Everton FFP- yes

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I'm struggling to get my head around their argument? Because they have been punished for those years, they expect to exclude those years from the psr calculations? 

Possibly. However his complaint seems to be about the Appeal Process being incorrect too.

There is an argument to reset losses that exceed £35m or £13m as may apply down the max ie £35m or £13m while those at that level or below remain at that.

However I don't know the PL process on prior individual seasons in the cycle that exceed...nothing in the rules about it so I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[W-S-M Seagull]

What's the problem? Both clubs have confirmed they are in breach of p&s rules. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.premierleague.com/news/3858986

Intriguingly it says nothing about Promotion Bonuses in this statement..I would then suggest multiple would have failed if so..going back Aston Villa, Bournemouth, Fulham maybe mode than once and Wolves in the year of Promotion and quite possibly Leeds would all fall foul.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Possibly. However his complaint seems to be about the Appeal Process being incorrect too.

There is an argument to reset losses that exceed £35m or £13m as may apply down the max ie £35m or £13m while those at that level or below remain at that.

However I don't know the PL process on prior individual seasons in the cycle that exceed...nothing in the rules about it so I guess we'll have to wait and see.

My understanding is they are appealing the punishment, not appealing the commisions findings? So them saying "We've had to submit a p&s calculation which is subject to change" is complete bs because the appeal isn't going to change those calulations? 

[W-S-M Seagull]

Forests argument doesn't stack up for me either. They had 3 years to stay within the allowed limit. You then can't argue that the money from a player they sold 2 months later should be included. They had 3 years to comply and they didnt. So suck it up. 

[Sir Geoff]

Everton keep conveniently forgetting that their losses initially amounted to £290 million.

[Hxj]

13 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

My understanding is they are appealing the punishment, not appealing the commisions findings? So them saying "We've had to submit a p&s calculation which is subject to change" is complete bs because the appeal isn't going to change those calulations? 

I think that the point more fairly made is what if the losses were £50 million in 2019/20, 2020/21 and 2021/22, followed by a loss of £10 million in 2022/23.

The losses to 2021/22 would be £150 million and the losses to 2022/23 would be £110 million, both failures.  However the club has already been substantially punished for the 2020/21 and 2021/22 losses in the first sanction, and 2022/23 is itself well below the £35 million limit.  In the EFL the £50 million would be reset to £35 million.  Meaning that Everton would be compliant for 2022/23.

(the above numbers are entirely made up and simplified)

Edited January 15 by Hxj

[Davefevs]

Surely you understand the rules first and foremost and then stick to them.  Unfair advantage gained.

[Open End Numb Legs]

For me this is personal.

My sister's long term ex partner was a Forest fanatic. He went off with another woman just because she could offer money to subsidise his failing crappy business that my sister had subsidised for 10 years before.

I think this should be taken into consideration and Forest should drop into the national league.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Surely you understand the rules first and foremost and then stick to them.  Unfair advantage gained.

On a human level, does he have any understanding of the impact its had on fans such as our own where we've had to watch some pretty shite stuff over the past few years whilst we were in austerity to avoid breaching ffp? Why should we potentially lose put to clubs who haven't got themselves in order and have instead cheated? 

The sympathies I'm hearing for Forest goes alone the lines of "well they wanted to get out of the Championship so had to spend. They wanted to stay in the premier league so they had to spend to compete" hmmm how about they adjust their ambitions to what's possible within the rules instead of cheating clubs such as our own. 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

On a human level, does he have any understanding of the impact its had on fans such as our own where we've had to watch some pretty shite stuff over the past few years whilst we were in austerity to avoid breaching ffp? Why should we potentially lose put to clubs who haven't got themselves in order and have instead cheated? 

The sympathies I'm hearing for Forest goes alone the lines of "well they wanted to get out of the Championship so had to spend. They wanted to stay in the premier league so they had to spend to compete" hmmm how about they adjust their ambitions to what's possible within the rules instead of cheating clubs such as our own. 

Agree, what about the human impacts of those that followed the rules.

[1960maaan]

Everton were so far over allowances I did wonder what would happen the 'next year'.
Looking at one Everton blog they expect losses to be around £50m for 22/23. If I have the right figures they have £100m & £43m for the previous 2 , that would total £200m for the period .
Now the question I don't know the answer to , does the initial deduction affect the 3 year period?
Effectively year 1 & 2 were taken into account with 10 points deduction , but obviously it's a rolling 3 years and they look to be over the next £105m allowance by some way . 
If they get more sanctions it will seem harsh unless we see others getting hit, ie: Chelsea & Man City. 

