Everton Discussion

[Cicero]

Are Everton special, or is the £19m loss completely out of the norm for most FFP breaches?

[RandoEFC+]

2 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Are Everton special, or is the £19m loss completely out of the norm for most FFP breaches?

Everton are in that tier of club which are big enough for the Premier League to go "look, we made an example of one of our football clubs so we don't need an independent regulator to come and interfere with us, thanks, bye" but also not in the group of clubs that the Premier League depend upon for their commercial revenue. This is why some clubs are, for example, hit with a £20m fine for trying to create a Super League which would have effectively put an end to the Premier League as we know it, but not a competitive penalty because "you can't punish the fans for the actions of the owners", but other clubs are smashed with the greatest sporting sanction in the competition's history, greater than what you'd get for going into administration, for spending £19m over the threshold needed for an FFP breach.

"Special" is one word for it I suppose.

@Dan I don't think you'll have much luck with yours because I think it relates to the season before last which means Burnley are the club who would have stayed up at our expense. Maybe you have an argument that if Burnley had been in the Premier League last season instead of Everton then you'd have finished above them and stayed up but I don't see how that could ever be legally proven either way. I'm sure Leicester, Burnley and Leeds will all be exploring their options. People have talked about those clubs suing us but I don't see how we could be held responsible for the Premier League failing to charge us until two years after the breach occurred. Not to mention the fact that they've signed off on every penny we've spent over the past 2 years leading up to this referral. Surely they're the ones who should be subject to legal action and not Everton.

[Rick]

City better get hammered 

[Dan+]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

Everton are in that tier of club which are big enough for the Premier League to go "look, we made an example of one of our football clubs so we don't need an independent regulator to come and interfere with us, thanks, bye" but also not in the group of clubs that the Premier League depend upon for their commercial revenue. This is why some clubs are, for example, hit with a £20m fine for trying to create a Super League which would have effectively put an end to the Premier League as we know it, but not a competitive penalty because "you can't punish the fans for the actions of the owners", but other clubs are smashed with the greatest sporting sanction in the competition's history, greater than what you'd get for going into administration, for spending £19m over the threshold needed for an FFP breach.

"Special" is one word for it I suppose.

@Dan I don't think you'll have much luck with yours because I think it relates to the season before last which means Burnley are the club who would have stayed up at our expense. Maybe you have an argument that if Burnley had been in the Premier League last season instead of Everton then you'd have finished above them and stayed up but I don't see how that could ever be legally proven either way. I'm sure Leicester, Burnley and Leeds will all be exploring their options. People have talked about those clubs suing us but I don't see how we could be held responsible for the Premier League failing to charge us until two years after the breach occurred. Not to mention the fact that they've signed off on every penny we've spent over the past 2 years leading up to this referral. Surely they're the ones who should be subject to legal action and not Everton.

I'm all for Leicester, Leeds, Burnley and Southampton hammering the Premier League to be honest. Can see it all being more trouble than it's really worth mind.

[Cicero]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

Everton are in that tier of club which are big enough for the Premier League to go "look, we made an example of one of our football clubs so we don't need an independent regulator to come and interfere with us, thanks, bye" but also not in the group of clubs that the Premier League depend upon for their commercial revenue. This is why some clubs are, for example, hit with a £20m fine for trying to create a Super League which would have effectively put an end to the Premier League as we know it, but not a competitive penalty because "you can't punish the fans for the actions of the owners", but other clubs are smashed with the greatest sporting sanction in the competition's history, greater than what you'd get for going into administration, for spending £19m over the threshold needed for an FFP breach.

"Special" is one word for it I suppose.

@Dan I don't think you'll have much luck with yours because I think it relates to the season before last which means Burnley are the club who would have stayed up at our expense. Maybe you have an argument that if Burnley had been in the Premier League last season instead of Everton then you'd have finished above them and stayed up but I don't see how that could ever be legally proven either way. I'm sure Leicester, Burnley and Leeds will all be exploring their options. People have talked about those clubs suing us but I don't see how we could be held responsible for the Premier League failing to charge us until two years after the breach occurred. Not to mention the fact that they've signed off on every penny we've spent over the past 2 years leading up to this referral. Surely they're the ones who should be subject to legal action and not Everton.

Tbf Everton's was just 1 breach. City's and Chelsea's investigation goes back to early 2010s which will likely take a while. The latter without a doubt more quickly as Clearlake went to the Premier League themselves regarding the undeclared payments. They are working with them as opposed to Citt's owners. 

All three clubs could face point deductions. 

[RandoEFC+]

10 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Tbf Everton's was just 1 breach. City's and Chelsea's investigation goes back to early 2010s which will likely take a while. The latter without a doubt more quickly as Clearlake went to the Premier League themselves regarding the undeclared payments. They are working with them as opposed to Citt's owners. 

