I am watching Sky Sports pre-match show now, and everybody on the table saying this 10-point deduction was harsh, and if you want to punish people, punish the owners and this and that…
I get it, Man City has over 100 allegations, and Chelsea has some too but that doesn’t change the fact Everton is in the wrong as well, personally, I think they will be fine even with the points deductions there are teams worse than them and they are playing well enough to be safe till the end of the season.
And if the end of the day, it’s proven Man City and Chelsea are also in the wrong, punish them, simple as that.
I just don’t get the feeling of “oh poor lads, they don’t deserve this…” Please, we have teams in history that suffered way more than a simple 10-point deduction and the level of outrage wasn’t near the same. We have teams that played in the Premier League out of league football because of poor management.
Everton got deducted one more point than a team that went into administration for a single FFP breach as they’re building a stadium in which the main investor left halfway through due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, giving them no competitive advantage over other PL teams. Something an independent commission backed by Leeds United refused to count.
The PL have already gone and said that this type of punishment was only for Everton and would not be used again, setting up Chelsea and Man City with a slap on the wrist. This is why everyone’s pissed.
I’d like to see documentation on the last part.
Google is your friend.
It’s the opposite of what you’re saying though. The Commission ultimately decided to use the same rules to arrive at the punishment that every other club is currently subject to.
The relevant section of the report is section 13: “Sanction principles - The Premier League’s proposed formula”
The Premier League proposed the structured formula to arrive at the punishment for this case, and that is what the articles people are seeing go on about. But the commission declined to use it, saying they will stick to the current PSR rules as they are written.
It does point out that the Premier League could either change the rules, or impose on the Commission that they need to use the new formula, but that didn’t actually happen here.
"We consider that it is not for a Commission to introduce such a structured formula even on a case by case basis. We consider that we are required by the Rules to hear and consider the mitigation, after which we have a wide discretion to impose any of the sanctions listed in Rule W51. If the Premier League wishes to impose a mandatory structured formula on a Commission dealing with PSR breaches, it can do so. In that event the Commission would be required to comply with those Rules. But as things stand at present that has not been done: the Commission has the wide discretion conferred by Rules W50&51.
We therefore decline to adopt the structured formula proposed by the Premier League. We will determine the appropriate sanction according to all the circumstances of the case, including (as required by Rules W50&51) any mitigating factors."
Also more points than any EFL team has been docked for FFP breaches (as far as I’m aware anyway). Sheffield Wednesday, the case the independent panel cited as the precedent for why we had to have a sporting sanction, only got 6 points by comparison.