Could be interesting few weeks. 

[Markthehorn]

8 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Everton were so far over allowances I did wonder what would happen the 'next year'.
Looking at one Everton blog they expect losses to be around £50m for 22/23. If I have the right figures they have £100m & £43m for the previous 2 , that would total £200m for the period .
Now the question I don't know the answer to , does the initial deduction affect the 3 year period?
Effectively year 1 & 2 were taken into account with 10 points deduction , but obviously it's a rolling 3 years and they look to be over the next £105m allowance by some way . 
If they get more sanctions it will seem harsh unless we see others getting hit, ie: Chelsea & Man City. 

Could be interesting few weeks. 

Unfortunately for them they have been caught out and punished.

Presume Man C will be at some point too but can understand there being a few doubts about how strongly .

[1960maaan]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Surely you understand the rules first and foremost and then stick to them.  Unfair advantage gained.

 

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree, what about the human impacts of those that followed the rules.

What a ******* stupid statement , looks like he's after some likes from Everton fans.

I have a soft spot for Everton , but what's the point of rules if you turn around and say , "nah , sorry you were charged, just seen that little Tommy is upset with it so carry on" 
As it is they have used (badly) a £200m advantage over any Club that stayed within the rules, ignore that and you might as well just hand the keys to the Prem to Man City and Newcastle .

[W-S-M Seagull]

5 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Everton were so far over allowances I did wonder what would happen the 'next year'.
Looking at one Everton blog they expect losses to be around £50m for 22/23. If I have the right figures they have £100m & £43m for the previous 2 , that would total £200m for the period .
Now the question I don't know the answer to , does the initial deduction affect the 3 year period?
Effectively year 1 & 2 were taken into account with 10 points deduction , but obviously it's a rolling 3 years and they look to be over the next £105m allowance by some way . 
If they get more sanctions it will seem harsh unless we see others getting hit, ie: Chelsea & Man City. 

Could be interesting few weeks. 

I do not know how it all works and I'm certainly not an expert. But you can't just pretend those years don't exist because then they end up getting an advantage by previously falling foul of the rules? 

Maybe they should have been doing all they could to raise money in 22/23 to bring them into line? But instead they chose to keep their competitive advantage rather than complying with the rules and that's why I have zero sympathy. 

Man City are a completely different case. It's worth remembering that Everton X2 and Forest have admitted to the breaches. Man City deny all charges. 

[1960maaan]

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Man City deny all charges.

They do have the best Lawyers apparently , but with 115 charges you would think some of them would stick.

[Markthehorn]

7 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

 

What a ******* stupid statement , looks like he's after some likes from Everton fans.

I have a soft spot for Everton , but what's the point of rules if you turn around and say , "nah , sorry you were charged, just seen that little Tommy is upset with it so carry on" 
As it is they have used (badly) a £200m advantage over any Club that stayed within the rules, ignore that and you might as well just hand the keys to the Prem to Man City and Newcastle .

Probably wouldn’t care one bit if this was Bournemouth or Brentford !

[W-S-M Seagull]

31 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree, what about the human impacts of those that followed the rules.

And that human impact will be felt all the way down to the likes of the tea lady. 

That's where the impact is felt the most. Real honest people at the bottom lose their jobs whilst a club is trying to stay in line. 

Not suggesting the tea lady got sacked but you get what I mean. 

9 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

They do have the best Lawyers apparently , but with 115 charges you would think some of them would stick.

Possibly but as of yet there is no public evidence they are guilty and they deny all charges. 

Forest and Everton x2 have admitted the breaches. 

[WarksRobin]

Has Colin Calderwood voiced his opinion yet?

[Mr Popodopolous]

Winter is good but without being impolite, can be a bit of a starphucker- apologies for the crude language. See Jim White too, slight sucker for the bigger name..

If it was I dunno Burnley and Brentford?

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[Natchfever]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Surely you understand the rules first and foremost and then stick to them.  Unfair advantage gained.

Henry Winter should know better.

**** Everton .

[Kingswood Robin]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

On a human level, does he have any understanding of the impact its had on fans such as our own where we've had to watch some pretty shite stuff over the past few years whilst we were in austerity to avoid breaching ffp? Why should we potentially lose put to clubs who haven't got themselves in order and have instead cheated? 

