Forest lodge appeal against PSR sanction

You'd never know, it might work!

The whole concept of the application of points deductions for financial failures is arbitrary and unfair on the teams, the fans and everyone involved with the operational arm of a club.An unmitigated disaster brought on by arrogance and intransigence of a board with no football experience, just banking, commercial and financial.

Yet now they have presided over the Tipping Point of Chaos, when, after the last ball has been kicked this season, they will decide on who they can and wish to relegate.There is a fine line that borders incompetence with corruption; once crossed, it is impossible to erase the smear.

The clubs in the Premier League should have an emergency meeting and stop this headlong pursuit of feigned self righteousness by a board who clearly have scant regard for the damage they do to the clubs themselves nor for the brand of the Premier League. What should follow is the resignation of this board for bringing the game into disrepute.

These shambolic rules need exposing for what they are doing to the game, for the clubs who want to at least try and become competitive.

Say Forest's appeal is unsuccessful, then does that mean it's likely that the Premier League will wish to land us with more or less points than 4 as another penalty?

Our club will definitely appeal if more than 4 (I assume); might not bother if less.

I can't see Forest being successful as, even the Premier League will struggle to align less than 4 with our original 10 and then 6.

It's points deduction Bingo. No surprise that, if 4's the magic number, then it's more than one win, so cannot be recovered in one game (although the season will probably be over).

We really need to win at Bournemouth, it's going to be out of our hands if we don't help ourselves.

Consider this: the season has finished, titles won, 4 other teams have gained the honour of Champions League qualification.

Along come the Premier League and announce that that three of the top four have broken rules with respect to the interpretation of PSR 3 years previously.

Points are deducted, the titles rescinded for the past 3 years, awarded Champions League places also affected, clubs in 6th or 7th for the last 3 years are suing because of lost income being denied access to the Champions League.

Far fetched? Of course it is, it would never happen. It never should happen. But by the same measure neither should it happen to clubs at the other end of the table.

To do so shows the difference in application of rules, the application and impact of sanctions. In short, an inherent unfairness applied to those they wish.

The Premier League clubs themselves should draw the line under this and stop it now.

Or corruption by the clubs who knew the rules and broke the rules?

There has to be some accountability with the clubs here. What if the rules that were broken were something else? What if it was later found that clubs bribed referees or opponents?

I doubt appealing the rules themselves will get them anywhere. The commissions so far have all said that the rules themselves were out of their hands.

Though I do agree the rules for promoted clubs are particularly dumb.

I could see them appealing whether cooperation and an early plea was worth 2 or 3 points.

Or whether, once the Commission banded their breach as 'significant', they shouldn't have given them the same 3 point additional punishment as us, given an assumption that ours included aggravating factors (ie, objectively misleading figures).

The independent commission should also measure against the sanity of the rules and feed that back to the Premier League to state they need to take a degree of responsibility and action.

Part of Forest's need to spend so much was because the team that got promoted had 5 loanees, including Garner, as part of their first team.

If they had actually built a team in the Championship, they would have required significantly less expenditure after coming up.

Not for one minute do I believe it is some kind of equal democracy between all the constituent members. There are powerful forces at work, the power always lies with the money, and those with money always want more of it.

If Everton had a chance of a consensual outcome as long as we didn't appeal that has now gone and more chance of a bigger sentence which will help Forest stay up. I don't blame them as I would do the same.

I really bope this leads to the downfall of Masters and Co for such a shocking made-up bollocks of a kangaroo court that has no rules.

The vested interest in Brand ensures such things happen. It is the application of selective punishment for some but not all that is as corrupt as a bung.

Should any club accept bribes or initiate bribes no matter where they stand, it is corruption.

The issue isn't so much of whom are we referring to with regards 'the premier league' as much as who the EPL is supporting vs punishing. Had the EPL acted sooner with Man City, they would have and should have been charged seasons ago before they got out of hand. May be they will get punished. May be they'll weasel their way out of it somehow. In the meanwhile, the clubs at the lower end of the league aren't receiving the same benefit in the slightest. I also sincerely doubt Forest and Everton (Chelsea are yet to be seen) are the only clubs who've breached PSR or any other rules. A breach is a breach even if it's £1m etc.

