Panel who punished Everton will decide on rivals’ compensation claims

[hackneyfox]

Burnley and Leicester City, who finished 18th in the Premier League in the past two seasons respectively, would appear to have the strongest case for damages​

new
Martyn Ziegler
, Chief Sports Reporter
Tuesday November 21 2023, 3.00pm, The Times
Law
Premier League
Football

Leicester were relegated to the Championship last season after finishing a place and two points behind Everton
MICHAEL REGAN/GETTY IMAGES
Share
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...4?shareToken=b3df5d4ea701ad834a99e5db30455f5c
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?te...ecide-on-rivals-compensation-claims-7r93f9t0q
https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sha...ecide-on-rivals-compensation-claims-7r93f9t0q
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...4?shareToken=b3df5d4ea701ad834a99e5db30455f5c
The same independent commission that imposed a ten-point deduction on Everton will also decide if other clubs should receive tens of millions of pounds in compensation for financial damages connected to the case.

Five clubs — Burnley, Leicester City, Leeds United, Southampton and Nottingham Forest — have been part of a legal action connected to the Everton case. They have 28 days from receiving the ruling on the Goodison Park club, which came last Friday, to pursue a claim.

The Premier League has confirmed that the independent regulatory commission that ruled on Everton’s case will also decide on any compensation claims. The commission was headed by David Phillips KC, Judge Alan Greenwood and Nick Igoe, the former financial director at West Ham United.

In his ruling which blocked the five clubs being parties to the Everton case, Phillips said: “I am satisfied that the applicant clubs have potential claims for compensation.”


Everton have said they will appeal against the ten-point deduction and any compensation claim will have to take the appeal decision into account. An appeal would be heard before the end of the season.
Everton insiders have questioned how more than one club could receive compensation, considering that at the most only one team would have been relegated instead of Everton.
Burnley and Leicester would appear to have the strongest claim to damages. Burnley were relegated in the 2021-22 season, the campaign in which Everton were judged to have breached the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules in terms of financial losses. Had the ten-point deduction been applied that season, Burnley would have survived and Everton would have been relegated. Burnley were promoted back to the Premier League at the first attempt but the financial cost to them was still about £50 million.
Everton were charged in March, but the five clubs unsuccessfully appealed for the commission to deal with the case before the end of last season. Leicester were relegated in 2022-23 — finishing 18th, a place and two points below Everton — and would also have lost about £50 million should they win promotion at the first attempt.

Burnley went down in 2021-22, the season in which Everton were found to have broken the rules
GARETH COPLEY/GETTY IMAGES
Had Everton’s points deduction been applied last season, it would not have prevented Leeds from being relegated but the club would have finished one place higher in the Premier League table, meaning an extra £2.2million in income.

​

There appear to be no grounds for Southampton, who finished bottom, or Forest, who stayed up in 16th, to claim compensation, as the points deduction would have made no difference to their league position in either season.
Phillips’s ruling added: “Those claims and their validity depend on whether the complaint is upheld. They depend on factual circumstances concerning the causation of any loss and they depend on other factual issues.
“If the complaint is upheld, the commission may wish to award compensation to one or more of the applicant clubs. If the complaint is upheld, the Premier League must provide a copy of the decision to the applicant clubs forthwith. Within 28 days of receipt of a copy of the decision, each applicant club must inform the commission whether it wishes to pursue a claim for . . . compensation.”
The compensation rules have been brought into the Premier League since Sheffield United agreed a £20 million out-of-court settlement with West Ham — during Igoe’s time at the club — after the London club had breached third-party ownership rules with the Argentina striker, Carlos Tevez.

 

[Breadfan]

Don’t you also have to take into account points lost by playing Everton if you are really being fair?

 

[sixthswan]

You couldn't determine with any accuracy, the points in games they played.
Unless you mean that all of their results should be automatic wins for the opposition?
Which would be unfair on the teams that beat them...

The points deduction does give Burnley and Leicester very strong cases for compensation.
Like the article says - nobody else has a case...

 

[Adumass]

I guess there is a risk only Burnley get compo...it reads like they have the stronger claim.

 

[Breadfan]

You couldn't determine with any accuracy, the points in games they played.
Unless you mean that all of their results should be automatic wins for the opposition?
Which would be unfair on the teams that beat them...

The points deduction does give Burnley and Leicester very strong cases for compensation.
Like the article says - nobody else has a case...

Be interesting to see what would be the league would look like last season if all Everton games were expunged

 

[sixthswan]

I guess there is a risk only Burnley get compo...it reads like they have the stronger claim.

I'm not so sure...the referral to the Independent Commission was in March 2023 and Burnley had already been relegated.
I think we are the only club who could have been saved from relegation, if the Commission had acted sooner.

