Everton points deduction reduced to 6 points

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

doombear Too far from Selhurst Park 27 Feb 24 9.54am
Originally posted by Painter It’s all a fiasco, no clear rules and punishment, it’s made up as they go. The offences occurred last year, but Leicester went down, as no penalty given Everton then, is that fair? No and that is why charges brought this year in relation to the last 3 year cycle of accounts will be dealt with before the end of the PL year (mid June, I believe when the PL have their annual meeting and licenses have to be returned by the clubs who are to be relegated). None of that, of course, helps Leicester and the other clubs who suffered because Everton weren't punished earlier.
Alert a moderator to this post

doombear

Too far from Selhurst Park 27 Feb 24 9.54am

Originally posted by Painter

It’s all a fiasco, no clear rules and punishment, it’s made up as they go. The offences occurred last year, but Leicester went down, as no penalty given Everton then, is that fair?

No and that is why charges brought this year in relation to the last 3 year cycle of accounts will be dealt with before the end of the PL year (mid June, I believe when the PL have their annual meeting and licenses have to be returned by the clubs who are to be relegated).

None of that, of course, helps Leicester and the other clubs who suffered because Everton weren't punished earlier.

Alert a moderator to this post

Sansbup Norfolk 27 Feb 24 5.51pm
Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement. Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them.
Alert a moderator to this post

Sansbup

Norfolk 27 Feb 24 5.51pm

Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement.

Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them.

Alert a moderator to this post

CPFC1965 Warrington 27 Feb 24 7.03pm
I wonder if Fa and Premier League can be charged with bring the game into disrepute.
Alert a moderator to this post

CPFC1965

Warrington 27 Feb 24 7.03pm

I wonder if Fa and Premier League can be charged with bring the game into disrepute.

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 27 Feb 24 8.21pm
Originally posted by Sansbup Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement. Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them. Interesting point. If for example City have been cheating for 10 years shouldn't their punishment be spread over the same period? You could fine them 40 points next season and they would still finish mid table not much punishment for the trophies they did not deserve to win. Edited by Badger11 (27 Feb 2024 8.22pm) One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 27 Feb 24 8.21pm

Originally posted by Sansbup

Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement.

Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them.

Interesting point. If for example City have been cheating for 10 years shouldn't their punishment be spread over the same period?

You could fine them 40 points next season and they would still finish mid table not much punishment for the trophies they did not deserve to win.

Edited by Badger11 (27 Feb 2024 8.22pm)

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online 28 Feb 24 6.53am
I dont see how that would be considered fair - this benefits the cheating side as they get another season in the same league & leaves those teams still relegated by actions that included cheating from teams within their league - The fairest way is for any penalty to be applied to the season which the offence took place & the new season doesn't start until the previous season has been completed including any judgements or appeals. Clearly for any judgement / appeals to be concluded before any new season starts the whole rules / process/ application situation would have to be a lot clearer & streamlined. Originally posted by Sansbup Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement. Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them.
Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online

28 Feb 24 6.53am

I dont see how that would be considered fair - this benefits the cheating side as they get another season in the same league & leaves those teams still relegated by actions that included cheating from teams within their league -

The fairest way is for any penalty to be applied to the season which the offence took place & the new season doesn't start until the previous season has been completed including any judgements or appeals.

Clearly for any judgement / appeals to be concluded before any new season starts the whole rules / process/ application situation would have to be a lot clearer & streamlined.

Originally posted by Sansbup

Been said before, but in my view the fairest penalty would be points deduction at the start of the season following judgement.

Hopefully Citeh start with minus 40 points next season and we might just finish above them.

Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online 28 Feb 24 8.08am
Profit & Sustainability could feasibly introduce / implement a kind of fixed price menu for penalties imposed - For example: Expenditure 0-£5 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 2 points Expenditure £5-£10 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 4 points Expenditure £10-£20 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 6 points - Clearly it would need some streamlining but you get the picture - The other issue that I can see happening is club X buys player Y knowing it will put them over the profit & sustainability guidelines by £Z but they gamble that having this player in the team will bring them more success than the recognised imposed penalty-
Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online

28 Feb 24 8.08am

Profit & Sustainability could feasibly introduce / implement a kind of fixed price menu for penalties imposed -
For example:
Expenditure 0-£5 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 2 points

Expenditure £5-£10 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 4 points

Expenditure £10-£20 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 6 points -

Clearly it would need some streamlining but you get the picture -

The other issue that I can see happening is club X buys player Y knowing it will put them over the profit & sustainability guidelines by £Z but they gamble that having this player in the team will bring them more success than the recognised imposed penalty-

Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop Portishead 28 Feb 24 10.02am
Originally posted by Dubai Eagle Profit & Sustainability could feasibly introduce / implement a kind of fixed price menu for penalties imposed - For example: Expenditure 0-£5 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 2 points Expenditure £5-£10 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 4 points Expenditure £10-£20 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 6 points - Clearly it would need some streamlining but you get the picture - The other issue that I can see happening is club X buys player Y knowing it will put them over the profit & sustainability guidelines by £Z but they gamble that having this player in the team will bring them more success than the recognised imposed penalty- A fixed penalty system with strict liability principles (i.e. doesn't matter if it was intended or not) could work, but not based on fixed monetary sums. That favours the big clubs too much. Man City lose more than £5m a month down the back of their sofa. I am sure there are financial rules that can be imported from elsewhere that will avoid a 3 day hearing with forensic accountants called; but it needs to be a % of something. Turnover? BTW on timing, the nature of accounting means you are always publishing finalised data at least a year after the event. Thus, while it would be nice to try, convict and hang in the same season the offence was committed, while fair it is not realistic.
Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop

Portishead 28 Feb 24 10.02am

Originally posted by Dubai Eagle

Expenditure £5-£10 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 4 points

Expenditure £10-£20 million in excess of guidelines = penalty deduction 6 points -

Clearly it would need some streamlining but you get the picture -

A fixed penalty system with strict liability principles (i.e. doesn't matter if it was intended or not) could work, but not based on fixed monetary sums. That favours the big clubs too much. Man City lose more than £5m a month down the back of their sofa.

I am sure there are financial rules that can be imported from elsewhere that will avoid a 3 day hearing with forensic accountants called; but it needs to be a % of something.

Turnover?

BTW on timing, the nature of accounting means you are always publishing finalised data at least a year after the event. Thus, while it would be nice to try, convict and hang in the same season the offence was committed, while fair it is not realistic.

Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online 28 Feb 24 10.59am
I would have thought that conventional accounting guidelines meaning the below mentioned delay could be supplemented by having a monthly running total submission of accounts to provide broad based numbers of the current situation, thereby providing a snapshot of the current picture & projected end of season outcome so that the likelihood of a profit & sustainability transgression can be seen / forecast & if any action needs to be taken that can be prepared for - In the event that the final audited accounts when submitted carry significant differences then they will need to be explained & if necessary penalised accordingly. In circumstances where it can be clearly seen that the differences between the running total submission & the year end accounts vary significantly because of clearly deceitful actions the penalty should be increased (perhaps doubled) Originally posted by silvertop BTW on timing, the nature of accounting means you are always publishing finalised data at least a year after the event. Thus, while it would be nice to try, convict and hang in the same season the offence was committed, while fair it is not realistic.
Alert a moderator to this post

Dubai Eagle Online

28 Feb 24 10.59am

I would have thought that conventional accounting guidelines meaning the below mentioned delay could be supplemented by having a monthly running total submission of accounts to provide broad based numbers of the current situation, thereby providing a snapshot of the current picture & projected end of season outcome so that the likelihood of a profit & sustainability transgression can be seen / forecast & if any action needs to be taken that can be prepared for -

In the event that the final audited accounts when submitted carry significant differences then they will need to be explained & if necessary penalised accordingly.

In circumstances where it can be clearly seen that the differences between the running total submission & the year end accounts vary significantly because of clearly deceitful actions the penalty should be increased (perhaps doubled)

Originally posted by silvertop

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 5 << First < 1 2 3 4 5

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Everton points deduction reduced to 6 points

Site Map

Sponsors