Yahoo News 'Flawed argument' - National media make same Everton points deduction claim as Man City reminder sent
Everton's worst fears were confirmed on Monday afternoon after it was confirmed the club had been deducted another two points from their Premier League tally.
The Blues have confirmed they will appeal this outcome, which relates to the three-year period to 2022-23, as they hope for a similar conclusion to their 10-point sanction in November that was later reduced to six. Sean Dyche's side could yet face further charges relating to profit and sustainability rules, however, though this is not expected to have an impact on the current campaign.
This separate investigation relates to interest costs associated with the building of Bramley-Moore Dock. The Premier League argue such expenditure should count as PSR losses, while the Blues are claiming the opposite.
Plenty has been said regarding this latest development in Everton's turbulent season, with the thoughts of the national media shared below.
Paul Joyce of The Times has explained Everton face a "contentious end" to the Premier League season if they avoid relegation by a small margin. Joyce continues by stating the Premier League and the Blues "remain at loggerheads" over the £6.5m figure relating to interest payments and stadium costs.
'Cast a shadow over the competition'
Paul MacInnes of The Guardian wrote:
"For any fan of either club, or of any other relegation-threatened side, or of any team who might play one of these sides, or the fans of those clubs hoping to get promoted from the Championship (including the league leaders, Leicester, themselves the subject of PSR charges), this is a non-ideal situation. What is the point of gnawing your finger nails to the quick if the outcome on the field can be second-guessed by the ruling of an independent commission? And why is it that some clubs face immediate sanctions while others can wait for a season (Leicester won’t be punished until next term), and some can apparently defer the day of judgment endlessly through enthusiastic engagement with the legal profession?
"It’s a rum conundrum which does not reflect well on “the world’s most-watched competition”. It has embittered supporters without whom, lest we forget, the game is nothing. It has prompted unfounded claims of corruption and talk of asterisks hanging over the record books. It has, furthermore, deepened divides between the clubs which make up the league and between clubs and the league itself. This new focus on compliance with spending rules has cast a shadow over the competition."
'A flawed argument'
Jason Burt of The Telegraph wrote:
"So, here we go. The Premier League wanted Everton to be deducted 12 points. An independent commission imposed a 10-point sanction. That was reduced to six on appeal. Then there was a second charge. The Premier League wanted Everton to lose a further five points. This time a different independent commission has deemed it should be a penalty of two points.
"Everton could have lost 17 points; have definitely lost six and after Monday another two, although that could change again after their appeal. Whenever that is heard. And here is the zinger: there could even be a third charge as set out by Point 20 in the 60-page written reasons although that will be decided “at a later date”. That is over a disputed £6.56 million – and using the tariff that now appears to be applied in the report, it could be another point deduction.
"Everton were “reckless” in their spending. That is without question while the argument put forward by their director of football Kevin Thelwell that it was like “a big old ship to turn around” does not hold water as they just kept on spending.
"But some of the Premier League’s arguments are seriously flawed. Such as claiming Everton should have cut their links sooner with sponsor Alisher Usmanov – even citing the Salisbury poisonings in 2018 – before they lost out on £20 million after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Feb 2022. That conveniently ignores that the Premier League only suspended its own deal with Russian broadcaster Match TV the following month. And that is just a flawed argument. As, unfortunately, has become the whole use of PSR and the punishments."
'Very little clarity'
Daniel Storey of The i wrote:
"Now, the Premier League has pivoted to scaremongering under the vague guise of “unintended consequences”. To cast doubt about the continued improvement and dominance of English clubs compared to those abroad, who – bar two or three exceptions – are operating with one arm tied behind their backs, is a fallacy. Of the top 30 clubs in Deloitte’s latest money league, ranked by annual revenue, 14 are English. That will not change and, if it does, that would only speak to an unsustainability of the financial status quo.
"And while the Premier League continue to claim that they are the right body to oversee the clubs within it, have given out points deductions of 10 (reduced to six on appeal), four and two points for breaches and there is very little clarity on how those exact punishments have been decided upon. There are still 115 charges over Manchester City with no indication of when those charges may be resolved. This isn’t the season to be pleading autonomy as the logical answer."