 

[buz_not_buzz]

I'm not so sure...the referral to the Independent Commission was in March 2023 and Burnley had already been relegated.
I think we are the only club who could have been saved from relegation, if the Commission had acted sooner.

But carrying that logic through that would be like saying if Man City were guilty of offences in say 2014 and had been finally referred in 2023 then it is the title in 2023 that would be expunged from their records not 2014. Of course, without the offences in 2014, 2023 might not have happened for them also so Arsenal last season are impacted (thus it is with us) & maybe both (and all those inbetween) should be but there can surely be no doubt that those teams in 2014 were initially & more directly impacted. Of course, in Everton's case if the accounting period of 2020/21 through 2022/23 also shows that they exceeded the limits then we'd be equally impacted anyway but that seems doubtful given the figures.

 

[sixthswan]

I get what you're saying, but logically Burnley couldn't have been saved by a points deduction for Everton - if the alleged offence wasn't referred until after they were relegated...

I'm not saying Burnley haven't got a case - I was referring to them having a stronger case than us, which I don't think is true. Though that is only an opinion...

 

[sixthswan]

Also in the summer of 2021/22, Everton spent £1.7m on new players.
In the summer of 2022/23, they spent £68m.

 

[buz_not_buzz]

Also in the summer of 2021/22, Everton spent £1.7m on new players.
In the summer of 2022/23, they spent £68m.

2022/23 hasn't been questioned yet though as far as I am aware so is irrelevant. It wasn't as if their earlier transgression enabled that spending.

Edited to clarify: the earlier transgression did of course actually enable that spending in so far as if they go down they probably don't spend to spend so much, I just meant that relative to the PL having stayed up and I presume believing or hoping themselves in the clear.

 

[sixthswan]

That's the point.
The 10 point deduction was applied to the 48 month period ending June 2022.
So the deduction couldn't have been applied to benefit Burnley...
Everton may face another deduction when the accounts are posted up to June 2023.
But they were known to have "cheated" when we were relegated.

 

[buz_not_buzz]

I get what you're saying, but logically Burnley couldn't have been saved by a points deduction for Everton - if the alleged offence wasn't referred until after they were relegated...

I'm not saying Burnley haven't got a case - I was referring to them having a stronger case than us, which I don't think is true. Though that is only an opinion...

I get that you are concentrating on the timing of the rule breaking being identified (something inherent in the current system which is a problem in itself) but the point is that by being found to have broken these rules they are implicitly judged to have gained a competitive advantage in the period in question (to the end of 2021/22). No competitive advantage and they possibly (probably) don't stay up but Burnley do and the division looks different in 2022/23 - whether or not to our advantage being even more conjecture than whether the cheating saved them or not.

 

[buz_not_buzz]

But they were known to have "cheated" when we were relegated.

Were they? They were certainly believed to have but wasn't that what the investigation was charged with determining & that only concluded after our relegation.

 

[sixthswan]

That's why I put the quote marks.
It was known about before we were relegated and there can't be any new facts discovered by the investigation...

 

[buz_not_buzz]

That's why I put the quote marks.
It was known about before we were relegated and there can't be any new facts discovered by the investigation...

Sure but guilt was not established at that point, that came after relegation.

Anyway, point is the initial & greatest impact of such breaches is in the season in which they occur because they have a sporting impact but, yes, they effectively skew everything that comes after, an effect that delayed investigation & sanction ensures perpetuates longer. From a sporting perspective though the effect can never be undone as the impacts ripple through the seasons. Financial compensation may/should be due to those most directly impacted (this is not a match officiating human error) but, y'know, not everything is all about us.

 

[sixthswan]

To be fair to you (and Post #4), it was Burnley and Leeds who originally questioned Everton's finances in May 2022.
So Burnley do probably have the stronger case...for now...

 

[buz_not_buzz]

To be fair to you (and Post #4), it was Burnley and Leeds who originally questioned Everton's finances in May 2022.
So Burnley do probably have the stronger case...for now...

They did indeed and I think it would be interesting to know what was reported by Everton before the deadline in March '22 for that season (supposedly realistic estimates of financial performance for the season as a whole), the nature of any questions that were asked of them by the PL at that time, any answers given and, if there were concerns, why PL Processes encourage slow follow up (not that I am advocating a kangaroo court or circumnavigating due process but a deadline of the following December 31st for filing actuals where concerns exist seems generous). If there were no concerns based on what was filed in March '22 that too should raise questions.

As it is I do recall that, at the time, there was a rumour that Everton had to sell Richarlison sharpish prior to the end of the reporting period to be compliant... bit like we did with Maddison last season I suspect.