Luton Outlaws - The Avenue of Evil

Everton

Posted by Frog Hatter on 14/1/2024, 22:07:12

Another 10 points….can they come back from that??
I would prefer we survived off our own back but feck em if they have broken the rules

Re: Everton

Posted by Vidar on 14/1/2024, 22:42:02, in reply to "Everton"

The rules don't really make any sense. Clubs that were allowed to spend freely before FFP came in can spend whatever they like with no real fear of punishment, see Chelsea.

Apart from us and Brighton, Everton have the lowest net spend on transfers for the past few years. When you consider a lot of the costs have gone on building a new stadium then it's not like a sporting advantage has been gained.

And what about clubs that built new stadiums before FFP that don't have to account for those infrastructure costs.

FFP is there to cement the power of the Sky Big 6. Oil states should not be allowed to own football clubs but it's uncompetitive if they (Newcastle) are unable to spend money they have to try and break into that level.

That being said hen you look at Forest's spending since being in the Prem, the money laundering transfers to Olympiacos, lying about loaning out Shelvey, then it was quite obvious something dodgy has been going on there.

These charges could well benefit us but what will everyone think when we are hardly able to spend any of the TV money we get because we don't have a high enough revenue?

Re: Everton

Posted by HH on 15/1/2024, 9:20:11, in reply to "Re: Everton"

not like a sporting advantage has been gained.

They finished two points above relegation last season and four points the season before.

I think with their overspend you could quite easily argue they gained a sporting advantage over those who went down.

Re: Everton

Posted by Vidar on 15/1/2024, 10:04:47, in reply to "Re: Everton"

At the expense of Leicester were fined £3.8 million for breaching the EFL's FFP rules in order to be promoted.

And Watford the season before who have bent the rules of FFP with their transfers.

Not saying Everton didn't break the rules but -10 points when going into administration is only -9 points makes no sense to me.

-10 points for us in 08-09 for unauthorised agents payments, wonder what slap on the wrist Spurs will get for their dealings with Mitchell Johnson. Big clubs are basically immune from punishment if it will harm the overall PL brand.

Re: Everton

Posted by The Outsider on 15/1/2024, 10:43:12, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Johnson? I thought that it was Thomas.

Re: Everton

Posted by Random hatter on 15/1/2024, 12:46:13, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Or is it Marvin Thomas

Re: Everton

Posted by HH on 15/1/2024, 10:14:15, in reply to "Re: Everton"

I think that's fair point on the strength of the punishments handed out.

Re: Everton

Posted by Lt on 15/1/2024, 2:16:41, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Its not about sporting advantage... it's about sustainability

Re: Everton

Posted by Doctor Ince on 15/1/2024, 7:07:16, in reply to "Re: Everton"

It's about protecting the status quo, under the guise of sustainability

Re: Everton

Posted by Essex hatter on 15/1/2024, 18:25:21, in reply to "Re: Everton"

I Hope Luton play Everton Away in the 4th round ofT The fa cup

Re: Everton

Posted by Music Critic on 15/1/2024, 8:43:15, in reply to "Re: Everton"

We've been sustainable. I'd argue we've broken through the status quo (whatever that status quo is supposed to be).

Re: Everton

Posted by MG on 14/1/2024, 23:11:27, in reply to "Re: Everton"

The TV money is revenue, we can spend all of it if we want to.

Re: Everton

Posted by Vidar on 14/1/2024, 23:18:00, in reply to "Re: Everton"

That's a fair point but TV money not being distributed equally amongst teams further enhances the imbalance for me.

The pre-FFP big spenders have been allowed to build up so many more revenue streams, some very illegitimate ones in Man City's case. So Chelsea can finish 12th and still spend nearly a billion on players with no real chance of punishment.

Re: Everton

Posted by MG on 14/1/2024, 23:32:00, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Well I totally agree there!

Re: Everton

Posted by M on 14/1/2024, 22:28:18, in reply to "Everton"

When will the result of this enquiry be known.

Re: Everton

Posted by Essex hatter on 15/1/2024, 8:09:39, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Looking forward to Luton vs Everton

Re: Everton

Posted by Floater on 14/1/2024, 22:26:57, in reply to "Everton"

There current points penalty is still subject to appeal.

Think we're doing ok without a helping hand? Our home games to come are predominantly against teams in the bottom half. Not easy, but not daunting either.

Re: Everton

Posted by Floater on 14/1/2024, 22:27:44, in reply to "Re: Everton"

'Their'. Should of got that right.

Re: Everton

Posted by Susie Dent on 14/1/2024, 22:38:56, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Should HAVE got that right

Re: Everton

Posted by The Outsider on 14/1/2024, 22:39:23, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Our yew knew hear?