The sympathies I'm hearing for Forest goes alone the lines of "well they wanted to get out of the Championship so had to spend. They wanted to stay in the premier league so they had to spend to compete" hmmm how about they adjust their ambitions to what's possible within the rules instead of cheating clubs such as our own. 

Completely agree. That side of it never gets mentioned.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Everton. Using a UEFA based and indeed EFL type template to build on the worked example by @Hxj

For £13m use £35m and it should be so impossible to fail such a high bar wirh £100m in TV money bare minimum plus decent allowable costs etc etc.

2019-20 and 2020-21 combined average..

If £20m after allowables and Covid it remains £20m.

If £35m it remains £35m.

If say £50m or even £1 above £35m it goes back to £35m.

Then the same again for 2021-22.

This forms the basis for 2022-23. Whixh may mean say instead of £50m, £20m..£35m it means £35m, £20m..£50m.

Using a template that maybe was used in the EFL end UEFA.

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[maxjak]

Similar to VAR .............FFP is a complete farce, punishing on occasions the wrong clubs while ignoring other's who are slipping through the cracks with clever financial manoeuvre's  .  I am not saying Everton are an innocent party, but  I believe that FFP is  not the level playing field it purports to be?              

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Similar to VAR .............FFP is a complete farce, punishing on occasions the wrong clubs while ignoring other's who are slipping through the cracks with clever financial manoeuvre's  .  I am not saying Everton are an innocent party, but  I believe that FFP is  not the level playing field it purports to be?              

It has two objectives:

- competition (cough, cough)

- financial security

It doesn’t really do either that well.

[Natchfever]

2 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Similar to VAR .............FFP is a complete farce, punishing on occasions the wrong clubs while ignoring other's who are slipping through the cracks with clever financial manoeuvre's  .  I am not saying Everton are an innocent party, but  I believe that FFP is  not the level playing field it purports to be?              

Im sure it isnt fair  but if youre caught thieving, a defence along the lines of " tom dick and harry stole more than me" wouldnt carry much weight would it.

Everton consider themselves special but are guilty as charged so suck it up.

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.goodisonnews.com/2024/01/15/ally-mccoist-and-jeff-stelling-rant-live-on-talksport-as-another-everton-points-deduction-mooted/

I can tell Jeff and I like Jeff from his Soccer Saturday days exactly what Everton could have done.

January 2022

*Sacking Benitez and replacing with Lampard added £10-11m to their losses for one.

*Adding Patterson for £16m, 5.5 years-£1.45m in amortisation and then you add wages for 5-6 months.

Adding Mykolenko for £17.9m, 4.5 years-£1.98m then you add 5-6 months of wages.

*El Ghazi- maybe a loan fee plus 5-6 months wages.

*Van De Beek- £0.5m loan fee plus 5-6 months wages.

Alli- No fee or loan fee but he was on major wages at Tottenham.

Oddly they were adjudged to have breached by £19.5m.a transfer free January and I reckon they squeak in!

Digne sold, Richarlison sold of course but they had one summer window and couldn't hack the financial discipline. They probably failed due to the January 2022 activity. By their own admission they expected to finish higher prize money etc..own fault.

They gambled and lost FFP wise but stayed up. Suck it up.

[maxjak]

8 minutes ago, Natchfever said:

Im sure it isnt fair  but if youre caught thieving, a defence along the lines of " tom dick and harry stole more than me" wouldnt carry much weight would it.

Everton consider themselves special but are guilty as charged so suck it up.

Sorry but i find that that a little simplistic and glib?   FFP is by no means a perfect model, and it needs to be refined and reviewed, as i do not believe it is achieving it's aims.  Everton are being hung out to dry, but theyr'e ; other clubs sailing very close to the wind.  I think FFP is failing in it's objectives and needs to be totally overhauled.       "Suck it up"?  Really??

Edited January 15 by maxjak

[Natchfever]

7 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Sorry but i find that that a little simplistic and glib?   FFP is by no means a perfect model, and it needs to be refined and reviewed, as i do not believe it is achieving it's aims.  Everton are being hung out to dry, but theyr'e ; other clubs sailing very close to the wind.  I think FFP is failing in it's objectives and needs to be totally overhauled.       "Suck it up"?  Really??

Yes suck it up Everton.

