RuffRob

Like a lot of our players - Gomes could have a great game, but equally he could end up having a stinker of a game. He's not your mister consistent. I agree that he is likley to have a better impact towards the end of a game when other legs are maybe getting a bit heavy and the game has slowed a little. I aslo think that there can be a benfit for a player like Gomes actually watching the first 50-60mins of a game and then stepping in to it.

This is all getting so frustrating. Given the limbo we are in then, a new owners should give the same 'bounce' effect as a new manager coming in to the club. We are in danger of even missing out on this short term 'positive' of a new enthusiastic owner coming in to the club. We are counting every point at the moment - so any sort of 'boost' would be very much welcome. This short term 'bounce' could easliy be worth 6 points or more - we have not been massively outplayed in games, and results have been down to fairly tight margins, I feel the optomisum of a new ownership permeating around the club could have been massivley beneficial in the bad run of results we are in. If the PL are taking their time over this because there focus has been on FFP hearings, then we really have had the shit end of the stick with double whammy of a points deductions (or two!), and currently missing out on a potential new optomisum bounce. I cant wait for this season to be finished and it fuck all to do with the football or board at the club this time around. All pretty much down to the PL and the fact its as poorly run as Everton football club has been run in the past. As fans we have suffered our own internal shortcoming, but we also seem to be the fans suffering the most from PL shortcoming as well.

I now have my fingers crossed that Newcastle's disallowed goal will turn out to be a turning point in our recent fortunes when that goal went in, Forest where breathing down our necks to go above us in the table tonight.

Good point tonight to help the team going in to the Burnley game on a positive note. Will only truly be a good point if another three are added to it in our next game.

got to try and now make the most of the life line of that goal being disallowed.

you have to take these games as a free hit to try and do something different. Newcastle away is not and easy game and on paper might not really expect a result. However, they have a lot of players out, so it is a chance to have a real good go at them and Newcastle are not City or Arsenal. Are regard to Bournemouth game, I am never quite sure if and enforced break between games is a particulary good thing. Extra few days - great, but extra two weeks just throws routine. We are becoming desperate for 3 points to ease nerves. Just fucking go fot it, in a game like this,

Being a Everton F.C scrutinising 'panel member' could potentially be offered as a University course.

The more I read (and see) about the stadium, I can't help think how did the club seem to get so much so right with this project (maybe bar the financing), yet fucked pretty much every other aspect of the club up so badly. You wouldn't think its the same club. The location is brillient - right on the edge of the iconic Mersy and in the heart of the docks on which the city was built and is famous for. So much effort and consideration has been made with the regard to getting the best possible atmosphere out of it when its full of Evertonians. Once the bums are on seats and the whistle goes for kick off - how the place 'feels' for those the 90mins (or 100mins these days) is probabley the one if not the most important things for both the fan attending and the player wearing the blue shirt. We have heard so much negative comments from fans moving in to new shiny yet soulless stadiums. If we are potentially playing in it for argubley a 100years, I am so glad so much attention has been paid to this aspect of the stadium. Proof will be in the pudding though . It also sounds like so much thought has gone in to the revenue it can generate both on match days and beyond. Litttle things like making a the 'tunnel' resturant area with high game to game availablity so the buzz in the area doesn't become stale just with to much corporate hospitality is a nice touch. Some seasons ticket seats at £50,000 a pair. If some people got the money and happy to spend it then get them sat down. I think the design if clever, with the lower rectanguar brick clad area extending out further than the traditional stadium oval bowl shape. Doing this they have created so much more practical and usable space and importantly revenue producing space, which over the year and decades will hold us in good stead. It might not be the 'sexiest' looking design as ultra modern stadiums go, but the stadium has it's own unique look and feel about it - It also look like is belongs in this location. I do like the fact it has very destincive sides and vistas to it and with a well thought out lighting system to it (I assume will be a gives), its going to look amazing for night games. The stadium is not overly flashy, but is innoative and practical, it would not be suprise to see much of it copied on other future new grounds.

yeah, I have also worked for 25 years in the heavy civils industry, although more on the design side. Very tight margins in this type of construction and actually hard to turn a profit and generally a high risk of losing money. Important that you sort a good contract our at the beginning. Laing will have sorted a decent contract out give the cost of living crisis kicking in and Everton's financial model of not actually having all the funds in place when Contract was drawn up.

If John Stones sold for £50M way back in 2006, then as the owner club I would I'd be slapping a nice round £100m valuation on him - He's a CB that a club could built a whole team around for a decade plus. He is already part of one of the tightest defences in the Premiership and chips in with goals- and argubley first name on our teamsheet. Pay up of fuck off. Other clubs are cashing in on £100m transfer fees for in demand player and we should be doing the same.

