The issue was discussed at the CMS committee today. Richard Masters coming under pressure for calling Everton and us “small clubs.” Has he not seen the fucking big club formula??
The "current transfer window" thing is key, but it's one hell of a gamble. If the sale doesn't happen and we are 40M in breach then that's a shitload of points deducted.
Of course, unless the response from the EPL was "that seems reasonable to us but technically it's a breach, we'll likely have to refer you to the commission for a ruling so as not to appear biased but we won't be asking for or recommending a points deduction". After all, if we get a fine then anything less than 17.5M means it was the correct financial decision.
I don't get it. Whatever the conversation that may or may not have been had. Whoever has decided to interpret that whatever way they choose (some very interesting examples on this here board, as a micro-example). Whatever the argument might be, however ridiculous. Are all completely irrelevant.
The rules are written down. We have been determined to be in breach of them, and been referred to the 'independent' commission for sanction.
A lot of you still seem to be in 'stage 1: Denial'.
I think it will be points deduction, but as far as im aware there is no set punishment, the punishment can be a fine or a points deduction at the discretion of the independent panel.
I think people are only discussing the quantum of the punishment.
It is possible that the sale may help to mitigate a little, but I don't think that's likely
That's my reading. In the legal world there are things like mitigation, which don't affect guilt, but do affect sentencing. Were we communicating our plans, showing we didn't intend ongoing breach? Yes.
Have we shown remorse? Well, let's quickly put a bunch of players down as available for sale and say yes we've learned our lesson.
It's a bit like hijacking a plane and bringing it back and all the time you are in contact with air traffic control assuring them, sure, you hijacked a plane but you're definitely going to bring it back.
And then they send you to prison because you hijacked a plane
We're some way from this because the league's independent commission has yet to make a determination, but if we exhaust all of the league's routes of Appeal we may have to think bigger. It's well established law since the Court of Appeal judgment in R v Jockey Club ex parte Aga Kha that a regulatory sporting body isn't amenable to judicial review and therefore subject to complying with public law obligations in its decision making and rather its authority is derived from contractual obligations. However, this isn't the jockey club, this is football and the national sport, we have parliamentary committees commenting on it and might it be arguable that the league actually is exercising a public law function? Might we like the supreme court to test this? If it were possible to demonstrate they were subject to public law principles all sorts of helpful principles like proportionality would come into play (I.e
is the sanction proportionate to the transgression) not to mention legitimate expectations (did the league's conduct in their dealinga with us create a legitimate expectation we would not be disciplined) and rationality. If this line has any hope at all, the league may be rather worried and agree to resolve this with us as it would seriously impact how they can be held to account for their decision making. This is all speculative though. The key, as others have indicated, will be the sanction.
Hold on just a minute there hoss. I don't like them, but if they want to pay me tens of thousands of pounds to run around for 90 or less minutes once a week and get called names by the three men and a dog that form the capacity of their garden shed, I am open to the conversation.