The NSNO Everton Forums

weimaranerblues wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 5:20 pm Remember when the PL wanted these points deducted last season and the panel said it would be not possible, I suppose this could happen to Forest and they get them next season ,

brap2 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 8:20 pm Our wage / turnover ratio is 90% at most recent accounts so right at the limit.

Trowel wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 6:09 pm https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... ction.html

SIMON JORDAN: Why the Premier League can't win when it comes to Man City's 115 charges... and they were RIGHT to take points off Everton
Simon Jordan explains why continued criticism of the Premier League is unfair

By SIMON JORDAN FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 17:00, 28 February 2024 | UPDATED: 17:00, 28 February 2024

Everton's successful appeal to reduce their ten-point penalty has led to inevitable and somewhat feeble-minded criticism of both the Premier League and its chief executive Richard Masters.

Now I’m no great admirer of what I consider to be the middle management of the Premier League and I remain unconvinced by Masters. His background is in the Football League when it was comprised of lightweight thinkers and low-level achievers and I don’t see him as a strong leader.

So I’m no cheerleader for Masters, but I do accept he has presided over a difficult period. His predecessor Richard Scudamore was a master politician, balancing all those egos in the room and keeping everyone happy. So much so, that he exited stage left with a £5million golden thank you from the clubs. He repeatedly delivered better broadcast deals and endlessly kept feeding the ravenous beast, but he left a ticking time bomb when he broke away from collective distribution of TV money from overseas rights which saw the top six handed even more cash. Scudamore signed that off and Masters has had to deal with it.

He must believe his ascension to the Premier League’s top role coincided with running over a black cat because that is just one of the very different challenges he has faced compared to Scudamore. From the types of owners and proper enforcement of Financial Fair Play regulations to the Covid shutdown. From the sanctioning of Roman Abramovich and the enforced sale of Chelsea to the allegations against Manchester City. Then there’s the impending introduction of the independent regulator with its primary function to grab a significantly greater slice of TV revenues for the Football League from his member clubs. Scudamore managed to avoid all that by timing rather than skill.

Masters strives to ensure the Premier League appears to act in a way that is beyond reproach – and their handling of Everton’s case has done exactly that. They upheld their rules – the ones all Premier League clubs agreed to – by prosecuting Everton and the independent commission adjudicated so how can anyone find fault with the Premier League or Masters here?

If I was still an owner I’d undoubtedly want Masters to be stronger at times but I’d also want people to be judged by a fair set of standards – and I think they are.

Many fans point to the ongoing case against City but again, that’s unfair. Let’s not forget UEFA couldn’t deal with City, who have never been particularly co-operative with these processes. They are using the legal system to advance outcomes and are quite proud to suggest they’re doing that. It’s a very difficult nut to crack.

We’re not dealing with ownership models consisting of the candlestick maker and the baker anymore, this is globalised football with billionaire hedge funds and nation states. We can’t even change policy in this country to stop people coming in illegally, and while I’m not suggesting we compare football to illegal immigration, the legal system is weighed and skewed in such a way that if you’ve got resources, like City, you’re facing a very significant adversary.

The Premier League have found themselves in a zero sum game situation. If they charged and then convicted City, they’d be damaging their product in the eyes of the world as it would look beset with corruption and fraud. But if they did nothing they’d be laughed at for being a toothless tiger and will continue to live in a world of innuendo and insinuation which also damages their product. It’s a case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

With regards to Everton, it’s not that there were legal holes in the case against them – the facts have not changed – simply that the judgment has been recalibrated. The absurd wittering of such luminaries as Steve Rotherham and Andy Burnham – the mayors of Liverpool and Manchester – and former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney about Everton bore no resemblance to the arguments the club brought to the appeal.

There are two instances where the independent panel were corrected. One is the perception that Everton were less than frank with the panel which is very subjective and can always be challenged.

The other aspect concerns the level of punishment and this is where the ridiculousness of it all is exposed and the Premier League does deserve some criticism. Why does the biggest, best-equipped, richest and supposedly most professional league in the world seemingly need to draw reference from the EFL’s policies for sanctioning football clubs? I’m not suggesting you shouldn’t learn from other environments but the Premier League should be better than having to look to the EFL to consider what a disciplinary process and any subsequent fines or penalties should look like.

In an ideal world the verdict would have been right first time but that’s not the Premier League’s fault. If people want to question their motivations and get into the territory of agendas and conspiracy theories then you’ll never be able to get past that objection.

The bottom line is, the fundamental findings were right. Everton breached FFP rules and now, after appeal, have a six-point penalty to contend with. That seems about right to me.

The next case against them – and Nottingham Forest – will be heard in the coming weeks and we should find out in early April what punishments they will receive. That then raises the prospect of the season concluding with appeals processes ongoing which is far from ideal. But whose fault is that? Not the Premier League but the clubs who broke the rules they agreed to in the first place!

Bob Sacamano wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 7:14 pm He could be right, but he gasses on so much I tend to drift off when he goes off on one like he’s the mayor of everything.