Typical profit margin for contractors in the heavy civils construction industry is closer to around 5%. If a contractor came away with a clear 5% profit on a project of this value he will be very happy.

love the fact all these media outlets seem to know Evertons asking price or what team X, Y or Z are will or not willing to pay. They know fuck all, becasue we don't even know who will own the club when the next transfer window opens!! If somebody is paying £700 to £800M for the club (plus other stadium costs) - then Branthwaithe value possibly covers around 10% of that!! He is going nowhere without any the new owners having a say on if he goes and how much they will be letting him go for. If nothing else I hope our new owners know how to play hardball in the transfer market.

Looking at what Forest got, then I feel we should have been reduced to 4 points in the appeal ( shame we can't appeal and appeal!!). So to me we should already be considered to be 2 deducted points in credit going in to the next hearing (but I am sure that will not be considered). We have been a club working toward meeting the rules over a few seasons now - so massive intent to do the right thing (unlike forest). Forest hung on to a player past financial deadline day, we ensured we sold our biggest asset before financial cut off. We could argue we miss out on extra money from Richarlison sale in the financial year now under consideration? Forest have already demonstrated that a player IS worth considerabley more at the end of August that he is in June. but fuck knows how they will work it all out, I have no faith in these commissions as the last lots can't even compare apples with apples.

unless they act like grown ups, accept an apology and put it behind them and simply get on with the rest of their lives. There are much more pressing issues to be worrying about that 'Dychegate' at this club and on life in general. Give Dyche a spin on his own naughty boys 'wheel of fortune' as punishment for being a bit of a knob - and underline the whole thing.

Thats what is grinding me - original sanction was 10 points, brought down to 6. People on these panels are surposed to be intelligent yet they cherry pick from original hearing and then appeal. Origianl hearing - Everton are liars so 10 points sanction (Forest commission choose to used 'Everton are liars' in there assessment, but ignore the 10 points) Appeal hearing - Everton are not liars reduced to 6 points. (Forest commission choose to ignore the fact Everton are not liars but then adopt the 6 points). Totally ignore the appeal findings on THE key points (i.e one of only two of items that where upheld in the appeal, so not exactely hidded), but latch on to the concluded points deduction in the appeal. Its just plainly wrong.

you can see in just this forum alone - how a 30-40 word article has be dragged accross the coals, sensationalised and blow out of any sort of proportion, and now there are tens if not hurdreds of thousands of words written about an incident but that in realliy 99.99% have no fucking clue about any details, peoples intent etc as they where not privy to it first hand - the vast majoiryt is conjector to suit any individuals own narratives. There was an uncomfortable or embarresing (word used in the original article) 'incident' and even in the souce article its sound like I was simply dealt with fairly qucikly like mature grown up. A senior Player appear comfortable in approaching the boss to call him out about it (in original article) and the boss apologies for it (in the original article). A sign off the times and perhaps subtle difference in the expectations and banter (for want of a better word) of different generations. I am sure everybody will learn from the incident, and that all you can resonably expect from people.

The three learned people in the Forest Commisson couldn't figure out why Everton actually got 6 points. Paragraph 14.15 is extracted below. 14.15 In the case at hand, the Commission considered whether there were any additional factors that should be taken into account - the “unique” position and/or the reasons for the excess. The conclusion was that these did not (nor were they mitigating factors, see above) and the only factor driving Forest up the scale will be the size of the breach. It was bigger than Everton’s, but both were in the “significant” breach band. However, there was no additional consideration around incorrect information being provided to the Premier League, as Everton had. The Commission does not know how the three extra points were arrived at by the Appeal Board for Everton, but some part of those three points must relate to the provision of incorrect information. Forest’s breach (not its losses, the Commission is concerned with the breach of the PSR Threshold) was larger than Everton’s and as a result, that alone slides it up the scale by three further points to a starting point of six points" What is very frustration is that 'incorrect infomation' (or being 'less than frank' as was the term used in Evertons hearings) refers to our original hearing only - for which we where given 10 points (not 6 points). However, in our appeal the hearing found that Everton's original hearing was wrong to say Everton had been 'less than frank' and our claim on this was upheld in the appeal. So we got some of the 10 points back, helping to bring our punishment down to 6 point from the original 10. Not up from 3 to 6. Another frustration is that a £19.5m and £34.5m are somehow classed in the very same bracket of ' a significant' breach. Convinient! I went on a few Forest fan forums yesterday, although they are pissed off at having point taken off them, pretty much all of they saying they through it would be more points taken off them, and the club should just take the 4 and do without the shadow of an appeal hanging over the fans, club and players for the rest og their games, maybe to possibley get 1 point back. A fucking luxury Everton have not had for four months as we had massive 10 points deduction around our neck for the best part of this season, so had no choice but to go through the internal stress of an appeal (and turns out justifibly so). Forest have dodged a bullet in my eyes and Everton have had the shitty end of the stick.