Hopefully other offenders will be dealt with in due course.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Henry Winter citing elements of the Everton defence, what a load of arrogant nonsense from the club again. This section jumps out.

"Everton believe PL appears to accept the current PSR rules are flawed as they’re changing them in August. Part of EFC defence is that current rules have not taken into account inflation, spiralling transfer fees etc. Club believe that under the incoming PSR rules their accounts would be compliant"

Good that means we didn't need to sell Semenyo because we would be compliant with the new rules so no need to risk a fail last year.

"Not keeping up with transfer fees" misses a key bloody tenent of the rules. Which is unspoken but clearly dampening down fees and wages is an objective. Or cap, stall the inflation anyway.

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[1960maaan]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

"Everton believe PL appears to accept the current PSR rules are flawed as they’re changing them in August. Part of EFC defence is that current rules have not taken into account inflation, spiralling transfer fees etc.

So if inflation was at it's highest, say 10%, that would put allowances at £115m over the 3 years.
The case they admitted was over by miles , if my sums are anywhere near (up the page a bit) the £200m loss for the last 3 years is still over by some way. 

But they have fans that will be upset so there's that. 
 

[Kid in the Riot]

Good that the PL are finally clamping down, but the elephant in the room is Man City.

If found guilty, and it's hard to believe they aren't guilty of at least one of the 115 charges (those in the know suggest they are very much guilty on multiple counts), then they need to be absolutely clobbered by fines and penalties; particularly as they've denied the charges, threatened journalists that originally reported on the case, and are using the legal process to delay proceedings against them. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Good that the PL are finally clamping down, but the elephant in the room is Man City.

If found guilty, and it's hard to believe they aren't guilty of at least one of the 115 charges (those in the know suggest they are very much guilty on multiple counts), then they need to be absolutely clobbered by fines and penalties; particularly as they've denied the charges, threatened journalists that originally reported on the case, and are using the legal process to delay proceedings against them. 

According to an article by Mike Keegan the Hearing is October 2024.

Presumably any penalties and appeal, therefore final disposition would be settled in 2024-25 or by the end. 

A lot of this Man City saga especially could have been avoided with Proactive monitoring from the getgo, it's such a mess the main body of charges runs from 2009 to 2016 or 2018 and then obviously non-cooperation charges from then to perhaps present.

Dunno how quickly historic alleged infractions can be unpicked. Hopefully by Summer 2025 all will be settled for once and all.

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

Well well well look which industry just can't stop regulating itself.

Transparent desperate pricks.

[Open End Numb Legs]

I can't help but see an analogy here.

A footballer hacks down an opponent, the ref blows his whistle and the culprit looks horrified, throws his hands in the air and screams innocence at the ref.

Similarly, a club flouts the rules, gets caught, they throw their hands in the air and scream innocence through their lawyers.

Both a form of cheating.

[Loco Rojo]

14 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Good that the PL are finally clamping down, but the elephant in the room is Man City.

If found guilty, and it's hard to believe they aren't guilty of at least one of the 115 charges (those in the know suggest they are very much guilty on multiple counts), then they need to be absolutely clobbered by fines and penalties; particularly as they've denied the charges, threatened journalists that originally reported on the case, and are using the legal process to delay proceedings against them. 

Be interesting to see the PL punish one of their crown jewels. Bet there are a few squirming at the potential of having to do that.  Unfortunately i can see Man City getting away with it. Which will probably mean the 'smaller' cannon fodder clubs in the PL being punished on far less terms to make a point but not result in relegation. 

[Kid in the Riot]

14 minutes ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

I can't help but see an analogy here.

A footballer hacks down an opponent, the ref blows his whistle and the culprit looks horrified, throws his hands in the air and screams innocence at the ref.

Similarly, a club flouts the rules, gets caught, they throw their hands in the air and scream innocence through their lawyers.

Both a form of cheating.

It needs to be remembered that the clubs help make, and agree, to the rules as well. 

Particularly established EPL clubs like Man C and Everton are well aware of what the rules are, signed up to them, and still break them.

For me, that's even more deceitful than if the rules were set by an independent governing body. To be knowingly breaking rules which you helped create... 

[Open End Numb Legs]

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

It needs to be remembered that the clubs help make, and agree, to the rules as well. 

Particularly established EPL clubs like Man C and Everton are well aware of what the rules are, signed up to them, and still break them.

For me, that's even more deceitful than if the rules were set by an independent governing body. To be knowingly breaking rules which you helped create... 

