Longest Thread! for Everton Discussion

[StevO]

On 18/02/2024 at 10:02, Romey 1878 said:

 

The decision on the takeover taking this long is taking the piss though. It's clear that these are fucking charlatans and should have been sent packing a good while ago.

Im pretty sure 777 are the charlatans in this post, but the people taking this long to make a decision could be too. 

[duncanmckenzieismagic]

When the deduction first dropped I wasn't really arsed because we were playing well and scoring freely, I just saw it as a false position in the table as we did not look like a bottom 3 side
But then because the squad is wafer thin a few injuries combined with a tough set of fixtures has completely derailed us
Suddenly we do look like a side that is fighting relegation . There is a very anxious atmosphere in the ground and it's clearly effecting the players
Nobody wants the ball and we are snatching at chances
I think the appeal verdict will dictate whether or not we are a Premier League side next season

[Palfy]

32 minutes ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

When the deduction first dropped I wasn't really arsed because we were playing well and scoring freely, I just saw it as a false position in the table as we did not look like a bottom 3 side
But then because the squad is wafer thin a few injuries combined with a tough set of fixtures has completely derailed us
Suddenly we do look like a side that is fighting relegation . There is a very anxious atmosphere in the ground and it's clearly effecting the players
Nobody wants the ball and we are snatching at chances
I think the appeal verdict will dictate whether or not we are a Premier League side next season

Personally I think we can survive the 10 point deduction already imposed, but if we receive a further points deduction on the second charge then we will playing Championship football next season. As you rightly say one or two injuries are having a huge impact on the team. My biggest problem is how much we are relying on DCL to get our goals which isn’t working out, our summer signing’s of Beto and Chamatti for me were based on DCL getting goals for the team, even though he hasn’t scored in 19 he’s still the 1st striker on the team sheet which is a sad indictment on the other two. We should have combined the fee and wages of those two and went for a striker with a more proven consistency in the top leagues, this could be classed as in hindsight, but for me I would say not, to rely on DCL is a big gamble the reality is he’s had one good season for us in all the years he’s been here, so a big mistake to rely on him this season is record should have told Dyche and co that. 

[Newty82]

5 hours ago, Palfy said:

Personally I think we can survive the 10 point deduction already imposed, but if we receive a further points deduction on the second charge then we will playing Championship football next season. As you rightly say one or two injuries are having a huge impact on the team. My biggest problem is how much we are relying on DCL to get our goals which isn’t working out, our summer signing’s of Beto and Chamatti for me were based on DCL getting goals for the team, even though he hasn’t scored in 19 he’s still the 1st striker on the team sheet which is a sad indictment on the other two. We should have combined the fee and wages of those two and went for a striker with a more proven consistency in the top leagues, this could be classed as in hindsight, but for me I would say not, to rely on DCL is a big gamble the reality is he’s had one good season for us in all the years he’s been here, so a big mistake to rely on him this season is record should have told Dyche and co that. 

You've got to remember the deals constructed for those 2 mean we haven't yet paid a penny.

We wouldn't have been able to combine their fees for a better option on a 'buy now pay later' deal, because no club in their right mind would let a proven scorer go on such a deal.

We're still absolutely skint remember.

[Palfy]

2 hours ago, Newty82 said:

You've got to remember the deals constructed for those 2 mean we haven't yet paid a penny.

We wouldn't have been able to combine their fees for a better option on a 'buy now pay later' deal, because no club in their right mind would let a proven scorer go on such a deal.

We're still absolutely skint remember.

Maybe but we have to pay sooner or later, and I wouldn’t take players just because you don’t have to pay for a year, for me that’s false economy, surely you buy players because they are going to make a good contribution and improve the team, they are doing neither. 

[Newty82]

2 hours ago, Palfy said:

Maybe but we have to pay sooner or later, and I wouldn’t take players just because you don’t have to pay for a year, for me that’s false economy, surely you buy players because they are going to make a good contribution and improve the team, they are doing neither. 

Yeah. You're right. But that's not the original point we're chatting about. That's a different convo in my opinion.

We couldn't clob the money together from both of those players to buy one because we didn't have the money. Anybody who wants to sell a proven goalscorer, would want the money there and then.

So we either go without and leave an area of the team we know we needed to improve with absolutely no back up at all...which we all would have been fuming about back in August.

Now you can say they've done nothing blah blah blah...thats the beauty of being able to look back from the now.

