread.

For me, the issue is that he was a 40m asset that is gone overnight through no fault of our own and suspended by the FA of all footballing activity. Subsequently as I've said all charges were dropped and he was out of contract before the charged were dropped and investigations were still ongoing. We weren't exactly going to renew his contract but also I think it's really not right to say we haven't lost out on money or mobility in the market by that loss of Gylfi overnight through no fault of our own. If it was just us suspending him and the FA did nothing I'd have less sympathy for our situation on this point but as it stands, the FA suspension and context surrounding that makes it a murky point and one which I don't think you can dismiss so easily.
Click to expand...


This is actually a very good point that should be taken into consideration upon appeal. You shouldn't be penalized for a third party arbitrarily tanking the value of an asset on your books, pushing you further into the red.
 
SilentWitness said:
I assumed we thought we were doing the right thing (by owning up) and due to previous punishments handed out, believed we would only get a fine rather than points deductions.
Click to expand...
Most opposition teams will have sympathy with Everton and to a lesser extent Chelsea who have both owned up to their misdemeanours. Everton have simply over traded within the FFP criteria and whilst I think 6 points might be the correct sanction after an appeal, the crime merits a points deduction.

Chelsea’s plight is actually greater, yes they’ve owned up to financial irregularities during the Abrahmovic era but they won PL and CL.

UEFA will not have the stomach to strip titles but the PL, now that they’ve set a precedent with Everton might go back retrospectively and deduct 10-12 points in the season that City or Chelsea committed the crime. You still have to think Chelsea new ownership being more willing to work with the EPL will ultimately get less of a punishment compared to City who constantly and openly flaunt the rules to fit their own agenda.
 
Snow said:
In Chelsea's case their current administration found the wrongdoing in the bookkeeping from the Abramovich era and they reported it to the FA. I imagine that will affect sentencing. For them it wouldn't matter that much to get a point deduction this year.
Click to expand...
Which is why they may have come clean thinking they might finish with 60-70 points and this is the right season to take the hit !
 
Everton didn't even buy any expensive players in the last 3 seasons.
 
SilentWitness said:


Here. This is in the official report which is found by going through the link in the OP of the thread.

For me, the issue is that he was a 40m asset that is gone overnight through no fault of our own and suspended by the FA of all footballing activity. Subsequently as I've said all charges were dropped and he was out of contract before the charged were dropped and investigations were still ongoing. We weren't exactly going to renew his contract but also I think it's really not right to say we haven't lost out on money or mobility in the market by that loss of Gylfi overnight through no fault of our own. If it was just us suspending him and the FA did nothing I'd have less sympathy for our situation on this point but as it stands, the FA suspension and context surrounding that makes it a murky point and one which I don't think you can dismiss so easily.
Click to expand...


Fair enough, and having read in a bit more detail, I can see how this would be something you could possibly argue against on appeal.

The circumstances surrounding Everton’s claimed losses are the sort of
events that occur in the management of football clubs where a player’s
services and value can be lost for a variety of reasons – most obviously
because of injury, or a loss of form. It is not something that can stand as
mitigation in these proceedings.

The FA suspending your player indefinitely over an investigation that goes nowhere feels pretty different to an injury or a couple of bad games.

Edit: I think I forgot how good Gylfi was for you as well. Probably tried to block out his existence after the 4-0.
 
didz said:
Fair enough, and having read in a bit more detail, I can see how this would be something you could possibly argue against on appeal.

The circumstances surrounding Everton’s claimed losses are the sort of
events that occur in the management of football clubs where a player’s
services and value can be lost for a variety of reasons – most obviously
because of injury, or a loss of form. It is not something that can stand as
mitigation in these proceedings.

The FA suspending your player indefinitely over an investigation that goes nowhere feels pretty different to an injury or a couple of bad games.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's also important with FFP because unlike Greenwood who was a youth player, the money we spent on Gylfi matters, whereas youth players count as pure profit in regards to FFP.
 
If the lawsuit is successful Everton will go in to administration and be deducted another 9 points.

With the new stadium on the horizon they’d be finished as the Everton we know I imagine.
 
adexkola said:
No they can't go to CAS. They can appeal but not to CAS.

So whatever was time barred, they better have a good defense for that
Click to expand...