All three clubs could face point deductions. 

We'll see in good time. I'm all for clubs being punished if they broke the rules and Everton very well may have but a 10 point penalty for a single breach of £19m is totally excessive I'm afraid. They've gone way overboard in their efforts to show that they don't need an independent regulator. I think if they'd have given us 4-6 points or something then enough of the media would have shrugged it off but early indications on social media suggest to me that 10 points is raising plenty of eyebrows outside of the Everton bubble. You've already got Jamie Carragher, Martin Samuel, TalkSport weighing in on Everton's "side". 

This could all get very messy between Everton's appeal and the legal action taken by the other four relegated clubs against Everton which has been legitimised by this judgement. Although I don't see what case Southampton and Leeds have because they didn't finish 18th and therefore would have been relegated even if this was acted upon at the time or last season.

[The Palace Fan]

2 hours ago, Dan said:

As much as everybody here deserved it last season we must have some sort of case here. We've been relegated at the expense of a side who were deemed worthy of a points deduction for their dealings. It's no longer a hypothetical.

Let's not delve in to how you got promoted in the first place.

[Happy Blue]

2 hours ago, Rick said:

City better get hammered 

 in your dreams

[Bluewolf]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

We'll see in good time. I'm all for clubs being punished if they broke the rules and Everton very well may have but a 10 point penalty for a single breach of £19m is totally excessive I'm afraid.

Totally agree... Pretty shocked when I read this earlier, a 10 point deduction seems ott for me in this case. Maybe they can have it reduced on appeal?? 

They have set the bar now though with this, If City have had breaches of the rules then let's see what happens there.. I doubt we will get away with it either but as Cicero pointed we are co-operating with the league about what has been found rather than trying to cover it up and hopefully if they do find anything that sticks it might go someway to reducing any penalty we might incur.. 

On a positive note if you were going to lose 10 points it's better at this point of the season when you still have a decent chance of climbing out of trouble rather than near the end when it could spell relegation if you were near the bottom 3. Still feels very heavy handed though.. 

[RandoEFC+]

8 minutes ago, Bluewolf said:

Totally agree... Pretty shocked when I read this earlier, a 10 point deduction seems ott for me in this case. Maybe they can have it reduced on appeal?? 

They have set the bar now though with this, If City have had breaches of the rules then let's see what happens there.. I doubt we will get away with it either but as Cicero pointed we are co-operating with the league about what has been found rather than trying to cover it up and hopefully if they do find anything that sticks it might go someway to reducing any penalty we might incur.. 

On a positive note if you were going to lose 10 points it's better at this point of the season when you still have a decent chance of climbing out of trouble rather than near the end when it could spell relegation if you were near the bottom 3. Still feels very heavy handed though.. 

I'm really not worried about finishing below Burnley, Luton or Sheffield United. We're only two points from safety even if this sanction isn't reduced on appeal.

It's the principle of it. A 10 point fine for a single breach of less than £20m of over spending while we have built a new stadium from scratch and which hasn't even made us better as a team is an objectively unfair punishment. One breach of anything in 30 years. No suspended sentences, no slaps on the wrist, just straight into the largest sporting penalty the competition has seen in its history.

[Redcanuck]

4 hours ago, Rick said:

City better get hammered 

Hopefully the 10 point deduction for Everton is an indication that City will be treated correctly.   I hope they get the same treatment as Rangers and are demoted to League Two.  Personally if it was up to me they would be out of football

[Dr. Gonzo]

There’s other clubs in blue more guilty than Everton of falling afoul of financial rules much more deserving of a punishment.

[Redcanuck]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

There’s other clubs in blue more guilty than Everton of falling afoul of financial rules much more deserving of a punishment.

The teams they investigate seems selective.   Chelsea definitely since Abramovich,  but I would like to see the Glazers investigated for using United as their own personal AMT.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Redcanuck

[Dan+]

2 hours ago, The Palace Fan said:

Let's not delve in to how you got promoted in the first place.

Frankly peanuts in comparison but true. I think the point you raise is right though - this is just going to open one big can of worms, one big game of who did what and lots could well follow this. The precedent has been set.

This is one of those things that at first looks interesting but the road it'll lead you down is going to be extremely boring for all involved.

[Lucas]

On 25/10/2023 at 14:52, Lucas said:

If Everton do receive a points deduction, it's probably the best season for them to be hit with it, in fairness.

Pretty convinced they would stay manage to up when you factor in what a shit show Sheff Utd, Burnley, Bournemouth and Luton are this season.

Leicester might feel a bit robbed but let's be honest, the club on the whole will likely be in a better position than they were when they went, manager and squad wise. 