My analogy gets worse in these cases as I see a player bringing down an opponent as a crime of passion, a spur of the moment thing. Breaking FFP rules is something that happens in slow time, it is a consequence of meetings that look at costs and finances, considers the rules and then breaks them even though they know it is wrong. That is probably why I have very little sympathy.

[Mr Popodopolous]

32 minutes ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

My analogy gets worse in these cases as I see a player bringing down an opponent as a crime of passion, a spur of the moment thing. Breaking FFP rules is something that happens in slow time, it is a consequence of meetings that look at costs and finances, considers the rules and then breaks them even though they know it is wrong. That is probably why I have very little sympathy.

Broadly speaking agree although sometimes there is a bit of blind panic as a deadline approaches and teams either fall foul or scramble clear.

See Stoke, who I have a major issue with btw given their Covid arguments, it was reported on 27th May 2021 that they were wet to 'sell' the stadium, as it turned out the training ground too..Bet365 no less, funny old world eh. Their accounts claimed it was done on May 28th 2021 and the reason for blind panic was Reporting Period deadline 31st May 2021.

Now I wonder if this was actually done in line with their Accounting Period as the Land Registry showed an odd entry for the Bet365 Stadium..

Edited January 15 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

I can accept that perhaps if there is a binding contract but given any transactions after 31st May wouldn't be accepted for FFP due to the rule change..should the change of Ownership have not been done by then.

Land Registry had major Covid related backlogs but all a bit strange.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Stoke City Holdings is/was the consolidator and Stoke City Property owned the ground and leased it to Stoke City FC.

Quite surprising then to see after the Reporting Deadline for the accounts, Stoke City Property still listed as owning...the Stoke City accounts and Bet365 accounts stated 28th May 2021.

[Loderingo]

Everton fans keep moaning about how badly they've been treated but as I see it they have been very lucky. If the FFP penalty had been applied last season, then they would have been definitely relegated instead of Leicester.

If you take the on-pitch points and pro-rata, you get:

Everton = 49 points

________________

Luton = 30 points

Burnley = 22 points

Sheff U = 17 points

so even with a 10 or even 12 point deduction Everton ought to stay up moderately comfortably.  The only thing that might cost Everton is if they firesale players in Jan.

There's also Forest who pro rata to 38 points.  They would be more at risk than Everton with a suggested 6-point penalty.

[Mr Popodopolous]

They would have dropped last year more than likely and 2021-22 as well.

Double reprieve really.

[W-S-M Seagull]

6 hours ago, maxjak said:

Sorry but i find that that a little simplistic and glib?   FFP is by no means a perfect model, and it needs to be refined and reviewed, as i do not believe it is achieving it's aims.  Everton are being hung out to dry, but theyr'e ; other clubs sailing very close to the wind.  I think FFP is failing in it's objectives and needs to be totally overhauled.       "Suck it up"?  Really??

Oh it's very much achieving its aims. The aims are to allow the big clubs to spend but the smaller clubs can't, even if they suddenly get taken over by Elon Musk. It keeps the big clubs big and the small clubs small. It protects the status quo. Uefa and the PL did not want another Man City or Chelsea. 

They are not being hung out to dry. They admitted the 1st breach and they have admitted the second breach. They will try and mitigate things to lower the punishment but ultimately they have now twice admitted breaching. 

Yes they need to suck up their breach and punishments and once theyve finished doing that, do aome more sucking it up. 

Clubs like Leicester were unfsirly relegate because Everton cheated and cheated. We'd be fuming if we were on the other end of their cheating. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

They would have dropped last year more than likely and 2021-22 as well.

Double reprieve really.

And not only dropped but almost certainly fell into administration. Potentially a double relegation. 

Whilst its a very loose connection even we can claim we've been cheated by Everton in a small way. Leicester would have stayed up ao therefore we wouldn't have lost to Leicester. We could have beat a severely weakened Everton instead. With a deduction in the Championship we could be one place higher. Maybe as a premier league club Leicester would have came in and offered 5 million more for Alex Scott. You get what I'm saying. There is obviously a more direct link of us and the other Championship clubs being cheated by Forest. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

Awhh the headlines today are that they may be forced to sell players such as Jarrad Branthwaite. Let's get the violins out for the poor darlings. 

Should have sold players before and they'd not find themselves in this self imposed mess. 

