Premier League launch independent inquiry into Everton's pursuit of Silva

Friday, 14 September, 2018 70comments  |  Jump to last

Everton face possible censure for alleged "tapping up" of Marco Silva while he was still manager of Watford last year.

According to newspaper reports, the Premier League has launched an independent inquiry at the Hornets' request into the Toffees' approach to Silva following the sacking of Ronald Koeman in October 2017 which could result in penalties as extreme as a points deduction.

The Hertfordshire club insist that they rebuffed "illegal" overtures to the Portuguese for his services, including rejecting compensation offers as high as £15m, and have complained to the league about the destabilising effect it had on their subsequent form.

Watford went on a winless run of 11 Premier League games before Silva, the latest in a succession of short-lived managerial appointments at Vicarage Road, was dismissed in January and replaced by Javi Gracia. Silva was eventually hired as Koeman's long-term successor at Goodison Park in May.

According to the reports, the investigation will try to ascertain whether Everton's pursuit of Silva contravened the rules and it may order high-placed figures at Goodison to produce phone records, including majority shareholder Farhad Moshiri and members of the Board of Directors, to an independent QC who was recently appointed to the case.

The two clubs met in April in an attempt to thrash out their differences as part of the Premier League's efforts to mediate a resolution where Watford are said to have received assurances that Everton would not follow up their interest in Silva after the 2017-18 season ended.

A follow-up meeting planned for July where it was the League's hope that a financial compensation deal could be agreed and that outcome is deemed by The Telegraph to be the most likely outcome, "despite claims that [Watford] want to see Everton punished".

 

Reader Comments (70)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Derek Knox
1 Posted 14/09/2018 at 03:18:14
I honestly thought this would have been put to bed after the Richarlison transfer, where they made something in the region of £20M plus profit.

It will be interesting to see how 'unbiased' the enquiry turns out to be.

Paul Kelly
2 Posted 14/09/2018 at 05:20:25
The RS get off with it, that means were nailed on for the biggest fine and maybe points deduction in the history of footy.

Roll on Sunday, I'm really bored now.

Alan J Thompson
3 Posted 14/09/2018 at 05:40:56
It seems to me that Everton approached Watford to seek permission to speak to their manager, Silva. What happened next is a little unknown but I assume that Everton spoke to Silva before offering Watford compensation, not to speak to him but to allow him to change to Everton.

Later Watford dismissed Silva and some months later again Everton employed him. The question then is did Everton speak to him after being asked not to by Watford and did this in any way affect his performance at Watford and was that just coincidental.

As for insisting on seeing phone records, I'm sorry, you only run a football competition. Everton should make it known that any judgement against them will be strongly contested in Court.

Michael Kenrick
4 Posted 14/09/2018 at 06:24:08
Alan (#3),

"I'm sorry, you only run a football competition." — I thought that too, but was quite shocked when I started scanning the Premier League Handbook — all 610 pages of it.

What did we used to be told? Read, mark, and inwardly digest!!!

Bobby Mallon
5 Posted 14/09/2018 at 06:26:05
That's us with points deducted, and I say this with good reason. In the season where only us and West Ham had players banned for simulation of a dive, do you really think nothing will happen over this? It's a bloody joke.
Pete Gunby
6 Posted 14/09/2018 at 06:26:56
Add Watford to the list of teams I hope get relegated, go bankrupt and vanish from football.
Robert Leigh
7 Posted 14/09/2018 at 06:30:16
This happens all the time in football, but normally the manager resigns then gets the move he wants – Silva didn't do that.

We offered good money for a man who had been there a matter of months, the fact things went south for them after we went elsewhere is not our fault.

Hell if someone comes in for their man now, if he stays will they throw their toys out the pram when their 100% record goes?

Harry Wallace
8 Posted 14/09/2018 at 07:04:11
Knowing our luck, we'll get a points reduction!
Christine Foster
9 Posted 14/09/2018 at 07:13:46
It's time for those who run the game to make an example again, and something that happens every day in football, where players and managers are tapped up, is once again ignored until we are involved.

Are we so amateurish that we cannot make an approach as others do? Or are we dictated to by a governing body who want to be seen as having teeth but daren't upset the top tier? We are big enough to be a target but not big enough to upset.

The hypocrisy is mind-numbing... laughable... but, once again, expect the worst from an organisation who do not have the spine to take on Chelsea, Man City or Liverpool, because they NEVER tap up anyone — do they! (Remember Moyes?)