Re: Everton

Posted by Godders on 14/1/2024, 22:15:36, in reply to "Everton"

If they go down due to points deductions it's because they've tried to get away with cheating so they deserve to go down. If we benefit so much the better. As long as we're clean and don't cheat I don't care how we stay up. And if it means we fall short so be it. I'd rather we just concern ourselves with running a sustainable club.

Re: Everton

Posted by Vidar on 14/1/2024, 22:47:18, in reply to "Re: Everton"

The same rules that are set to be scrapped in August according to the Times today?

The Premier League can't afford to damage it's brand by charging Chelsea and City, and by chucking out the rules they won't have to make that decision.

This may end up helping us but the current rules being broken are not fit for purpose.

Re: Everton

Posted by Music Critic on 15/1/2024, 8:21:47, in reply to "Re: Everton"

This may end up helping us but the current rules being broken are not fit for purpose.

But they are the rules. Fit for purpose or not. And I agree they're not. Hence the regulator coming in. We can only hope it has genuinely strong powers

But we can't just decide what laws/rules to obey and which we don't just cos we don't like some of them. The FFP rules, fit for purpose or not, are pretty black and white

Also this argument that it's just there to protect the Top 6 or whoever. It really isn't. They're there to stop an owner racking up massive losses/debts, fukking off cos he's had enough and leaving that club in huge piles of shit as that owner has no obligation to honour debt, contracts, etc cos he's piled it all on to the club. Like Reading. Like Portsmouth. Like Bolton. Like Luton

It's there to protect clubs. Now, an unwanted consequence of that is that it might also protect the status quo. But how is that working for Man Utd over the last few years and Chelsea the last couple? If the rich clubs are being protected how come those 2 clubs are not in the top 4, 6, wherever all the time?

Re: Everton

Posted by E1 on 14/1/2024, 22:36:22, in reply to "Re: Everton"

👏🏻

Re: Everton

Posted by Nearly a Genius on 14/1/2024, 22:20:27, in reply to "Re: Everton"

+ 1

Re: Everton

Posted by Ches Fordroad on 14/1/2024, 22:13:22, in reply to "Everton"

They've got a few well-connected followers on board to send the PL a letter claiming any punishment could kill the club

Re: Everton

Posted by Poole Hatter on 14/1/2024, 22:24:55, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Fxck em. No one wanted to know when we got completely Shat on!!!

Re: Everton

Posted by College Hatter on 14/1/2024, 22:48:20, in reply to "Re: Everton"

I think the League will be soft on both Everton and Forest, because if they did get tough with them, then somewhere down the line they will have to be seen to be tough with Man City, and they won't be brave enough to take them on, what with Man City's limitless resources to spend on a legal fight.

Re: Everton

Posted by Vidar on 14/1/2024, 22:57:52, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Net spend for Everton for the past 3 years shows that they have tried to remain compliant with the PL rules. For me stadium costs should not come into it.

Forest on the other hand have been spending recklessly, and the fact Chelsea can get away with that kind of deficit shows what a farce it all is.

We can enjoy the benefit that these FFP charges bring us now, but if we are in this league much longer they will mean we are able to barely spend any of the TV millions without relying on player sales first.

Re: Everton

Posted by WH on 15/1/2024, 8:05:29, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Stadium costs don't come into it. All infrastructure spending, plus things such as youth development, community work and women's teams are not included in the calculations.

Re: Everton

Posted by Music Critic on 15/1/2024, 8:04:26, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Stadium costs do not come into it as far as I'm aware

Re: Everton

Posted by HH on 15/1/2024, 7:57:14, in reply to "Re: Everton"

They tried, but still didn't manage to comply. They've been a basket case for years.

As dad as I'm aware, infrastructure and stadium investment is omitted. The commission who deducted them points stated it was their poor transfer deals.

All they could say in defence was 'we were due a new sponsorship deal and hoped to sell a player for more.' Proper if my aunt had bollocks stuff.

I've no sympathy with Everton. And I don't think Chelsea and City have gotten away with it - yet.

Re: Everton

Posted by Brko's Bicycle on 15/1/2024, 7:51:12, in reply to "Re: Everton"

The issue is clubs spending more than the tv millions. You're allowed to spend the tv millions.

Re: Everton

Posted by E1 on 14/1/2024, 22:50:25, in reply to "Re: Everton"

Last year, this government did £32bn worth of trade deals with the owners / non owners of Man City.

Titles will stand.

« Back to index

[ Luton Outlaws - The Avenue of Evil ]

Luton Outlaws - Independent Message Board for Luton Town FC