Cornish Steve

50 minutes ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Do you even like football?

Yes, especially Premier League football. Focus, focus, focus on survival.

No-one likes to lose, but we don't have the luxury of a squad good enough or deep enough right now for extended cup runs. That's the reality of our situation. The day will come again, for sure, but all that matters right now is surviving another season in the Prem.

8 hours ago, dunlopp9987 said:

Is....is away to Fulham a crucial leaue match?

Absolutely crucial. Fulham is just the type of team we need to beat, so let's hope we won't tire at the end because of first team players playing twice in quick succession.

I was really hoping that Sheffield United would hold on for a 2-2 tie and then win in the replay. They don't have the squad depth to focus on both the league and the cup. The same is true of Luton, though, so today's loss does have a silver lining.

Give some key players an important break before a crucial league match next week.

                        Virginia

Patterson   Keane   Godfrey   Mykolenko

                    Onana   Garner

Harrison          Danjuma              McNeil

                           Beto

7 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Got 75 minutes in for the U21’s v Benfica tonight

There's something a little incongruous about Ashley Young playing for the Under-21s. It would be like watching a player's dad fill in for a missing player to make up the numbers in a school football game.

1 hour ago, Palfy said:

I’m still in Spain back in UK on Friday, I’m not looking forward to my return the weather has been fantastic here low to mid twenties for nearly three and half weeks, just two days rain then sunshine the rest of the time. I hoping I’ve missed the worst of the bad weather you lads have been having, from what I’ve seen on the news and my kids have been telling me it’s been horrendous, so dreading my return, only good thing will be is that I will be able to fill you in a lot more on the pending appeal, I’m sure you can’t wait  

I’ve mistakenly put this in the wrong thread, I am guilty and have no mitigating circumstances to why I did, deduct me as many points as you see fit. 

Hey, what would a thread be without covering a wide range of irrelevant topics?

On 21/01/2024 at 09:35, Matt said:

Stage 1 is now technically possible...

Don't even suggest it.

6 hours ago, Palfy said:

I can imagine your wife dreads asking you what you want lunch, knowing that she won’t get a reply in under a thousand words

You forget where I'm from: the answer is a bisyllabic, 5-letter word.

7 hours ago, Palfy said:

And in a lot less words.

Since you're going to nit-pick, it's 'fewer' and not 'less'.

(Nods to Mike.)

8 hours ago, StevO said:

Look at Steve just driving around with £600 in his wallet. Loaded!!

I wish!

20 hours ago, Hafnia said:

The best example would be.....

an average speed check over 4 miles had you 80mph vs 70 limit. 3 points a £100 fine.
 

You are then consequently assessed a further 1 mile down the road and 3 of the 4 miles you had been caught doing 80mph were now being used to find you guilty of being now an average of 75mph over the previous 4 miles. - given the fact that you were possibly 70mph for the newest mile would you think it's fair? 
 

I would be angry. 

I see you made the same point!

20 hours ago, Hafnia said:

The best example would be.....

an average speed check over 4 miles had you 80mph vs 70 limit. 3 points a £100 fine.
 

You are then consequently assessed a further 1 mile down the road and 3 of the 4 miles you had been caught doing 80mph were now being used to find you guilty of being now an average of 75mph over the previous 4 miles. - given the fact that you were possibly 70mph for the newest mile would you think it's fair? 
 

I would be angry. 

To make the analogy a little closer...

The traffic cop notes your time as you pass by various mile markers. Local statutes demand that they measure your average speed over three miles. On this stretch of road, the speed limit is 65mph. Only if you exceed 65mph over three miles can you be charged with speeding. Here's what they observe:

Mile marker 1: 45 seconds
Mile marker 2: 90 seconds
Mile marker 3: 135 seconds

The police note your total time over 3 miles: 135 seconds. This means you've been doing 80mph. On come the blue lights. You immediately slow down to 60mph (a mile a minute). The police car isn't behind you yet. Maybe you got away with it.

Mile marker 4: 195 seconds
Mile marker 5: 255 seconds

Now they've caught up and pulled you over.

"Sir. From when we started monitoring your speed, we measured it at 80mph over three miles. Did you know the speed limit is 65mph? That'll be a £200 fine." You take out your wallet and hand over the cash. Before you can drive off, the police officer continues: "But we also started monitoring your speed after Mile Marker 1. For the next three miles, you averaged 72mph. That's a second offense. That'll be a £400 fine." You're annoyed. "But from the moment I spotted your blue lights, I slowed to 60mph." The officer smiles as he thinks what he'll do with that £600. "Sorry sir, but the law states that we must measure your speed over a 3-mile stretch of road." Now you're angry: "But you can't fine me twice for speeding over the same stretch of road! Anyway, national law is different." The officer considers this for a moment before continuing: "What matters is my patch, not national law. Now, we also measured your speed for three miles starting at Mile Marker 2. From there, you averaged 65.5mph. Now, I was going to be kind and overlook it, but since you've taken umbrage... that will be £600 for a second repeat offense."