Tony Rice
10 Posted 14/09/2018 at 07:16:56
Can we count the 4 points lost in the last 2 matches as part of the "Silva" points deduction?!
Kenny Smith
11 Posted 14/09/2018 at 07:54:44
I see Gareth Evans, aka Harry the Hornet, has resigned with immediate effect. We'll probably get the blame for that as well.

Meanwhile, across the park, those lovable reds begin world domination by tapping up Gerbil Van Dijk with no punishment at all.

Graham Coldron
12 Posted 14/09/2018 at 08:00:48
Should come as no real surprise this but what makes me laugh is how other clubs routinely get away with it and how the media plays its part.

Go back to when Rooney burst onto the scene and how he was openly touted to move to a bigger club "for the good of the English game" and the media also played its part when Moyes slunk off to Man Utd.

I can also remember the media collectively nodding its head and saying "When Sir Alex gets on the phone, you cannot say No."

I can also remember Lineker acting all coy on the Wogan show with Venables when asked if he was going to Barcelona. This has been going on for years where Everton are concerned.

Rob B Williams
13 Posted 14/09/2018 at 08:02:21
What we need here is a defence lawyer, someone who knows Silva and his tactics first hand, someone who can plead that his man was not 'tapped up'.

I wonder whether we have any suitable candidates amongst us?

Phil Sammon
14 Posted 14/09/2018 at 08:21:33
If we tapped him up, then what did Man Utd do to us?

Moyes had agreed to become their manager while he was still in charge at Everton.

Mark Dunford
15 Posted 14/09/2018 at 08:53:13
This should have been sorted months ago and we can only assume it wasn't because Watford wanted to pursue the case... it may be out of a stubborn sense from their pig-headed owners are in the right or they think they have evidence to win. Perhaps, both.

Either way, it is potentially very serious and I assume we just wait for the verdict, and then decide what to do. Doesn't feel like it will end soon.

Michael Lynch
16 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:07:21
I'm sure that if a club can get away with allowing their fans to line the roads to their ground and hurl bricks and bottles at the opposition team's coach, then we should be given a small fine at worst for such a minor offence.

I have total faith in the Football League to act in a fair and proportionate manner .

So we'll probably be relegated to the Scottish Third Division.

Colin Glassar
17 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:09:17
Rob B, what we need is a defence coach to stop us leaking so many goals from set-pieces!

Knowing our luck, we'll be automatically relegated, deducted 500 points and fined £100m to put us back in our place.

Meanwhile, the RS thugs who planned the terrorist attack on the Man City bus are walking around Scot-free while Merseyside fucking Police continue with their “ongoing investigations”.

Kim Vivian
18 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:17:04
Totally off topic this but is anyone else getting that fucking annoying pop up which says your phone is virus affected bah blah blah, only, 45secs to act blah blah blah? Only happening to me on tweb. Sorry for the interruption to the thread.

On topic - I can't see this going anywhere and someone is wasting a lot of people's time. Unless something extremely dubious has gone on behind the scenes but in the general scheme of things these days there seems to be little mileage.

You up yet, Mr Ferns?

Dermot Byrne
19 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:25:09
Kim... happens to me occasionally too but only on TW. Not for a week or so though.
Ray Smith
20 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:27:18
If, as reported, Watford the Premier League have appointed an independent QC to examine telephone records of certain people, one would think that the said independent QC would advise caution in what could become a minefield of counter representations from both sides. I can't imagine Moshiri taking this laying down.

A question to any TWers who are lawyers. Under what authority can the telephone records be produced (RIPA)?

Wouldn't this be construed as ‘phishing'?

Christine (#9), you are right in one respect that we are (were) seen as a soft touch by the authorities. However, George Graham was made an example for something that all managers were up to!

Hopefully the new regime will show its teeth.

Unless the said independent QC draws a line under this, it will drag on for years IMO.

Brent Stephens
21 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:28:00
"The Premier League has launched an independent inquiry at the Hornets' request".

I'm ignorant of precedent here, so would be interested to know a number of things:

Is this QC-led inquiry as a result of a Watford complaint to the Premier League (about an illegal approach to Silva)?

Have any other clubs previously complained to the Premier League about such illegal approaches?

In those cases, what process did the Premier League initiate (eg, a QC-led inquiry)?

And what were the outcomes?

Anybody know?