But 100% at the time, we all thought it was shrewd business and clapped it.

I don't believe that we go out to buy players to contribute nothing. I believe we buy players to improve the team. And with us being skint, we have to do so with care.

Again, now the opinion MIGHT be we shouldn't have bothered. At the time, there would have been a kick off. Guarantee it.

[Matt]

 

 

[Romey 1878]

2 hours ago, Matt said:

 

 

Which is why a 10 point deduction for one offence was fucking mad. They’ve backed themselves into a corner with that one decision. 

[Palfy]

21 hours ago, Newty82 said:

Yeah. You're right. But that's not the original point we're chatting about. That's a different convo in my opinion.

We couldn't clob the money together from both of those players to buy one because we didn't have the money. Anybody who wants to sell a proven goalscorer, would want the money there and then.

So we either go without and leave an area of the team we know we needed to improve with absolutely no back up at all...which we all would have been fuming about back in August.

Now you can say they've done nothing blah blah blah...thats the beauty of being able to look back from the now.

But 100% at the time, we all thought it was shrewd business and clapped it.

I don't believe that we go out to buy players to contribute nothing. I believe we buy players to improve the team. And with us being skint, we have to do so with care.

Again, now the opinion MIGHT be we shouldn't have bothered. At the time, there would have been a kick off. Guarantee it.

Well I don’t think we will agree on whether the purchase of Beto Chamatti was good business, or beneficial for the team when we are desperate for a striker who can convert a % of the chances we create. 
There’s a saying that if a deal seems too good to be true it normally is, now we’ve got a player in Beto on a 3 year contract who’s going to cost us millions in fees and wages, based on a deal of a delayed payment, for me that doesn’t warrant the reason why you would buy anyone, and that goes for a Deli another deal that proved another deal to good to be true generally is. 
Now I’m not saying that you advocate what’s happening, my concern is we have thrown all our weight behind DCL as our number 1 striker to get our goals, and haven’t bought well with his cover should he fail to get the goals we need, which is what’s been happening over the last 19 games, and yet he still starts because Beto must be deemed not as good as a off the boil DCL, I find that very concerning. 

[Newty82]

1 minute ago, Romey 1878 said:

Which is why a 10 point deduction for one offence was fucking mad. They’ve backed themselves into a corner with that one decision. 

Yeah. And then they want to do us for the exact same offence for the exact same reasons. Because they haven't thought it through.

Mad ain't it?

So I'd the 10 points stick, realistically they can only take another 10 points off for the 'new' offence.

It's fuckin crazy.

[Newty82]

2 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Well I don’t think we will agree on whether the purchase of Beto Chamatti was good business, or beneficial for the team when we are desperate for a striker who can convert a % of the chances we create. 
There’s a saying that if a deal seems too good to be true it normally is, now we’ve got a player in Beto on a 3 year contract who’s going to cost us millions in fees and wages, based on a deal of a delayed payment, for me that doesn’t warrant the reason why you would buy anyone, and that goes for a Deli another deal that proved another deal to good to be true generally is. 
Now I’m not saying that you advocate what’s happening, my concern is we have thrown all our weight behind DCL as our number 1 striker to get our goals, and haven’t bought well with his cover should he fail to get the goals we need, which is what’s been happening over the last 19 games, and yet he still starts because Beto must be deemed not as good as a off the boil DCL, I find that very concerning. 

No, honestly, I get you.

I get the point . And it's valid.

BUT...its all hindsight. At the moment.

In my opinion, Beto isn't as bad as some think. We, as Evertonians, tend to be very quick to write players off.

Beto, like any player...and we've plenty of evidence of this...needs proper consistent game time.

So, again, we could have not bothered buying any striker because our price range means whoever we get would be a gamble. That's the realistic market we're in.

Which means, we still would rely on DCL either way.

It's the sort of catch 22 we'll find ourselves in again and again.

End note...I'm not sure Chamatti was a good idea. I wasn't sure about that one at the time. Didn't seem to make sense.

[Palfy]

11 minutes ago, Newty82 said:

End note...I'm not sure Chamatti was a good idea. I wasn't sure about that one at the time. Didn't seem to make sense.

On that I remember Dyche being asked what was the thought on buying Chamatti, and his response was “ because he was available “ I think Dyche was being sarcastic because at the time every player they had on their lists of targets at the time had fallen through. 