As I said last month, Everton will piss survival, even with a substantial deduction. 

Personally for me, the fact the Premier League have acted now, in a season where it's obvious to everyone that the three who came up are almost certainly going down, definitely is fishy. The timing is impeccible.

They know they can hand the secere punishment whilst likely avoiding a situation which sees Everton relegated. I mean, come on. You cannot tell me that's just a coincidence. I'd assume Everton have known this was happening too so wouldn't surprise me if that's been at the heart of their motivation recently.

As for Chelsea and City, I don't know but the pressure should be ramped up on them and the spotlight firmly on their cases. They were obviously keen to nail Everton, they should be just as keen to make examples of Chelsea and City, although chances are, they don't want to wreck two PL giants on a global scale because of what they do for the Premier League.

Edited November 17, 2023 by Lucas

[LFCMike]

9 minutes ago, Lucas said:

As I said last month, Everton will piss survival, even with a substantial deduction. 

Personally for me, the fact the Premier League have acted now, in a season where it's obvious to everyone that the three who came up are almost certainly going down, definitely is fishy. The timing is impeccible.

They know they can hand the secere punishment whilst likely avoiding a situation which sees Everton relegated. I mean, come on. You cannot tell me that's just a coincidence. I'd assume Everton have known this was happening too so wouldn't surprise me if that's been at the heart of their motivation recently.

As for Chelsea and City, I don't know but the pressure should be ramped up on them and the spotlight firmly on their cases. They were obviously keen to nail Everton, they should be just as keen to make examples of Chelsea and City, although chances are, they don't want to wreck two PL giants on a global scale because of what they do for the Premier League.

City winning the league every year does nothing but impact negatively on the 'best league in the world' brand so they should be keen to nail them.

[RandoEFC+]

11 minutes ago, Lucas said:

As I said last month, Everton will piss survival, even with a substantial deduction. 

Personally for me, the fact the Premier League have acted now, in a season where it's obvious to everyone that the three who came up are almost certainly going down, definitely is fishy. The timing is impeccible.

They know they can hand the secere punishment whilst likely avoiding a situation which sees Everton relegated. I mean, come on. You cannot tell me that's just a coincidence. I'd assume Everton have known this was happening too so wouldn't surprise me if that's been at the heart of their motivation recently.

As for Chelsea and City, I don't know but the pressure should be ramped up on them and the spotlight firmly on their cases. They were obviously keen to nail Everton, they should be just as keen to make examples of Chelsea and City, although chances are, they don't want to wreck two PL giants on a global scale because of what they do for the Premier League.

I get why you're saying this but Everton were referred for this breach back in March where there was every chance we could have been relegated anyway by now, and there's no way they could have known by that point what this season would look like. Nobody would have looked at Burnley pissing the Championship at that point and said they'd be as bad as Luton this and not many people would have said that if Everton stay up, next season they can probably survive even if we smash them with a massive points penalty.

What's fishy is that Everton approached the Premier League back in 2019 when we were getting close to being in trouble, asked them to advise on how we could make sure we didn't commit a breach, did everything they said and then suddenly this March they decided they wanted to go after us. It's all linked to the independent regulator that's been suggested and the Premier League wanting to show they can police the league properly themselves.

[RandoEFC+]

3 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

City winning the league every year does nothing but impact negatively on the 'best league in the world' brand so they should be keen to nail them.

Does it? I don't know if I agree with that but either way, there's no way the reputation allows damage of having to kick them out of the league or even reassign the titles they've won in retrospect wouldn't do worse reputational damage.

[The Palace Fan]

I still think Everton will stay up. The Everton under Benitez and Lampard played against Palace like they thought they were too good to be in the position they were in. The Everton I saw last weekend under Dyche played like Dyche convinced them they're better than people think they are.

I know @Whiskey is pretty dismayed with the general state of football but in 10+ years I think Everton fans will look back at the mentality of this Sean Dyche side as one of there favourite Everton teams.

[Whiskey]

5 minutes ago, The Palace Fan said:

I still think Everton will stay up. The Everton under Benitez and Lampard played against Palace like they thought they were too good to be in the position they were in. The Everton I saw last weekend under Dyche played like Dyche convinced them they're better than people think they are.

I know @Whiskey is pretty dismayed with the general state of football but in 10+ years I think Everton fans will look back at the mentality of this Sean Dyche side as one of there favourite Everton teams.

Yeah, without sounding like a broken record the fact I'm not that arsed shows how disconnected I am with football and Everton. The fact that we are docked points, yet City with their 638,239 charges will inevitably walk away with no action is just deflating to say the least. 

Corruption has never been so rife, oil money has never been so rife, disregard for human rights has never been so rife, the lack of respect for the match going fan has never been so rife. 