Ray Roche
22 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:35:50
Yes, it's gone on for years so maybe now the Premier League, The FA, and Uncle Tom Cobbley will decide it's time to do something about it and make an example of us in the same way that we were punished for the Niasse “dive”.

It remains the ONLY time a punishment has been handed out for that offence, yet it continues to happen every game without any further retrospective action. If there is a fair and proper investigation into this, I'll show my arse in Burton's window.

Sam Hoare
23 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:38:27
I think it is highly unlikely that we will get a points deduction. Unless we have done some seriously dubious things. If we had points deducted and then got relegated, then we could end up trying to sue the Premier League for huge loss of income etc; the whole thing would get incredibly messy and the Premier League won't want to risk that unless some very clear and undebateable wrongdoing, clearly worse than usual, can be proven.

I'd expect a large fine at worst. Hopefully.

John Pickles
24 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:47:47
Can we claim Belgium tapped up Martinez after his first season with us?
Eddie Dunn
25 Posted 14/09/2018 at 09:55:50
I don't know what went on behind the scenes but put yourselves in Watford's position. A bigger club tap-up your manager after he has made a promising start to the season, the uncertainty affects the team's form and things go tits-up.

If we had started the season well and this happened, we would all be baying for blood.

Victor Yu
26 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:00:02
Meanwhile, we did nothing when Moyes left (we even congratulated him).
Ian Ferries
27 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:19:23
I too am getting that irritating pop up about virus. Nuisance.
Len Hawkins
28 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:20:27
Well as all things football at the moment revolve around the shite from across the park, you can't be a pundit unless you played for the Shite the boss of BT Sport is a card-holding redneck who demanded the clowns were on more than other teams, Sky never have them off for more than 5 minutes... I would imagine the nonce leading the investigation is a bleeding redneck too!
Rob Halligan
29 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:25:55
Here is a link to when The Telegraph reported on Liverpool trying to tap up Van Dijk. It seems it's not the first time they have been accused of tapping up:

Liverpool forced into humiliating apology over pursuit of Virgil van Dijk and shelve interest in world-record bid

The highest profile proven case of tapping up to date was the Ashley Cole from Arsenal to Chelsea case in 2005. Chelsea received a £100k fine and a suspended three points deduction.

I imagine we would, if found guilty, expect a similar punishment, albeit a lot heavier fine, probably running into millions, and a suspended points deduction.

John G Davies
30 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:33:57
Who would you suggest, Rob B?
Tony Everan
31 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:35:19
Who passes judgement at the end of this inquisition?

Liverpool tap up the latest Southampton player every six months, Virgil van Dijk was a ten times more valuable deal and Liverpool get a slap on the wrist and a don't do it again. We get a QC-led enquiry with the threat of a points deduction hanging over the club all season.

The real inquiry needs to be into the Premier League's shameless double standards.

Derek Cowell
32 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:41:38
I'm also getting the virus scam notice but only when I'm on ToffeeWeb. Someone needs to take a look at it as the site is obviously infected!
Rob B Williams
33 Posted 14/09/2018 at 10:54:03
JGD: 'Who would you suggest?'

Far be it for me to suggest any names, but from what little knowledge I have of the legal process, we certainly need someone in that particular 'Zone' of defending hopeless cases, taking statements and arranging bail etc.

It seems that we are in the "Dock' once more — first Kings, now Bramley-Moore... and who knows, the Old Bailey.

No, John, I would not wish to proffer any candidates for that very important job; indeed, if a candidate were to emerge and be successful, he could find his image being projected around Goodison Park for years to come.

His approach would need to be clinical, well presented and easy to follow. On the other hand, if he has the skills to bullshit, we could even get off scot-free.

Would you know anyone suitable for such a massive job, someone with inside knowledge of the perpetrators of this heinous crime??

Liam Reilly
34 Posted 14/09/2018 at 11:16:34
Disgraceful.

Liverpool admit to tapping up VD and nothing happens, even though Southampton were furious.

Serious double standards.

Jay Wood
[BRZ]

35 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:12:34
The Italian owners of Watford are not going to let this slip quietly under the waves.

They seem intent on applying a couple of Italian proverbs on vengeance:

"Revenge a 100 years old still has its milk teeth"

and

"Wait time and place for your revenge, for it is never well done in a hurry."

They seemingly wish to disrupt our season in the same way they perceive we disrupted theirs, last season.