 

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

And not only dropped but almost certainly fell into administration. Potentially a double relegation. 

Whilst its a very loose connection even we can claim we've been cheated by Everton in a small way. Leicester would have stayed up ao therefore we wouldn't have lost to Leicester. We could have beat a severely weakened Everton instead. With a deduction in the Championship we could be one place higher. Maybe as a premier league club Leicester would have came in and offered 5 million more for Alex Scott. You get what I'm saying. There is obviously a more direct link of us and the other Championship clubs being cheated by Forest. 

Everton probably would've failed the FFP rules at this level too, how quickly who knows but a real tailspin.

The firesale I dread to think.. some had relegation reduction clauses but if they failed seemingly on PL momey and the year Gordon sold, lop £60m or more off TV cash (PL - Parachutes and EFL) and £22m odd the Upper Loss limit..

Edited January 16 by Mr Popodopolous

[Natchfever]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Everton probably would've failed the FFP rules at this level too, how quickly who knows but a real tailspin.

The firesale I dread to think.. some had relegation reduction clauses but if they failed seemingly on PL momey and the year Gordon sold, lop £60m or more off TV cash (PL - Parachutes and EFL) and £22m odd the Upper Loss limit..

Irresponsible shower, hopefully they will face the sanctions they voted for.

Arrogant *****.

[W-S-M Seagull]

@Mr Popodopolous I heard Simon Jordan speaking about Evertons claims this morning and he totally rubbished it. 

He said something along the lines of when one year drops off then its another year gets added so a new cycle is created and they continued to spend in that year and therefore breached the rules in the new 3 ywar cycle too. He said there is nothing in the rules with any provisions for double punishments, rules Everton signed up for. 

I tend to agree with that. 

Edited January 16 by W-S-M Seagull

[Mr Popodopolous]

As I said a few months ago, vindication.

O'Neil has used this in respect of their summer 2023 transfer policy.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68003939

[Curr Avon]

The Exploding Heads nail it (as usual)

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Hmm I fancy Chelsea are well over atm in the present period..if so they have at best until June 30th 2024 to sell as many players as needed etc.

Man City, the Hearing is as per one or two reports pencilled in for Autumn 2024...shame these things aren't public or streamed but I guess it is necessary.

Edited January 17 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

As for Everton, the first I can find on fan Protests goes back to January 2022. Some try to rewrite history a bit. Poorly run sure but..

https://archive.is/2022.01.23-163912/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2022/01/23/inside-evertons-civil-war-sparsely-attended-protests-rudderless/

Nothing I can see there about overspending or concerns of that nature.

This was when they were lower midtable to bottom 3rd under Benitez as he begun the process of necessary cost cutting..Gray and Townsend a combined £1.5m, offloading Rodriguez and obviously results can suffer.

They couldn't stick the financial discipline path more than one window. I know that subsequent sales existed but subsequent to the article in came Alli plus El Ghazi and Van De Beek on loan..Benitez had just been sacked which cost millions more.

Edited January 17 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Evertonians eh, I really hope they get hammered this time around. 

It is an interesting countefactual tbh but any club trying it deserves to get absolutely hammered.

 

I'd have thought that should yield a far bigger deduction.  Talking 15-20 points and recurring deductions for recurring breaches and probably stricter embargoes too.

Edited January 18 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

On a different note, I wonder if they have and not only them, got their books in order for the 2024 Test.

ie to the present season, Projections go in March 2024.

[Sir Geoff]

On 15/01/2024 at 21:24, Loderingo said:

Everton fans keep moaning about how badly they've been treated but as I see it they have been very lucky. If the FFP penalty had been applied last season, then they would have been definitely relegated instead of Leicester.

If you take the on-pitch points and pro-rata, you get:

Everton = 49 points

________________

Luton = 30 points

Burnley = 22 points

Sheff U = 17 points

so even with a 10 or even 12 point deduction Everton ought to stay up moderately comfortably.  The only thing that might cost Everton is if they firesale players in Jan.

There's also Forest who pro rata to 38 points.  They would be more at risk than Everton with a suggested 6-point penalty.

Not if the takeover by 777 doesn't go through. Then they could be looking at administration, due to the fact they owe 777 at least £50 million in unsecured loans (maybe more).

