Cornish Steve

I confess that it's my natural inclination toward unnecessary and loquacious verbosity that may at times obscure a simple and straightforward message to the point of absurd or even confusing hyperbole.

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

I confess that it's my natural inclination toward unnecessary and loquacious verbosity that may at times obscure a simple and straightforward message to the point of absurd or even confusing hyperbole.

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.

I think for everybody’s sanity we need to pause this thread until after the appeal. Clearly mitigation is not in Palfys vocabulary so no matter how many people try to explain why we have a case he isn’t going to accept it
Lets just hope Palfy doesn’t get appointed to the panel for the appeal hearing or we are all fucked !

That'll be a no then

Because we've been too nice. We showed that we wanted to collaborate with the PL the whole time and be good boys during the takeover. 
Not sure why you're so animated about it, it's not a matter of head in the sand, althoygh maybe it is because you seem to being doing just that 
Its more a matter of looking at the whole picture. We already know that the owner and board put us at risk. However, they kept us within those limits based on the initial rules. The PL then changed the rules and, whilst signing off on our books, never once thought to tell us that those interests on construction loans dont count towards construction costs (which is fucking stupid) dismissed "daily events that all companies should plan for" like one of your biggest assets being falsely accused of paedophilia writing £30m off the books or war in Europe after 80 years of peace. You know, daily events in a company's life. 
Moshiri and Co have made stupid decisions, but we would be more comfortable if not for the PL moving goalposts and signing off on books and expenses they know would be questioned. 

Palfy we get it, you want to ignore the changing of the rules and all of the mitigating factors, as did the PL and the so called ‘independent’ panel
However a lot of very intelligent and very qualified people believe this is grossly unfair and unjust so I do think people are right to be angry with how the PL have handled this
Nobody needs to get there head out of the sand because everyone is in agreement that rules were broken and that Moshiri and co have been negligent in their duties and are 100% to blame for getting us into this mess
But the irony is the years of profligacy are not in scope for these sanctions. Under Kevin Thellwell Everton have long been towing the party line and cutting their cloth accordingly. Over the past 5 years only Brighton have a lower net spend and the wage bill has been slashed. We have also been in constant dialogue with the PL over every deal we have made. These are all indicators of a club doing everything they can to play by the rules not a club flagrantly flouting them. 
The powers that be have even said they are satisfied that there was no deliberate breach and that no sporting advantage was gained yet in their infinite wisdom decided the greatest sporting sanction of the competitions  history was an appropriate punishment and that it’s fair to charge us twice for the same set of accounts
Now if you believe that is fair then fair enough you are entitled to your opinion but personally I think we have a case to get the entire case thrown out especially given the fact they are changing the rules again in the summer
 
 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

Round 20 produced an awful result, which no-one predicted. Only dunlopp and Matt scored two points, the winning total for this round. For the busy month of December, Romey and sibdane were joint winners, although neither managed to top TT Average. For the season, Boston Toffee retains the lead.
We can take stock after 20 games and the end of 2023. The winner per prediction is Bill. He was the inspiration for this weekly prediction game - I only took it over when he struggled to find the time - so it's fitting that he should come out on top. His sad passing is the end of an era.

Round 20 produced an awful result, which no-one predicted. Only dunlopp and Matt scored two points, the winning total for this round. For the busy month of December, Romey and sibdane were joint winners, although neither managed to top TT Average. For the season, Boston Toffee retains the lead.
We can take stock after 20 games and the end of 2023. The winner per prediction is Bill. He was the inspiration for this weekly prediction game - I only took it over when he struggled to find the time - so it's fitting that he should come out on top. His sad passing is the end of an era.

Round 20 produced an awful result, which no-one predicted. Only dunlopp and Matt scored two points, the winning total for this round. For the busy month of December, Romey and sibdane were joint winners, although neither managed to top TT Average. For the season, Boston Toffee retains the lead.
We can take stock after 20 games and the end of 2023. The winner per prediction is Bill. He was the inspiration for this weekly prediction game - I only took it over when he struggled to find the time - so it's fitting that he should come out on top. His sad passing is the end of an era.

Round 20 produced an awful result, which no-one predicted. Only dunlopp and Matt scored two points, the winning total for this round. For the busy month of December, Romey and sibdane were joint winners, although neither managed to top TT Average. For the season, Boston Toffee retains the lead.
We can take stock after 20 games and the end of 2023. The winner per prediction is Bill. He was the inspiration for this weekly prediction game - I only took it over when he struggled to find the time - so it's fitting that he should come out on top. His sad passing is the end of an era.