The report says the findings won't be concluded until 2019, without saying which month.

Best just to ignore it until some final decision is declared.

John G Davies
36 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:20:22
What we need, Rob, is someone who does thier research before they comment. Someone analytical in the way they break down the evidence and present it in a way anyone with a modicum of intelligence gets the picture.

What we don't need representing our case is someone who snipes needlessly at fellow members of the bar without presenting a counter-argument.

I rest my case, m'lud.

Steve Brown
37 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:37:37
Rumpole of the Bailey then.
John Wilson
38 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:38:36
I am not a lawyer as such but I do hold law degree with honours (including commercial law).

In the USA, companies have constitutional rights (think of them as being equivalent to human rights). Everton use certain company names so they are a legal company (ie, not sole trader) and not an individual. An individual (ie, Moshiri, Silva... others) as well as footballers 'may' have a legal personality (a company, ie Limited by incorporation – some protection to limit liability). So Moshiri can make commercial transactions in his own name (individual transaction) or make commercial transactions as a company (ie, Ltd etc). Managers, Footballers, as legal companies or individuals, can do the same.

Order of Disclosure:

Under civil procedure rules (CPR), each party (individual or limited incorporate company) are expected to make disclosure of all material (relevant evidence) at the beginning of a hearing. It is the judge who decides if any evidence is inadmissible (can't be used as evidence for the hearing). It is usually about whether there is a public interest for the disclosure of telephone records, for instance. A company cannot claim right to a private life in the UK but could in the USA; an individual in the UK, however, could claim 'right to a private life'.

ADR (alternative dispute resolution) is not the law any more than Islamic tribunals are the law. ADR (mediation) will seek to find a remedy for the companies instead of an expensive court case. Tribunals or ADR, I believe, do not have to follow the normal court rules (CPR).

Commercial custom:

The courts give companies some freedom to regulate themselves to an extent, insofar as the courts interpret commercial terms based on the ordinary practice of those companies (legal entities or personalities).

I think Everton should argue that tapping up managers is commercial practice – lots of Premier League clubs do it. It would be disproportionate to treat Everton differently if other clubs did the same but are not sanctioned in the way Everton were (if they were to lose points or fined).

Commercial law — 'malicious prosecution:

Everton could claim torts (compensation for wrongs) in terms of malicious prosecution, ie, Watford allegedly blaming Everton for taking Silva albeit there is no direct evidence (res ipsa loquitur — 'evidence speaks for itself' principle in tort) that Silva would have performed any better for Watford even if he were to have stayed at Watford (foreseeability principle). It would be malicious prosecution (court or related action, ie Premier League complaints or reporting) where the action taken was basically for spite and not any genuine complaint.

Everton (allegedly) offered Watford up to £15 million compensation (even though there was no case proved against Everton). May be this is the world of multimillionaire or billionaire remedies... to avoid paying QCs stupid money. In terms of contract breaches, £15 million would likely have been feasible – in tort law, the opponent cannot usually claim for pure economic loss (money for money's sake) because it is highly speculative.

Everton FC Company Ltd are subject to the Company Act 2006 and so must follow all the laws in the UK.

Gordon Crawford
39 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:38:40
The FA and the Premier League truly are a joke. Expect it to be double, triple what Chelsea got. The bias knows no end.
John G Davies
40 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:39:09
Steve,

Aka Tommy Smith.

Kevin Jones
41 Posted 14/09/2018 at 12:49:51
I seem to recall a few years back Robbie Fowler doing an interview on Sky or the BBC. At the time, he'd left Liverpool, played for Leeds, and then went to Man City; surprisingly out of the blue (pardon the pun), he then re-signed for Liverpool. He told the Interviewer, "I was sitting in a restaurant one night when the then Manager of Liverpool, Rafa Benitez, approached me and asked would I like to resign for Liverpool? To which I said Yes. A week later, I was re-signed."

Now at the time, I contacted the Premier League, because I'm an extremely bitter Blue, to say "I've just witnessed a Manchester City Player, Robert Fowler, openly confess on TV to being tapped up by the Liverpool Manager, Rafa Benitez. Can you please advise if this will be looked into as this is an illegal approach?"

This was 2006, and I'm still waiting for a reply. I'll keep you posted if they reply.

Jay Harris
42 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:01:50
I think the Premier League did not want to have to deal with this and really wanted the clubs to resolve it between themselves.