This points out just how ridiculous the whole scenario is. We're being threatened with a second fine when we were already fined for much of the same stretch of road. Either they restart the measurement after three miles or they calculate over one mile. It's ridiculous that they claim the right to fine potentially three times for overspending in just one year.

1 hour ago, Palfy said:

So why did we plead guilty to braking the rules and why aren’t we appealing against the fact we’re found guilty and not just the severity of the punishment. Get your head out of the sand and face the facts we broke sustainability rules because of poor ownership.  

1) The rules changed, and you can't undo a stadium project years after it's planned and begun. That's not about poor ownership.

2) We lost millions in funding when forced to break ties with Russian nationals.

3) As Mike mentioned, we lost millions because of the Gylfi fiasco, for which any reasonable body would make allowance.

Things haven't been perfect, for sure, but it's a cop-out to only blame the owners and executives. If it were me, I would be challenging everything and not accepting guilt at all. We tried to play nice by keeping the league informed of our finances and abiding by their restrictions during transfer windows. Playing nice these days counts for squat.

6 hours ago, Palfy said:

That is probably the best piece of journalism I’ve read on what is happening to us and why. For me I’ve always accepted we have broken sustainability rules I’ve never held the theory that the PL have an agenda against us and are wilfully trying their best to destroy us. As the writer of the article says we need help from the PL to find a solution to our financial problems and penalties aren’t helping us recover and find a fair way forward. Firstly the club need to accept their breaches and ask for more of a solution to the way out, and secondly the PL need to be more helpful to any club who is admitting to it’s failures and is seeking a solution to move forward to sustainability. But what concerns me is that we may have been given a direction from the PL and we didn’t take heed of the advice, but if that is not the case then let’s try and find common ground and solution that helps us instead of the punishments that are making our future unsurvivable in our present circumstances, brought on possible by the worst owner in PL history. 

We differ on this. I do NOT accept that we broke rules - because those rules were changed after the fact, after we'd committed to building a new stadium, after we invested in the community affected by the move, after interest rates soared, and after we lost some funding due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Do correct me if I'm wrong on this point.

The entire case for supposed over-spending is based on two decisions by the league that ought to be contestable in court.

1) Change the rules about stadium spending.

2) Change the cycle for annual calculation.

There's little a team can do when the league changes the rules either at a moment's notice or after the fact. The stadium is a long-term and costly project, and everyone knew that. Not only is the league being unfair to Everton, but it's going to make every team think twice about making such an investment themselves. Frankly, extraordinary financing for stadiums should be separated from regular spending and not be counted.

Applying the same penalty twice in the same season is without precedent and a totally arbitrary decision. Why do that now? Why do it in a season when you know a team will suffer twice?

We can all argue about the number of points to be deducted, or applying a fine instead of a deduction, but I don't see this changing. It's a power play at this point, and league officials will do anything not to lose face - or be subject to an independent commission. Our best recourse, in my opinion, is to take the league to court over these two fundamental issues. Sue them for hundreds of millions. Sue league executives personally.

On 19/01/2024 at 05:12, Matt said:

You're consistent, I'll give you that

 

True, but this is our reality. Money carries the most sway in today's league, so our goal this season must be to maximize it, and that means winning the most TV money that we can. Apologies to sound this beating drum too often, but we really must focus and not be distracted.

On 19/01/2024 at 03:29, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

How did the League Cup cost us two points against Brighton ?

Have the FPL created another Everton only rule, that I don’t know about, in their desire to destroy us?

We tired in that game because the same team had played Burnley a few days earlier. Instead of claiming 3 points, our tiredness toward the end of the game meant we took away just one.

8 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Well we need to bring the loss to below £33m so with all these loans fling around and if 777 deal collapses it may mean a fire sale .Or win the appeal

https://theathletic.com/5208105/2024/01/17/everton-ffp-psr-double-jeopardy-efl/?source=user_shared_article

The single biggest factor will be final position in the table (TV money). Yes, it's nice to have an FA Cup run, but all our focus must be on gaining every single point we can in the league. I'm mad that we let the League Cup cost us two points against Brighton. Play dull; it doesn't matter. Gain points through hard-fought draws; just fine. But we need to win all games against teams in the bottom half.

14 hours ago, Matt said:

 

 

Virginia had a great game. He's matured quite a bit, and his confidence is there.

1 hour ago, MikeO said:

Not too shabby at all!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/68013948

For those outside the UK (or who refuse to use X)...
 

If we can thrash Newcastle, we can beat Villa.

Everton 2-1 Villa
DC-L

Today's the day Manchester City won the league. It's now inevitable.

2 hours ago, c1982 said:

Finally, @patto I think it’s kind of cool that you and @Bill never revealed your link.

In retrospect, the name 'patto' is a bit of a give-away - if only we'd thought of it.

Very sad to hear. Bill was a genuine contributor. Wishing every sympathy to his family.