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-supporters-submit-case-against-28474925

[chinapig]

A good piece from Jonathan Liew that dismantles the arguments made by Everton fans in particular and points out that the PL (ie the clubs) should have dealt with reckless spending years ago.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2024/jan/23/in-footballs-crisis-of-trust-the-premier-league-as-referee-is-hard-to-stomach

[Mr Popodopolous]

Good article, thanks for posting.

I quite like this new era of FFP oversight. 20 years overdue but it has potential to reward the prudent and stall or check the profligate.

Wasn't even a thing when Abramovich arrived, barely when Sheikh Mansour arrived, not properly implemented 5-10 years ago. Bournemouth, Leicester and Aston Villa all benefited from lax areas in the system. QPR did short term but got clobbered in the end.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Obviously there is an issue as to new entrants but they can build their way up over time to some degree. Newcastle with 52k at St James Park perhaps have a bit of a headstart on many but with lots of scope and need for growth still.. how their ries to Saudi Arabia play out remains to be seen.

[W-S-M Seagull]

13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-supporters-submit-case-against-28474925

So are they going to also allow submissions from fans of clubs such as Leicester detailing the impact Evertons cheating has had on their clubs? 

Ultimately Everton fans are still watching their team in the premier league because of the cheating. They would be well advised to shut up. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

So are they going to also allow submissions from fans of clubs such as Leicester detailing the impact Evertons cheating has had on their clubs? 

Ultimately Everton fans are still watching their team in the premier league because of the cheating. They would be well advised to shut up. 

Totally agree.

Burnley another and frankly cleaner one given they have always been miles clear of FFP, had been run along such prudent lines...possible that Everton had breached 2 seasons in the bounce thereby impacting the relegation battle and prospects of not one but two sides.

They should take it on the chin gracefully this and any subsequent sanctions Everton and their fans.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Burnley made a £36m pre tax profit in 2021-22, which was the first FFP period that Everton failed.

Some of that was brought about by relegation oddly because their accounts run until July 31st to sales from late May/early June to end of July count in that period but still. What of the impact on them and their fans.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The other thing that is good about better enforcement is that, unless you are well run in the first place you can't buy your way out of trouble, a sticky patch or buy your way back to momentum in January.

You have to coach, you have to work..find solutions. Some managers are better at this than others.

Edited January 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[chinapig]

17 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

The other thing that is good about better enforcement is that, unless you are well run in the first place you can't buy your way out of trouble, a sticky patch or buy your way back to momentum in January.

You have to coach, you have to work..find solutions. Some managers are better at this than others.

Or copy La Liga and have a budget assigned for the gross salaries and any amortisation for the entire squad plus coaching staff ahead of the season.

Even if a club later increases revenue e.g. new sponsorship they can only add a maximum of 30% of that to their budget.

Prevention is better than cure.

[Portland Bill]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

So are they going to also allow submissions from fans of clubs such as Leicester detailing the impact Evertons cheating has had on their clubs? 

Ultimately Everton fans are still watching their team in the premier league because of the cheating. They would be well advised to shut up. 

Weren’t Leicester one of the clubs that cheated ffp in the Championship? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

Weren’t Leicester one of the clubs that cheated ffp in the Championship? 

Yes, ironically I wonder about their compliance to the present season in respect of the 3 year rule..mainly but not 100 pct due to their major loss in 2021-22.

2014 They failed and there were wider questions pertaining to a sponsorship arrangement with Trestellar.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/11/leicester-city-finances-football-league-financial-fair-play-investigation

One that confuses me is how Bournemouth the to their income net of TV cash and Fulham due to their seemingly regularly free spending ways/big losses seem to comply at all times. (I know they failed the old rules, fine and embargo respectively).

[Ska Junkie]

I haven't read the whole thread so please excuse if this has been covered already but why are Everton being deducted points / have been already yet Man C, Chelsea and Forest haven't?

Surely the same rules apply to City, Chelsea etc yet they've had no penalties.

Could anyone explain this for me as surely consistency is necessary?

Thanks.

Edited January 23 by Ska Junkie

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

I haven't read the whole thread so please excuse if this has been covered already but why are Everton being deducted points / have been already yet Man C, Chelsea and Forest haven't?

Surely the same rules apply to City, Chelsea etc yet they've had no penalties.

Could anyone explain this for me as surely consistency is necessary?

Thanks.

I'll try as a starting point Ska. Taking each club in turn.

The present and more straightforward matters

Everton

A) Deemed in breach of the period ending 2021-22 ie the period of 2018-19, the combined average due to Covid of 2019-20 and 2020-21, then 2021-22.