I expect it will be a situation where they appear to give us a big slap on the wrist but really brush it under the table unless there is proper evidence that we approached Silva directly at any point before he was fired.

John Wilson
43 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:05:01
Kevin, anything said by any person 'can' be used as evidence under the 'hearsay rules' meaning it is third party evidence but not in person.

In reality, the Premier League are not going to investigate circumstantial information say unless Robbie Fowler himself were to come forward and give evidence. But, why would he?

Steve Ferns
44 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:07:19
I'm not sure what line you are going down, John.

This will not be a court case. It is a simple arbitration and the Premier League are hiring a QC only because it sounds good.

Watford will present their case, Everton will defend it. The tribunal will make a ruling and then it's up to the parties to accept it or not.

If Everton lose, we will appeal, and it'll go to CAS, then after that up through the courts proper.

As for demanding phone records, they cannot insist. The police are not involved, there are no powers to seize them. Instead, the tribunal will simply draw an inference for any failure to comply with disclosure requests.

There is a precedent here though from FIFA. After the World Cup bidding fiasco, Russia and England were investigated. We gave full disclosure and lo and behold FIFA found some evidence of very minor infringements because we did not doctor the evidence and dealt with things above board.

Russia meanwhile said their computers were all destroyed and disposed of and so they had no records for FIFA to look into. FIFA said that was okay, and let them off.

Moral of the story: Everton need to have a big midnight bonfire and shredding session down at the Pier Head (like off that Tom Cruise film, The Client).

This is all a sham. The Pozzos are just after money.

Pete Edwards
45 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:09:23
Hahaha, I love this! No doubt they will wait to see if we have broken into the top 4 or 6 then deduct the number of points to demote us back out of it!

You heard it here first...

John G Davies
46 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:19:50
Tongue-in-cheek post, Steve.
Brian Williams
47 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:24:05
Steve (#44).

I read somewhere that the Pozzos / Watford have already given up the right to compensation so there's no money in this for them.

I'd like you to use your contacts so that you can get involved in the case coz I'm bloody sure we'd come out of it with points added! So, my learned friend, get it sorted! :-)

Gordon Crawford
48 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:24:12
Peter I was going to post the same earlier. Champions League spot lost because of a points deduction, now that would make the FA happy.
John Wilson
49 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:24:29
If the Pozzos are just after money, then why did they turn down up to £15 million? No individual or company should be able to manipulate.
John Wilson
50 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:26:09
A QC is supposed to a mean the country's best legal court advocates.
John Wilson
51 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:29:50
Steve Ferns - when you discuss police powers, this is public law - not civil law as such.

I know all about public law as I help families oppose or revoke 'forced' child adoption orders, based on public law.

Some people are worried about Brexit whereas the lower social class worry about having the state – the social workers, the council authorities (local authorities) – in generations of their family's life. The so-called 'secret' courts have that power... an ex-barrister or judge. I know what a QC is alright. One uses posh words and the other has a diluted view of family rights in the free democratic UK.

nb: I was making a point not for a debate. I am limited on my posts so I cannot, and really cannot be arsed commenting any further on this post.

Danny Broderick
52 Posted 14/09/2018 at 13:50:59
If we have broken the rules, then we will be punished. It’s like if you get caught speeding. Everyone does it, but you can’t use that as your defence. Let’s hope we haven’t done anything wrong.
Michael Williams
53 Posted 14/09/2018 at 14:03:19
The reason the FA is investigating Everton with possible penalties as a result is that Watford are pushing a complaint.

In the case of Virgil van Dijk, it appears Southampton and Liverpool were able to settle the matter amongst themselves. Even though Man Utd tapped up Moyes, Everton did not file a complaint either. The FA is not to blame here.

Steve Ferns
54 Posted 14/09/2018 at 14:09:34
John,

QCs are certainly not the best advocates. You go on at length about class in other posts. QCs come overwhelmingly from a set few schools. It's about having the right tie. Sure, they'll give the silk to someone deserving now and again, but most of the ones I see are terrible. They just have the right accent and the right credentials in terms of family and friends.

As for police powers, you're barking up the wrong tree. The police will not be involved in this, I can assure you. 0% chance of police seizing any phone records. It's all done with adverse inferences anyway.

Garry Corgan
55 Posted 14/09/2018 at 14:13:17
If our directors have any sense of humour, they'll sign up Harry the Hornet immediately!
Jamie Crowley
56 Posted 14/09/2018 at 14:44:46
This will amount to nothing except a monetary compensation to Watford to get them to shut their mouths.