I think I mentioned but there's a non league club (lower than Vanarama North/South) a 5 minute walk from my house. I'm genuinely debating going there to get my football fix and sacking off this elite Premier League oil money, TV deal, #globalsport wankathon. 

As a side note, in retrospect I do agree with the comment regarding Dyche.

[LFCMike]

30 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Does it? I don't know if I agree with that but either way, there's no way the reputation allows damage of having to kick them out of the league or even reassign the titles they've won in retrospect wouldn't do worse reputational damage.

It hasn't yet but if they go on to win the next few having already won 5 of the last 6 the PL is no different to some of the other leagues with the same team winning it every year

[6666]

Can see the points deduction being reduced on appeal but as many have already mentioned, it probably won't be that much of a blow either way to Everton staying up.

[Reluctant Striker]

It does all seem harsh, but then maybe not any more or less than being just about relegated by a small margin. Of the 20 sides in the Premier League each season, a slight majority do spend more time contemplating the bottom 3, than how near top 4 is.

You would certainly hope certain other sides do get treated at least equally. But I'm not quite sure where the connecting comparison line to the European Super League is.

[RandoEFC+]

1 minute ago, Reluctant Striker said:

But I'm not quite sure where the connecting comparison line to the European Super League is.

People are mainly talking about it because the central argument against points penalties in that case was that it was the owners who plotted to ditch English football and the fans and footballing side of the club shouldn't be punished for it, yet that logic apparently doesn't apply when clubs go into administration or breach FFP.

Anyone who thought those clubs should have been hit with a heavier punishment, possibly points penalties, has been waiting for the moment that another club gets penalised in exactly that manner to call out the hypocrisy and now here we are, Everton taking a sporting sanction because of the incompetent running of the club, i.e. the actions of their owners. The worst thing is, Moshiri, who has overseen this decade-long shitshow, just gets to sell the club off and take the money while the staff, players and fans of the club are left behind to pick up the pieces. This isn't the first time this has been raised. If you go back to the time when the punishment for the Super League Six clubs was being debated, plenty of people were saying we'll hang on a minute, what about when Portsmouth, Leeds, etc. were hit with points penalties? Why was it okay for the fans to suffer for the actions of their owners in those instances?

The link is that you can't have it both ways. Either the owners get punished separately and the clubs themselves get left alone from a sporting point of view (which simply couldnt ever work) or the clubs themselves get punished for their actions and the fans just have to deal with it because the nature of football nowadays is that these aren't football clubs that you're a part of anymore, they're businesses that you observe from the outside with an emotional investment.

[Dr. Gonzo]

10 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

People are mainly talking about it because the central argument against points penalties in that case was that it was the owners who plotted to ditch English football and the fans and footballing side of the club shouldn't be punished for it, yet that logic apparently doesn't apply when clubs go into administration or breach FFP.

Anyone who thought those clubs should have been hit with a heavier punishment, possibly points penalties, has been waiting for the moment that another club gets penalised in exactly that manner to call out the hypocrisy and now here we are, Everton taking a sporting sanction because of the incompetent running of the club, i.e. the actions of their owners. The worst thing is, Moshiri, who has overseen this decade-long shitshow, just gets to sell the club off and take the money while the staff, players and fans of the club are left behind to pick up the pieces. This isn't the first time this has been raised. If you go back to the time when the punishment for the Super League Six clubs was being debated, plenty of people were saying we'll hang on a minute, what about when Portsmouth, Leeds, etc. were hit with points penalties? Why was it okay for the fans to suffer for the actions of their owners in those instances?

The link is that you can't have it both ways. Either the owners get punished separately and the clubs themselves get left alone from a sporting point of view (which simply couldnt ever work) or the clubs themselves get punished for their actions and the fans just have to deal with it because the nature of football nowadays is that these aren't football clubs that you're a part of anymore, they're businesses that you observe from the outside with an emotional investment.

Wasn’t the rule about leaving for breakaway leagues made after that happened though? Because I think it wouldn’t have been the most unreasonable punishment if not for the fact there was no rule against it.

I think the way the prem has operated on this is a joke though. Worked with the club for years to resolve this - rubber stamping the finances each year. Then saying there’s a violation and referring this to an independent commission to impose the harshest sanction this league has ever seen.

Trying to make an example out of Everton when they’re not even the first or second worst offenders for this type of offense is stupid imo. The message sent is if your club is rich enough, no problem… but for anyone else the rules really matter.

And if relegated clubs sue Everton successfully, I think the league is really to blame - not Everton. Everton cooperated fully, the league rubber stamped everything. So this combined £300m other clubs want from Everton should be coming from the league’s pockets imo.