No they can do much more than that with the correct legal representation. I’ll explain to all Everton Fans. If a precedent has been set that an automatic 10 point deduction. Is applied to any breach of PL FFP/FSP rules then action is required immediately for Chelsea and Manchester City.

I’ll explain Chelsea irregularities are being investigated from 2012-2019, City from 2009-2018.

Let’s take a look at PL finishing positions in that period of investigation?

2009/10 - season
City finished 5th 67 points deduct 10 (57)
Everton finished 8th 61 points
They would now be 7th and take CIty Europa league Spot

No European football for City

2010/11 Season
City Finished 3rd 71 points deduct 10 (61)
Everton Finished 7th 54
No change

2011/12 Season
City Finished 1st 89 points deduct 10 (79)
Chelsea Finished 6th 64 deduct 10 (54)
Everton 7th on 56
City end up second, United win a title
Everton move up to EL and Europe

2012/13 season
City 2nd 78 points deduct 10 (68)
Chelsea 3rd 75 points deduct 10 (65)

City move to 4th, Chelsea 5th and Spurs as well as United and Arsenal play CL football

2013/14 Season
Man City 1st 86 points deduct 10 (76)
Chelsea 3rd 82 points deduct 10 (72)
Liverpool win title. Arsenal second. City 3rd and Everton move up to 4th into CL with a better GD than Chelsea

2014-15 Season
Chelsea 1st 87 points deduct 10 (77)
Man City 2nd 79 points deduct 10 (69)
Chelsea still win the league, Arsenal 2nd, United 3rd and City 4th

2015-16 Season
Leicester won only effect is
Man City 66 points deduct 10(56)
United 66 take the last CL space and City finish 8th with 56 points
Chelsea move from 10th to 16th 50 points deducted to 40

2016-17 Season
Chelsea 1st 93 points deduct 10 (83)
City 3rd 78 points deduct 10 (68)

Spurs win title 86 points, Chelsea 2nd, Liverpool 3rd and Arsenal move up to CL from Europa, United 5th and City 6th

2017-18 Season
Man City1st 100 deduct 10 they finish on (90)
Chelsea 5th 70 deduct 10 they finish on 60 drop to 6th
No real effect

2018-19
City not being investigated Chelsea are
Man City 1st 98 points
Liverpool 2nd 97
Chelsea 3rd 72 points deduct 10 (62)
Chelsea move to 6th and Arsenal now play CL football.


Summary If this is a standard penslty and is applied retrospectively to all teams then Everton can sue the EPL for not showing the correct procedural checks and doing the due diligence that cost Everton a Europa League Position for 2010/11 season and CL space for season 2014-15, how much did that cost the club and had the EPL been checking clubs like City and Chelsea for alleged illegal payments into off shore suspect accounts, then Everton would have qualified for Europe and received an additional potential payment from UEFA for €100m and not breached FFP rules?

Everton legal team must go after the other two teams in the sane way Burnley came after them.

The compromise here is City don’t get stripped of all their titles but they do lose 2 one to united and one to Liverpool, Chelsea also lose a Title to Spurs.

Arsenal gain multiple CL qualification and so to do United. Huge Counter Claims historically for loss of revenue from historic clubs to mostly City as well for loss of CL revenue.
 
Fortitude said:
Said this would be on the cards, I mean why wouldn't it be? Everyone lawyering up. Just the start of it pending the outcomes of the other cases.
Click to expand...
They have a great case as I’ve detailed, but this could be a genuine premier league implosion of catastrophic proportions, it all starts with a dodgy Russian Oligarch leading to state owned clubs. Teams like Burnley and Southampton during them is nothing compared to what Everton could do if They were denied CL in one season due to no action being taking against City or Chelsea?
 
What a disgrace, here we are with 115 charges FC pissing the league again yet their target is Everton. Either punish all cheaters or no cheaters.
 
Woziak said:
They have a great case as I’ve detailed, but this could be a genuine premier league implosion of catastrophic proportions, it all starts with a dodgy Russian Oligarch leading to state owned clubs. Teams like Burnley and Southampton during them is nothing compared to what Everton could do if They were denied CL in one season due to no action being taking against City or Chelsea?
Click to expand...
I'd like to say fun and games, but yeah, implosion is about right. I was saying to @adexkola the other day, I believe this lasts for as deep as the pockets of the respective clubs go and how much they're prepared to put into their respective cases. But there must surely be a lot of talks going on between clubs at the moment. Can a class action/group litagation suit be brought upon a club or the FA in England?
 