If there is a points deduction, it will only be levied if we are nowhere near a European spot at the end of the season, rendering it meaningless. If we're in the hunt for a top 7 spot, the Premier League will not levy a points deduction.

As someone stated earlier, this is only about the Italians wanting compo for their coach. The Premier League has to save face possibly with a points deduction. It's all superficial "we have to appear to have done the right thing" garbage.

Justin Doone
57 Posted 14/09/2018 at 14:55:09
We all know that we have a poor defence and are a soft touch on and off the field. We may be as guilty as a dozen or more clubs but we know how to roll over better than them.

I'm guessing an apology, a fine and a few theatre tickets should help sort it out as it's approaching panto season and people want a song and dance.

Back to football, we really need to turn draws into wins so I'm expecting 3 points this weekend... c'mon Toffees.

Paul Myers
58 Posted 14/09/2018 at 15:05:07
If Everton are given a huge fine, why not sue the Premier League for applying different rules for different clubs?

Manchester United openly admitted to tapping up Moyes whilst under contract to Everton. But the Premier League did nothing.

It's not too late to file a lawsuit, plenty of new evidence has emerged with Moyes's and Fergy's autobiographies.

Sue the Premier League and use the compensation to pay the fine.

Mark Taylor
61 Posted 14/09/2018 at 15:46:04
While I'm not a lawyer, I've never really quite understood Watford's case here.

As I understand it, we approached the club about the possibility of recruiting their manager and were not trying to encourage Silva to resign. I can imagine we may well have had a probably indirect exchange with Silva to ascertain whether he would in theory be amenable and the type of wages he would seek, but we made a formal approach as I understand it to the club, not Silva.

The nub of this issue under EPL rules is whether attempting to qualify whether a person would even be interested in moving amounts to 'an approach', if it falls short of negotiation or ongoing dialogue. And that is assuming Everton even had such an informal contact, which they may not have done.

Our formal approach was rebuffed. I think we would be technically falling foul of the regulations if we had further contact with Silva after being rebuffed by the club. But Silva, whether we talked to him or not, did not resign, he stayed with Watford.

The fact that Watford then struggled strikes me as neither here nor there. It would be impossible in my view to prove, even on a balance of probability, that Everton showing interest in Silva affected his performance. Frankly, they'd have a better case against Silva himself.

And in any case, Watford's EPL record is hardly one that suggests what then happened was unusual. And of course, if Watford chose, they could have dispensed with his services. It was their choice to keep with him and this they are accountable for what happens next.

I believe we offered compensation to Watford as part of our formal approach. That is normal because there is a clear loss implied in a player or manager not fulfilling their contract. But, as it turned out, Silva did fulfil his contract. And last time I looked at this, it appears that Watfor sacked him without compensation, which suggests, if there is any contract breach, it's theirs.

Of course, the devil here is in the detail. Did someone at Everton talk to Silva about moving and if so, was it beyond just checking if it was even a viable option? If so, we may well have broken Premier League rules.

But we clearly haven't broken the law and nor can I see any remotely defensible case for compensation, other than possibly to Silva from Watford. Maybe Watford, knowing that, have tried to move the process towards fines and point deductions...

Tim Gerrard
62 Posted 14/09/2018 at 16:28:27
Just a thought on the comments on Moyes's departure. Maybe the difference was that Man Utd did not approach him with a view to break his contract; merely, at the end of his contract, not to renew it, and sign one with them?
Brian Wilkinson
63 Posted 14/09/2018 at 16:31:39
Watford are on maximum points so far in the Premier League, what would a points deduction mean to them?

They did the same when Silva was at Hull City — is this going to be brought up as well and Watford receive the same punishment as Everton?

Like others have pointed out, Van Dijk, Moyes to Man Utd being a done thing as early as January that season.

The constant Barkley bids even after being told during a closed transfer window he was not for sale.

The nick Barmby tap-up, what player would say "I want to play for them", unless he had been approached with the other club saying "We don't want you"? He knew they wanted him, hence coming out with the comment.

There are lots of different tap-ups that have gone on but Ashley Cole as the only one I recall a points reduction in the prem, may be others that have eluded me.

Like others have said, Niasse and one other player are the only ones to be punished for simulation; none coming out of the so called big six have been punished.

