M18CTID
Well-Known Member
As I've just posted they might well have achieved that if Ancelotti had stayed. A 10 point deduction for that is ridiculous IMO.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules
- Thread starter ayrshire_blue
- Start date
Citizen of Legoland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 10,101
It’s shit though really, how do clubs gamble to compete with the big boys now? You’d have to be thick to vote for such financial limitations to your business, who on earth would vote for that?BBC article:
Premier League clubs are permitted to lose £105m over a three-year period and Everton admitted to being in breach of the profit and sustainability rules (PSR) for the period ending 2021-22.
Following a five-day hearing in October, the commission found in favour of the Premier League that Everton's losses during that period amounted to £124.5m.
From that, I think it's the difference between the total losses listed being £372m, and the loss after allowable discounts are offered (e.g. having no matchday income for a long time).
The commission seem to think that the club assumed they would finish about 10 places higher in one season, and that cost them c. 20m.
Oh wait, the stupid clubs did.
Carry on …
Yep, I thought that too.Thanks for that.
Seriously, that commission statement is pathetic. Plenty of football clubs speculate to accumulate and the statement basically says that Everton didn't ride roughshod over FFP rules as though they didn't exist. Instead they spent a lot of money on players in order to (hopefully) finish higher up the league which in turn would've earned them more money. A £19.5m overspend over 3 years is equivalent to finishing 3 or 4 places higher up the league each season. That's hardly an impossible dream and if Ancelotti hadn't left for Real Madrid they may well have bridged that gap.
Doesn't fill me with too much confidence of the time of people who will be on our panel even if the cases are different.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,384
That was my thought when I read that info.
I suspect the 10 pts is ready for an appeal to reduce it significantly/suspend part.
Still think it's a mistake to give a points deduction. The club's relegated last season were already complaining, now they could have a financial claim against the PL for not sorting this out sooner. Maybe ...
East Level 2
Well-Known Member
If Everton play 38 games trying to get the highest number of points possible (you know, the whole idea of league football) then it doesn't matter when the points are deducted, their final total is unaltered. The only way the timing matters is if they reach what they think will be sufficient, stop trying and then get hit with a deduction..The deduction is immediate no?
Id rather lose 10 now with 20 games to go then be thrown into a relegation battle in the last 5.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
As I've just posted they might well have achieved that if Ancelotti had stayed. A 10 point deduction for that is ridiculous IMO.
I agree - it seems very harsh.
Maybe an element of setting a precedent for other FF-breakers, but it means that a clubs will need to make allowance for a possible future bad season - that seems to be a mad way of going about things.
I still find it weird that in a 4 year investigation they’ve not bothered questioning or even speaking to him.All Machini has to do is say that the payments were for his consultation role in the UAE. I don't see how they can prove otherwise.
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Still think it's a mistake to give a points deduction. The club's relegated last season were already complaining, now they could have a financial claim against the PL for not sorting this out sooner. Maybe ...
Possibly - that'll be a mess!