Posted this in general thread but will repost it here So FA have published what Slot supposedly said While shaking the hand of referee Michael Oliver, the report alleges that Slot used abusive words towards Oliver. Slot is alleged to have said to Oliver that he "[expletive] gave them everything" in relation to Everton. It also alleged that Slot said to Oliver that he hoped he was "proud of that performance." Slot is also stated to have said "if we don't win the league, I'll [expletive] blame you" before shouting "a [expletive] disgrace" twice at Oliver. There is no way he said all that before being red carded he said about 4 words to Oliver then he reached for his card
Funny reading Everton’s comments. admittedly that decoure didn’t act in a professional manner but he was 20 yards away from the crowd. Also say jones reaction was excessive and he should have allowed the officials to deal with it
Is funny it talks about how the FA dispute Everton’s events and that decoure ran 20 yards towards lfc fans to celebrate. Jones obviously reacted so rightly both got 2nd yellows but interesting it states 2 other Everton players joined and instead of pull decoure away then joined in to make it 3v1 which caused it to escalate. Surprised no action was therefor taken against those 2?
Yah the report says he said the first 2 things while shaking his hand which is when he got sent off. So that is what he was sent off for. the following bits then happened afterwards when he went back to the referee having already been sent off so although not good, can’t be used as reason why was sent off. is why it makes it a bit pathetic of a ref card tbh. Even when you watch he may have said it aggressively but want running around intimidating and shouting in his face, that you’d see klopp sometimes do. Was much more measured
Jones' reaction was spot on but still can't do it so was rightly punished. No complaints with that decision
Vvd will sort dacoure inside 5mins. Just throw a ball up between the two and you'll hear thr impact in woodison.
Sports have always been allowed to operate in ways normal mercantile businesses wouldn't allowed after all leagues are in effect monopolies
I'm not a lawyer (or Tobes or Astro), so I don't know all the ins and outs. Still, I do remember when the railways were being privatised 30 years ago, and the legal and regulatory minefield it was to set up The Association Of Train Operating Companies (ATOC). Even though the government was steering all the acts of Parliament and so forth, there was still confusion and challenges relating to anti-competition and fair access issues that sit in over-arching anti-monopoly and fair trade laws. Tbh, it still ended up a bit of a hotchpotch, but as the franchises were given out on who was giving the biggest backhanders to the party in power at the time (and this carried on under Labour too - Google Bowker and Branson for details) they muddled through without much resistance apart from the unions and fringe newspapers. I suspect this is what went on in the Prem (up until City) in that nobody dares challenge the rules as they're desperate to be in the club. City are, it would seem, as big, if not bigger (in terms of financial and legal backing anyway) than the Prem and even UEFA - they're quite prepared to bring the whole temple down around everyone rather than take their punishment. The question is, has the Prem overreached itself trying to placate Utd, Liverpool, and Arsenal (the legacy clubs, if you like), to stop another Abramovich happening? I suspect this won't be resolved for a decade at least, and thus any punishment of City will end up like Trump's open-and-shut legal cases against him that will just be appealed until they dissipate away.
To be honest that’s slowly changing though as city showed by proving that league rules go against normal competition laws when it comes to sponsorship etc
think that was more because it related solely to financial rules though i found the decision a bit odd tbh
CAS threw out a few bits because they were time barred against uefas own rule book however they were guilty of others as city had to pay a fine plus could only 22(ish) instead of 25 players for next years CL campaign
No Cas upheld the UEFA case but as City had dragged it out so long they were outside their own time limit for punishment. So guilty but no punishment though CAS did fine City ,£2m iirc, for obstructing the work of the court .
thats why the PL should have charged them pretty much straight after that case as so many of the infringements were applicable in both FFP systems and if City won their case here it promptly goes to CAS where following their previous judgement the PL case would likely have been successful for at least many of the charges . Why they waited so long is beyond me .
Sure I can. 2mil for obstruction when the vast majority of the number of charges are for the same is a very clear precedent. The time past since the breaches of whichever rules presents a massive issue that the Premier league walked away from with Everton after their first appeal. Everton breached higher than the year they got the original 10, points and only were given 2 to try get the thing over with. The punishment will be meaningless.
