The Everton Forum • Re: Financial Fairplay Investigation - 4 Points Back

Not only did they specify 6 for a breach in the original case, our appeal didn't dispute that (just awarded us leniency points to make sure we were safely under 9), but Nottingham Forests panel specifically called out the fact the opening point is 3 points *and they don't know why we were given 3 more as an addition and wouldn't be commenting further on that*

Not sure if I've misunderstood, but think we might be talking at cross purposes. I was referring to our IC appeal, that relative to Forest's judgement, where soonafter it had been jumped on pretty fiercely (understandably) by some of ours that "as we'd copped an initial 6 points base for breaching, that that should be a precedent and Forest", as seen in a highlighted extract of text from the hearing that had been shared extensively.

Apparently there wasn't such a precedent set, and that there were actually extenuating circumstances that came into our penalty. I don't agree with how they came up with the remaining points either, just that it seemed interesting that some on our side that seem to know a fair bit about it, had conceded a 6 point precedent wasn't actually correct.

Statistics: Posted by Cods — Thu Mar 21, 2024 3:08 am

---