Even after sales, Covid allowables, averaging, usual allowables and Stadium related expenditure albeit not necessarily interest they overspent.  Overspending generally means deduction..

B) Also the baseline numbers seem to show a potential breach to the period ending 2022-23. Namely 2019-20, 2020-21 average, 2021-22 and 2022-23.

There is an argument pertaining to overlap or excess losses in one period impacting the next and maybe the next. The EFL and UEFA have some partial reset, e.g. excess of Upper Loss limit in one year reset down to it..say £55m P&S Loss in one year reset to £35m.

I guess that side of it remains to be seen.

Nottingham Forest

In simple terms, they're deemed to have breached the Spending Limits to 2022-23. 2 Championship seasons and 1 PL season.

£13m, £13m and £35m.

Personally I thought they were in bigger danger of breaching to the year they went up rather than last season but they should certainly face a points deduction.

The submission for P&S form at PL level seems to lack an allowable for Promotion Bonuses which is strange but if applied back to 2016-17 and reassessed that way Aston Villa, Wolves, Bournemouth probably, Fulham once or more and maybe even Leeds would all fail.

Logic dictates that they should be excluded if properly evidenced as they're entirely contingent on promotion..but the form seems not to show a space for it. Computer says no??

A key pillar of the Nottingham Forest defence or mitigation appears to be based on the sale of Brennan Johnson and whether they should be allowed to or can include it in the 2022-23 Accounts. I also question their Covid losses for the year they went up, believe it could have unduly assisted with compliance for that period.

More Complex cases

Man City

115 Charges. A Hearing is reportedly due in the Autumn of 2024. It takes a lot of unpicking had Man City see reportedly contesting all the way.

Their accounts now and the last several years will be way within, the question is and it is very serious, to what extent was their rise up clean and compliant. There should have been far more real time analysis at PL and UEFA level.

Even if they had say excess sponsorship now, perhaps last 7-8 years, I believe that their success, growth in profile, prize money, player sales and yes legitimate rises in revenue odd the back of success.. they have sufficient headroom to be compliant now, several years and more.

Having to go through however many years, however many transactions...probably lawyers, accountants, Independent valuation experts on both sides.

If they're found guilty, they will surely be absolutely clobbered. Relegation- more than one relegation?

Chelsea

A) It's complex. Todd Boehly and Clewelake reportedly flagged up irregularities that they found when they took over. This is currently under investigation, charges could follow.

A key question then is two-fold. What sanctions should such off the book payment yield if proven and

b) Does it tip Chelsea over PL FFP over the relevant periods.

If yes that is potentially a double punishment or should be.

B) Irrespective of this and totally separate the expectation is that complying to FFP to this season and perhaps beyond will be a huge challenge.

At best if true they have until June 30th to put matters right, otherwise they stand to be charged and referred to an Independent Disciplinary Commission for excess losses/breaching the £105m.

Swiss Ramble respected Football Finance Blogger reckons a £96m hole to this season. We'll see but that would using the mooted formula equate to a 25-26 point deduction.

To clarify my 25-26 point deduction not that season but the number they could be deducted if SwissRamble is correct and the Everton case sets a precedent!

Edited January 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

37 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

I haven't read the whole thread so please excuse if this has been covered already but why are Everton being deducted points / have been already yet Man C, Chelsea and Forest haven't?

Surely the same rules apply to City, Chelsea etc yet they've had no penalties.

Could anyone explain this for me as surely consistency is necessary?

Thanks.

Basically it's because the charges against Everton are very different to the charges against Man City.

Everton have spent too much and so they have breached the P&S Rules (aka FFP). That's a fact that they have admitted, and basically there is now an argument about how much punishment they should receive.

Man City are basically accused of cooking the books and fraud. They have, of course, not admitted this. So there the case need to first be proven before they can be punished. As the accusations against them are covered by some 115 separated allegations, this is taking a very very long time.

The Forest case is similar to Everton, and my boss is chairing the panel running their case and has to issue a decision by April. That will be sorted quickly.

My understanding is that Chelsea currently have no formal allegations to answer. But they are under investigation and have a lot of suspicion and informal allegations swirling so are more a case of watch this space.

Btw all - the Football Governance Bill is expected to be published in the next fortnight, so expect the PL PR machine to go into overdrive on this stuff very soon. 

Edited January 23 by ExiledAjax