So I am expecting a fine, nothing more, the Premier League have already tried to distance themselves from this dispute; expect a fine and nothing more.

As for Watford, they should receive the same punishment; if I was chairman of Hull City, I would be following this very closely.

Kieran Kinsella
64 Posted 14/09/2018 at 16:40:53
Michael (#53),

You are exactly right. This isn't some kind of "conspiracy" against Everton. The Premier League have been pushing Watford to settle this behind closed doors but, since they refuse to do so, the league have to act.

One thing concerning me is that the Premier League, Fifa and Uefa are all investigating agents and trying to stop the outflow of money and all these shenanigans. The "tapping up" thing is essentially part of that same murky underworld where everyone has been talking to players and coaches "illegally" either directly or through intermediaries be they Mina Raiola or Paul Pogba. So, if the investigators find us guilty – which seems probable; otherwise, why would we even have attempted to mediate if there was no case to answer – that the Premier League may take the opportunity to hammer us as part of their overall drive to clean up transfers.

The flip-side to that is that it could open up a can of worms with dozens more cases. But I suspect the majority of clubs can accuse but also be accused of similar things so there may be a kind of Mexican standoff with Everton hung out to dry as the case that marks the start of a new "cleaner" era.

Si Cooper
65 Posted 14/09/2018 at 17:03:28
The Premier League can't have it both ways. Either this is a serious offence and each occasion should be independently investigated irrespective of any settlement between clubs or lack of complaint, or it is a relatively minor infringement only worthy of a slap on the wrist at best due to plenty of precedents that have been handled that way.

If we do get a points deduction, surely we have a case for being treated more harshly than others have been. ‘Justice' is rendered meaningless if it isn't applied equally.

Kieran Kinsella
66 Posted 14/09/2018 at 17:15:47
Si,

They aren't having it both ways, their preference is for clubs to mediate. 99% of the time that works, in this case Watford won't play ball.

Si Cooper
67 Posted 14/09/2018 at 17:41:55
I understand that, Kieran, but you can't have a heavier punishment just because someone wants to make a big deal about something. It's like the tribunals who decide how much compensation a club should get for losing a young player.

If the clubs can't agree, then the Premier League must decide the appropriate amount but if they impose a points deduction then they are applying a level of punishment they haven't insisted on before.

It's ridiculous to allow a malicious ‘victim' to force a greater punishment. Justice must be applied equally and that includes the level of punishment.

It is also wrong to start applying these things retrospectively. If you want to bring in greater punishment you can draw a line in the sand and say anyone who infringes from this point will get the new level of punishment, but it still has to be applied to everyone.
Joe O'Brien
69 Posted 14/09/2018 at 18:15:34
A friend of mine keeps going on about that Moyes could talk to other clubs cos he was in his last 6 months of his contract... is there some truth in that or is he just talking bollox?
Rob B Williams
70 Posted 14/09/2018 at 21:36:48
John G,

Any member of the bar is a friend of mine, in fact, I have met with quite a few this evening. Bars are nothing special, you set them as high or low as you want, some even limbo under them.

No John, I have nothing against bars (or the bar) – it is just that, in an open forum, some will throw in their status, be it lawyer or barman, as some way of accreditation.

I have no hidden agenda against the bar, nor the right to free speech. What I do detest are the ones that find it hard to make their case in one or even two posts and feel that they have to chip in or counter every argument made on these pages.

You as a poster of few words who likes to keep in with the flavour of the month poster (brown nose) will know what I am talking about, so please don't keep coming up like 'Little Sir Echo' and try and put me on the spot.

I have likes and I certainly have dislikes and at the moment I am reserving judgement on you, mate, albeit that my ancestors carried the name Davies.

Keep happy.

John G Davies
71 Posted 14/09/2018 at 21:44:15
Same again, Rob.
Phil Sammon
73 Posted 14/09/2018 at 00:09:47
I think someone needs to define ‘tapping up'.

As far as I can tell, Everton made several formal approaches for Silva and were repeatedly knocked back.

If we are to be charged with anything, surely it's being ‘bothersome'.

Jerome Shields
74 Posted 16/09/2018 at 20:59:42
I hope Silva is worth the risk of being found guilty of tapping up – a fine and a points deduction.

It also appears he was the only candidate for the job and Everton had to tap him up to get him and give him a 3-year contract. How highly unprofessional and desperate this all seems.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.