[Newty82]

37 minutes ago, Palfy said:

On that I remember Dyche being asked what was the thought on buying Chamatti, and his response was “ because he was available “ I think Dyche was being sarcastic because at the time every player they had on their lists of targets at the time had fallen through. 

....probably because we couldn't pay for the blokes

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, Newty82 said:

Yeah. And then they want to do us for the exact same offence for the exact same reasons. Because they haven't thought it through.

Mad ain't it?

So I'd the 10 points stick, realistically they can only take another 10 points off for the 'new' offence.

It's fuckin crazy.

The only way they can get themselves out if the corner they’ve painted themselves into is to lower the points deduction or change it to a financial penalty or transfer ban. 

[Palfy]

1 hour ago, Newty82 said:

....probably because we couldn't pay for the blokes

done me

[Gwlad]

3 hours ago, Newty82 said:

 

In my opinion, Beto isn't as bad as some think. We, as Evertonians, tend to be very quick to write players off.

Beto, like any player...and we've plenty of evidence of this...needs proper consistent game time.

 

I'd like to see him given the opportunity to start either with or without Dom. We really can't do any worse at the moment with the goals not coming.

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, Gwlad said:

I'd like to see him given the opportunity to start either with or without Dom. We really can't do any worse at the moment with the goals not coming.

We absolutely could do worse. 

[Newty82]

9 hours ago, Palfy said:

done me

It was a cheeky one

[Newty82]

10 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

The only way they can get themselves out if the corner they’ve painted themselves into is to lower the points deduction or change it to a financial penalty or transfer ban. 

It should all be 'suspended' pending clear improvements. Whatever it ends up being.

The other thing that bugs me, I'm sure it does you and everyone else, and I can't quite get my head around, is that the next charge is to be announced in April?

But then I guess that has a right of appeal too. But the timeliness of these things, so far anyway, show that the season would be finished!

As we all know, the more we talk about it and look at it, the crazier it all gets.

[Matt]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68371996

Now end of month??

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68371996

Now end of month??

Personally, I think the fact it's taking a while is a good thing. Surely, if they were just keeping the original punishment it'd have been announced by now.

[Cornish Steve]

The PL spokesperson has apparently promised a decision on February 30th.

[Cornish Steve]

28 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

Personally, I think the fact it's taking a while is a good thing. Surely, if they were just keeping the original punishment it'd have been announced by now.

There has to be two decisions:

1) Should Everton's 10-point reduction be upheld or should it be reduced? I'm hoping for it to be halved.

2) Should Everton face two point deductions in the same season? The answer to this really has to be "no".

[Romey 1878]

Just now, Cornish Steve said:

There has to be two decisions:

1) Should Everton's 10-point reduction be upheld or should it be reduced? I'm hoping for it to be halved.

2) Should Everton face two point deductions in the same season? The answer to this really has to be "no".

If there was any logic to this then the mere fact that the rules around it are changing in August because it's been realised that the current rules are flawed would mean that our two charges and Forest's are dismissed entirely and our 10 points reinstated.

Logic is in short supply though.

[Cornish Steve]

Just now, Romey 1878 said:

If there was any logic to this then the mere fact that the rules around it are changing in August because it's been realised that the current rules are flawed would mean that our two charges and Forest's are dismissed entirely and our 10 points reinstated.

Logic is in short supply though.

In which case the fans should sue for unnecessary mental anguish.

[Formby]

31 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

Personally, I think the fact it's taking a while is a good thing. Surely, if they were just keeping the original punishment it'd have been announced by now.

I have the same feeling. There is a lot more to consider if the original penalty is in any way overturned. 

Still very miffed other teams get penalties on the pitch and we get this! 

[Romey 1878]

5 minutes ago, Cornish Steve said:

In which case the fans should sue for unnecessary mental anguish.

As silly as it may sound there will be fans whose mental health is suffering due to all of this.

[Hafnia]

3 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

As silly as it may sound there will be fans whose mental health is suffering due to all of this.

Got dickheads on twitter who make up bullshit about Everton  - proper wind up shit. Supposed to be fans.   
 

don't realise that the club is all some people have. 

 

[Romey 1878]

12 minutes ago, Hafnia said:

Got dickheads on twitter who make up bullshit about Everton  - proper wind up shit. Supposed to be fans.   
 

don't realise that the club is all some people have. 

 

I can never understand why there are blues that make up stuff to try and put the shits up fellow blues. It really pisses me off. 

[Matt]