Everton to ‘quite probably’ avoid second points deduction after Nottingham Forest verdict
Everton will “quite probably” receive no further points deduction based on the outcome of Nottingham Forest’s hearing, according to The esk.
The Toffees journalist and blogger reacted via Twitter on 19 March to the latest verdict a day earlier claiming, on the basis of the four-point sanction for Forest, that even the reduced six-point punishment previously felt at Goodison Park was “inappropriate”.
And with the club’s second hearing next up he suggested that with the apparent starting point for a breach now three points, that could be cut to one on the basis of double jeopardy, with “further mitigation” applied to wipe it out entirely.
The esk wrote: “I’ve had time to reconsider this from yesterday. Nowhere in Everton’s appeal was it established that a starting sanction of 6 points should be established generally in future cases, but rather the 6 points was specific to our particular mitigating & aggravating factors.
“What is not clear is why if using the EFL starting point of 3 points (as referenced in the NFFC case) & even after applying mitigation/aggravation, EFC ended up with 6 points. The NFFC case result yesterday only highlights the inappropriate size of Everton’s post appeal sanction.
“It also means that any possible sanctions applied for Everton’s 2nd charge start at 3 points, should be then reduced by 2/3 (double jeopardy) & further mitigation applied. A maximum of 1 point quite probably & properly reduced to 0 with mitigation.”
Everton route to points deduction escape clear?
Alan Myers has also predicted a second points sanction is now possibly off the table, but it has been separately reported that the club are “resigned” to one, although they hope it is reduced for cooperating this time, as Forest’s was.
There is some logic to a much-reduced and potentially negated punishment in this way, but based on the verdict from the Nottingham Forest case it would seem to depend fairly heavily on the size of the breach and how much weight the commission places on the club’s cooperation.
Everton apparently got the same three-point escalator for their £19.5million overspend as Forest did for a £34.5m one, despite the latter being noted as 77% greater, because both landed in the “significant” band.
Forest are also said to have been proactive in their assistance of the commission, and there is no guarantee Everton’s panel will feel the same.
Additionally it remains to be seen whether the new hearing panel decides that breaching twice in successive periods constitutes another aggravating factor.
As with everything in these cases there are so many different value judgments to be made, and they don’t always seem to tie up.
For example it was put forward as an aggravating factor in Everton’s original hearing (page 31, 17 November) that they continued to sign players despite being warned over the risk of a breach, and yet in the Forest hearing (page 24, 18 March) the same dynamic was acknowledged but this time wasn’t pushed as an aggravating factor.
That is exactly the sort of thing which contributes to Evertonians feeling the entire process is arbitrary and seems to crack down on them harder than others, but also shows that a lot hinges on how separate panels value different factors, rather than the clear set of guidelines everyone wants.
Either way there does look to be a feasible route for Sean Dyche and his players not to have any more points taken away, but it would equally be presumptuous to bank on it at this stage.
In other Everton news, club sources have given the latest indication on the 777 takeover bid.
For more Everton news, follow us on Facebook or join our brand new WhatsApp Channel for instant updates to be sent straight to your phone.