Woziak said:
No they can do much more than that with the correct legal representation. I’ll explain to all Everton Fans. If a precedent has been set that an automatic 10 point deduction. Is applied to any breach of PL FFP/FSP rules then action is required immediately for Chelsea and Manchester City.

I’ll explain Chelsea irregularities are being investigated from 2012-2019, City from 2009-2018.

Let’s take a look at PL finishing positions in that period of investigation?

2009/10 - season
City finished 5th 67 points deduct 10 (57)
Everton finished 8th 61 points
They would now be 7th and take CIty Europa league Spot

No European football for City

2010/11 Season
City Finished 3rd 71 points deduct 10 (61)
Everton Finished 7th 54
No change

2011/12 Season
City Finished 1st 89 points deduct 10 (79)
Chelsea Finished 6th 64 deduct 10 (54)
Everton 7th on 56
City end up second, United win a title
Everton move up to EL and Europe

2012/13 season
City 2nd 78 points deduct 10 (68)
Chelsea 3rd 75 points deduct 10 (65)

City move to 4th, Chelsea 5th and Spurs as well as United and Arsenal play CL football

2013/14 Season
Man City 1st 86 points deduct 10 (76)
Chelsea 3rd 82 points deduct 10 (72)
Liverpool win title. Arsenal second. City 3rd and Everton move up to 4th into CL with a better GD than Chelsea

2014-15 Season
Chelsea 1st 87 points deduct 10 (77)
Man City 2nd 79 points deduct 10 (69)
Chelsea still win the league, Arsenal 2nd, United 3rd and City 4th

2015-16 Season
Leicester won only effect is
Man City 66 points deduct 10(56)
United 66 take the last CL space and City finish 8th with 56 points
Chelsea move from 10th to 16th 50 points deducted to 40

2016-17 Season
Chelsea 1st 93 points deduct 10 (83)
City 3rd 78 points deduct 10 (68)

Spurs win title 86 points, Chelsea 2nd, Liverpool 3rd and Arsenal move up to CL from Europa, United 5th and City 6th

2017-18 Season
Man City1st 100 deduct 10 they finish on (90)
Chelsea 5th 70 deduct 10 they finish on 60 drop to 6th
No real effect

2018-19
City not being investigated Chelsea are
Man City 1st 98 points
Liverpool 2nd 97
Chelsea 3rd 72 points deduct 10 (62)
Chelsea move to 6th and Arsenal now play CL football.


Summary If this is a standard penslty and is applied retrospectively to all teams then Everton can sue the EPL for not showing the correct procedural checks and doing the due diligence that cost Everton a Europa League Position for 2010/11 season and CL space for season 2014-15, how much did that cost the club and had the EPL been checking clubs like City and Chelsea for alleged illegal payments into off shore suspect accounts, then Everton would have qualified for Europe and received an additional potential payment from UEFA for €100m and not breached FFP rules?

Everton legal team must go after the other two teams in the sane way Burnley came after them.

The compromise here is City don’t get stripped of all their titles but they do lose 2 one to united and one to Liverpool, Chelsea also lose a Title to Spurs.

Arsenal gain multiple CL qualification and so to do United. Huge Counter Claims historically for loss of revenue from historic clubs to mostly City as well for loss of CL revenue.
Click to expand...
What a way for Spurs to win their first title in 60 years.
 
djembatheking said:
What a way for Spurs to win their first title in 60 years.
Click to expand...
I’m just saying rather than take all City and Chelsea titles they might come up with compromise, where does this end do other clubs go back to Roman first started and say due to City financial filing should any of their recent titles be allowed ?
 
Forest Red said:
Fair enough - I do get it - We had Dougie Freedman and a transfer embargo in the name of stability.

oh and people thinking Everton need 40 points are delusional.
Click to expand...
They probably only need another 30-33 though ?
 
This had to get done before our game didn’t it! This is another example of us being screwed over… they’re gonna need points so be right up for this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.