I don't think the Johnson argument held any water as a mitigation factor in the final.judgement. The way I have read the judgement it is that Forest reduction from 6 points to 4 point is due only to the mitigating factor that Forest was being up front and basically admitted everything and rolled over to the PL and the commission. what annoys me in Forests judgement is it tries to make out that Everton where less than frank in our charge. However, in our appeal one of the two 9 points upheld was that the original hearing was wrong to state that Everton have been 'less than frank'. Forest appear to have 2 points (33%) knocked off their punishment for being frank.

Reading Forest reaction to the judgment you can see they are very disappointed that the arse kissing grovelling approach to the PL didn't get them a zero points deduction. However, even Forest's response is cringingly asre kissing to the PL and commission. Is this what it's all coming down to.? Should 'small' clubs not stick up for themselves and fight their corner. How dare we!

I agree, especially as we where pretty much the test case for this type of thing. As you read through it in more detail it appear to be that we have been well and truly screwed as 'the first' case. I feel a bit of a shit saying Forest should get more points (in fact part of the judgement says compared to our beach - 8 points would be pro rata punshment give the size of their breach), becasue I don't think us or them should get points taken off them, but it obviolsey effects our league position. We are just clubs battling to try and somehow compeate in this league. My gut feeling is they have been given a reduced sentance of 4 points to stop them appealing. Judgement hints at 8 points, charges them 6, and reduced in by 2 for Forest holding their hands up and being so co-operative.

And this is how you get 2 points knocked of a 6 point punishment. You just have to bendover like a bitch to the Premiership!!! or have the advantage of not being the first to be screwed. 12.104 The Premier League agreed with the Appeal Board in the Everton Appeal, in that there is a level of cooperation that is reasonably expected by all clubs in the Premier League. In this case, it considers that Forest has indeed displayed a level of cooperation which is above the level reasonably expected. Forest has consistently indicated it intended to cooperate and has been very receptive to indications from the Premier League as to what would be required in this regard. Its cooperation commenced prior to the submission of its Annual Accounts at the end of December 2023 and has continued thereafter. By doing so, it has significantly reduced the costs of enforcement and assisted this Commission. It is desirable that such cooperation be recognised and given credit, both because it is deserved, and in order to create appropriate incentives for respondent clubs in future PSR cases. 12.105 The Commission agrees with the Premier League and commends Forest for its early plea and for the cooperative way it has conducted itself throughout this matter. Without this approach, it would not have been possible to conclude the process, including a two-day hearing, in just eight weeks from the Complaint. It is crucially important to the Premier League, all its clubs and the fans around the world that these types of matters are dealt with expeditiously, so the 18-Mar-24 42 competition can be concluded on the pitch.

Forest breach was £34.5M on a £61M threshold - so 56% breach of the rules. Everton was £19.5M on £105M threshold - so 19% breach of the rules. Both fall in the 'signifcant breach' bracket apparently.

The whole thing is a fucking joke!!!

basically saying Forest breach was bigger than ours, but both are significant. This judgement says it's not sure why Everton have 6 points, so they have assumed our total deduction must be becasue we tried to mislead. An interesting Extract of interest to us. "If the context was such and/or the quantum at the lower end of a significant breach, then the starting point might slide down the scale in terms of points and conversely, absent any contextual justification and/or with a higher quantum within the significant breach band, the starting point should slide upwards in terms of points. The Commission notes with Everton, there were a couple of factors that moved it up the scale to a starting point of six points - the size of the breach itself and what was initially termed as “misleading” the Premier League, but on appeal shown to be “incorrect” information being provided to the Premier League. 14.15 In the case at hand, the Commission considered whether there were any additional factors that should be taken into account - the “unique” position and/or the reasons for the excess. The conclusion was that these did not (nor were they mitigating factors, see above) and the only factor driving Forest up the scale will be the size of the breach. It was bigger than Everton’s, but both were in the “significant” breach band. However, there was no additional consideration around incorrect information being provided to the Premier League, as Everton had. The Commission does not know how the three extra points were arrived at by the Appeal Board for Everton, but some part of those three points must relate to the provision of incorrect information. Forest’s breach (not its losses, the Commission is concerned with the breach of the PSR Threshold) was larger than Everton’s and as a result, that alone slides it up the scale by three further points to a starting point of six points"

I think they pretty much said that a points deduction is an appropriate punishment for a breach- and that 6 points was appropriate for our breach - but doing think it crystal clear that 6 points was a absolute minimum, becasue it sounded like you could claw points back for good things an offending club did. Maybe they did get 6, but reduce for 4 becasue they did have the intent to sell a player (it was just a few months late to maximise his sale value). It will all be very interesting to read.