Everton: Lawyer accuses Andy Burnham of Donald Trump behaviour over Premier League accusation
Andy Burnham has been accused of behaving like Donald Trump in his interpretation of the latest Everton commission hearing, by Stefan Borson.
The lawyer and former financial advisor to Manchester City reacted via Twitter on 9 April to criticise the Toffees-supporting politician, a day after the club were handed a second points deduction to take their total for the season to eight pending another appeal.
Burnham had highlighted a passage in which the commission had dismissed the Premier League’s criticism of Everton over how cooperative they had been in providing information for the investigation into their latest profit and sustainability charge, implying it was proof the authorities were treating the club badly, but Borson suggested the Manchester mayor hadn’t understood what he was looking at.
Burnham quoted the written decision: “In our view, many if not most of the criticisms levelled against the club in this respect by the PL are unwarranted, overstated, or both.”
In his own words he added: “A damning verdict on the Premier League’s treatment of Everton. Hardly the behaviour of a fair and even-handed regulator.”
In response Borson wrote: “This is Trump-like. Did you even bother to see what para 159 was about or which section this appears in?”
New Everton points deduction sparks yet more disagreement
Paragraph 159 is actually more than five pages (32-37) of paragraphs detailing Everton and the Premier League squabbling over the when, how and where documents should be shared and meetings should be held.
The Toffees were hoping for a similar reduction in their points deduction as Nottingham Forest received for exceptional cooperation, while the league’s position was that the club didn’t deserve it since they had barely cooperated at all, let alone exceptionally.
The entire dispute gives the impression of two parties who have seen far too much of each other in unhappy circumstances and now have their backs put up by every pushback or overstep from the other side.
But ultimately it is a central argument which seems representative of the entire stand-off between the two, where neither are exactly covering themselves in glory but one is certainly coming off worse than the other.
So if the commission has deemed the Premier League’s negative position towards the Toffees on that matter as “unwarranted, overstated, or both” (page 56, paragraph 256) it seems quite valid for Burnham to extrapolate that attitude across wider interactions.
As an Everton fan he is emotionally invested and no doubt has a perspective skewed towards the club, but the part of the decision he has highlighted is hardly a false representation.
There has been, at the very least, a suspicion among Evertonians that their club is being made an example of when more leeway is perhaps afforded elsewhere.
Perhaps that is in fact a paranoid perspective, and there is no getting away from those in charge at the Goodison Park’s responsibility for much of this mess, but when Richard Masters is railing against independent regulation [The Times, 9 April] at the same time as his office is found to be criticising one of the member clubs in a way which is “unwarranted, overstated, or both” it isn’t too hard to see why people feel there has been unfair treatment.
And Forest, lauded for their exemplary cooperation, were still just as infuriated with the Premier League after receiving their four-point deduction [Telegraph, 18 March] and appealed it anyway, so the Toffees aren’t even alone in their displeasure.
In other Everton news, takeover clarity is expected imminently as 777 claim the league have been given funding details.
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.