evertons issues are going back several years. they took independent advice at the time that told them to claim 170mil in covid losses all told and thst could be ignored by ffp. they decided in their own wisdom to make thst 210mil and submitted it. they were warned and told what to do but didn't sell players to offset it and in fact bought players koning they had thr gap. the have submitted accounts thst are verifiable per the prem rules and have had their additional amount rejected and as a result face 2 charges for the same losses. they knew they were toast and did not sell last summer so two punishments are inevitable. forest knew the rules and flouted them then claimed if slurs would only have paid them johnsons worth in June it'd all be fine. again that's not on so they will be punished. again accounts were submitted properly and audited. city have published accounts for each and every year. the issue relate to under the table hidden payments to players and staff that if accounted for would have put them over the ffp limit 5 times. they put in accounts that were false. on its own that is an expulsion matter. the scale of city's cheating is utter under precedented everton were chances forest both incompetent and childish and topped off with a huge chance your arm play at the death. the rules are there or are not. my opinion on the Everton points deduction is that its too close to the level a club actually ran into the ground would get for going into administration. my view now looking at all the facts is that a club ought to be punished once for a one year issue not twice foe the same thing but the punishment should be something like 5 points and a transfer embargo. I think telling clubs that their purchasing of players is irresponsible and that gets then a years transfer ban plus 5 points is probably OK. they can still sell. in any event I do think that if clubs wash out covid then we will get to a point in time where -105mil target every year then starts to make no sense to the clubs who do want to buy. they have to save u0 scope to move in the market.
Honesty definitely doesn't pay. FFP rewards people to be deceptive and dishonest. If Everton got 10 points being honest and transparent any club being dishonest should be punished much harsher. It's not right that the teams who show a level of decency get the stick when teams that are deceptive as part of their entire mode of operation get off. City's punishment should be crippling to them.
no. every club has a legal requirement to keep accurate accounts. by the rules of the prem they must submit accounts. everton were caught as they were dishonest and tried to put non covid losses into the covid bucket to avoid selling more players. it was against their own purchased expert advice to do so. city were caught as investigators poked round and hacked their emails. they have been digging an ever bigger hope for themselves since. they should be expelled for what they have done.
Aren't Man City expected to submit accounts to Companies House too? If so, surely the two sets of accounts (CH & FFP) should relate to each other (not match, different criteria) making hidden payments obvious? If they've submitted false accounts to CH then isn't that fraud and possible imprisonment?
yes. they submit accounts that are not including payment made to players and their manager over in the motherland. they are caught in emails understanding stuff. this is why pep absolutely hit the roof when directly asked if he was being paid over there
People need to stop comparing city to Everton and forest. Two totally diff things. city aren’t accused of breaking ffp. It’s a whole bunch of even worse misleading and deceitful **** that they’ve been accused of. everton and forest it’s a clear, here’s the figure you can’t exceed and they exceeded. Case closed, all that’s left is to decide on the amount of points. city case is unprecedented and needs the prem to prove they misled them over payments and income etc
but they are accused of it. 5 charges in the 115 are breaches of ffp. it's actually what they can do then for imo. as jb has said its not a court of law so the panel will review the evidence and make a call. they did so with evertons matter of opinion about that extra 40mil they tried to put to covid and stuck 10 points on them.
I'll be controversial again here. the game was moved so those with tickets really wanted to be there and it showed. if that game was at 3pm tomorrow the place would be dead. and yeah it'd be tourist etc. the place sounded 10 times better right from the off even if klopp had to berate them for getting on players backs. imo european nights at anfield are better as it's far far harder obtain those tickets on a casual basis. those that get them have to go to games to get on the list and are more committed. in the league anfield can be poor and its a general culture thing of the country. get a committed European crowd and they are bouncing and singing all game even if their club is a tiny one. imo the prem has priced out young fans as well.
Everton weren't honest ffs they falsified the figures to try and meet the regs and made blatantly untrue submissions to the tribunal which contributed to the severity of the penalty handed down .
City keep saying they want it sorted quickly while simultaneously, knowingly are delaying the process by not cooperating. It could run for years and probably will. None of us know how it will turn out but I do think that some people think it is run like a court case and they assume city will have lawyers jumping up objecting etc. when the reality has been shown by how the Everton investigation went. Evidence is collected and 'witnesses' are spoken to. All the information is then collated and reviewed and a punishment decided upon. There will be no representatives from city intervening or questioning as the panel process all the evidence and come to a decision.
no city will present their evidence and be questioned. if they get any sniff of anything they don't like imo they will seek injunctions to prevent decisions being taken.
That's exactly what I said. Evidence will be collected and witnesses ie. club representatives or anyone outside of the club with crucial information, will give their statements and answer questions put to them. The second bit, I don't know if that's allowed. All clubs sign up to the rules and regulations at the start of every season, thus agreeing to abide by all decisions being made including, if necessary, decisions by independent panels. They have an appeal option in certain situations. I don't think they can take out injunctions against something they have signed up to. But it's not happened before so who knows.
Maybe the rules should change to force clubs hands; must cooperate, if not you'll be deemed guilty and punished. Much like a driver refusing a breathaliser
If a serious punishment is levied against City I have no doubt that they'll fight tooth and nail to resist it.
the courts of the land always take precedent over a private body. if there's any point of law that city can use they will use it to block decisions being taken. city are not paying 4million to solicitors to roll over and play dead here. that's the point. they will go in and assess what is being asked for then pounce on it.
the rules are clear on non cooperation. the there's a block within the 115 charges that are purely down to non cooperation!
I'm not a legal expert so I can't pretend to be definitive about anything but I would have thought that having a KC as head of the independent panel would mean that the panel wouldn't leave themselves open to any legal charges.
And ironically, they will be the easiest to process so there will be punishment of some sort for that alone. What's one step up from scot-free?
they in effect have already been found guilty of that by the CAS ruling on the eufa charges which are basically the charges and evidence the PL are using as far as i can see
