The NSNO Everton Forums

howard1334 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:13 pm We are not going to be able to revert now and argue guilt. That die has been cast. Doubt we win, unless on the double jeopardy point.

No reverting involved is there? It's a separate period. It won't change the first charge but that's rather irrelevant now.

Deano Blue Boy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:16 pm I remember back in the day singing in school "we hate Nottingham forest, we hate Liverpool too, we hate all the others, but everton we love you"

Think it went we hate city and united, but Everton we love you

Shogun wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:17 pm No reverting involved is there? It's a separate period. It won't change the first charge but that's rather irrelevant now.

It almost certainly doesn't matter that it's a separate period when two of the three years are the same. We've admitted we've breached already. Were not going to be able to contradict ourselves, unless there is something about the one year being swapped out that drastically alters the equation.

Paddockoldie wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:26 pm Think it went we hate city and united, but Everton we love you

We hate Manchester united

I don't remember anything about city, as back then city was in ligue 2 or somthing

biziclop wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:15 pm They're kinda exploiting the fact that there are no nasty stereotypes of Nottingham, as no-one cared enough about them since that sheriff incident.

Aye, what a cunt he was cancelling Christmas.

Paddockoldie wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:26 pm Think it went we hate city and united, but Everton we love you

Was definitely Nottingham Forest.

HANNU wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:29 pm We hate Manchester united

I don't remember anything about city, as back then city was in ligue 2 or somthing

It was city and United in the mid 80’s

One thing we do know is that we're not going to get more than 6 pts for the second charge. We may get less with the double jeopardy thing, and if finances are continuing to trend in the right direction. We don't know the extent of our breach or Forest's breach.

But we have to assume it'll be 6 pts, worst case scenario. So our target has to be 7 points above 18th, unless Forest are the club in 18th.

It does look like the entire season is going to be decided by independent commissions for both our appeal of the 2nd charge and Forest's appeal of their charge, assuming that's what happens. Whatever these commissions decide will clearly save or relegate certain teams and the people making those decisions will clearly know the result of their decisions, which makes the entire process disreputable.

Say Luton get relegated because someone has decided our 2nd charge can be reduced from 6pts to 2 pts on appeal? How is that a remotely appropriate way to oversee a competition? Surely it opens a legal minefield?

Bluebridge wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:32 pm It was city and United in the mid 80’s

I the 90s was no mention of city

HANNU wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:33 pm I the 90s was no mention of city

I do remember the full name Manchester United was sung when I was younger, the song must have evolved over time but for me the tune makes no sense with the addition of city in it



Don't know what happened I ment to edit my last post but somehow quoted it

HANNU wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:33 pm I the 90s was no mention of city

I continued to sing that, to this day.

I am still unclear as to how a process that is assessed annually (on a 3 year rolling calendar admittedly) can be sanctioned twice in one season. How two different time frames can result in a punishment in the same season seems illogical to the point of unjustifiable.

I'm sure the PL will just muddle it through and never do it to another club ever again but I just can't understand it.

CannockPricey wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 6:37 pm I am still unclear as to how a process that is assessed annually (on a 3 year rolling calendar admittedly) can be sanctioned twice in one season. How two different time frames can result in a punishment in the same season seems illogical to the point of unjustifiable.

I'm sure the PL will just muddle it through and never do it to another club ever again but I just can't understand it.

I get what ur saying but in essence we got the first charge for the accounts ending 2 seasons ago and the 2nd charge is for last season

The Prem will say ''you should've had the first sanction last season, and that would've relegated you so stop moaning about it''.

I find the fact that both Forest and ourselves will be dealt with by two separate ‘independent commissions’ concerning. How does that possibly offer any consistency?