The Commission did apply the full, relevant 3-year period. In fact, they calculated the spend in a way Forest didn't want and which was to Forest's disadvantage.

As opposed to Everton who were “delighted” to be given 4 points back, from an initial ten that was just plucked out of thin air with a lesser charge against the PSR rule and end up two points worse off, despite (apparently) cooperating with the commission throughout. So someone is telling porkies. Was probably Kenwright as that PoS lied every time his lips parted.

So if Forest were given 6, and cooperated they get 4 and we get 10 less 4 on appeal and end up with 2 more than a team 75% more in breach than we were (assuming a breach is a breach, regardless). And we were fucking delighted! FFS. If Forest appeal and get 2 or 3 back, then what? Our appeal was actually against a ridiculous penalty but their appeal is against any penalty.

Everton this.

Why has nobody made the argument that the PSR limits haven't been inflation adjusted for TEN years? It's ludicrous and the whole thing falls apart on that basis alone (wages and transfer fees etc have all increased dramatically).

Just you wait until Everton become the first club and only club in history that will be punished for the same “offence” twice. And then the rules are scrapped at the end of the season.

By the way...

Whoever came up with VAR wants beating about the head with a camera and the whole of the so-called top referees sending down to the National leagues and replacing with decent honest refs. Those arseholes have opened Pandora's box and I hope they suffer for it.

There need to be some kind of rules in place to stop teams financially doping, but also to stop owners taking the kind of risks that threaten the existence of clubs. A fine doesn't address either.

I completely take the point that the rules favour the rich, and that so far they've only been applied to two clubs, both at the lower end of the revenue scale.

But we signed up to those rules, and no-one as yet has demonstrated that they won't be applied equally to others.

If City have actually broken PSR rules (and it's not clear to me that is one of the 115 charges) then they should be absolutely ripped by a commission for delaying the punishment by years. Let's see if it happens - what I do know is that the Premier League have charged them.

I don't know of any other club that's been charged. So who should be punished?

In some ways, I feel it could be a win-win for us. If they lose and get more points added on to their deduction, then that obviously helps us (and teaches us not to appeal a lenient punishment). If they win back points and their deduction is reduced to 2 or 3, then that surely sets a helpful precedent for us in our second PSR case.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if we had financial management as competent as the vast majority of other Premier League clubs.

And, in different circumstances, if Usmanov was still funding the stadium, thus freeing up funds to buy top players, and had installed a business-savvy CEO and effective Chairman, would we have any sympathy for Forest?

"There need to be some kind of rules in place to stop teams financially doping, but also to stop owners taking the kind of risks that threaten the existence of clubs. A fine doesn't address either."

The principle behind it is sound but, by making a points deduction, it actually threatens the existence of a club in the lower part of the table due to relegation and the lower income that would entail.

I would query the claims regarding Everton losses against Forest losses. The Everton figures bandied about are the figures that Everton presented to the commission. They were not accepted by the commission. The actual Premier League Everton figures were never revealed.

This is in line with the terms that the Commission was originally set up by the Premier League and probably to avoid getting caught up in a tax investigation.

Forest were acknowledge by the Commission as being fully co-operative and it was taken into account in the sanction they received. What I took from this was that Forest presented accurate and correct figures to the Commission.

Everton were referred to the Commission when their highly qualified audited final accounts became available. Everton publically held to the argument that the figures monitored over the previous two years by the Premier League were correct.

I also came across a report that Everton presented a claim at the Commission that they had lost £200 million in sponsorship because of the Ukraine war fallout, but when asked by the Commission to provide evidence, they were unable to produce a signed contract.

When Everton were approach independently regarding this Contract, they admitted that one had not been drawn up. I concluded from that Everton where never threatened with sanctions because of Russian connections. If there had been a contract, they could have legally enforced it.

Everton did publicly announce USM sponsorship, regarding the Stadium naming rights and Finch Farm which did appear in the accounts,

The whole PSR process is a mess in implementation and finishing after the end of the season adds to that.

The worrying thing is that the only way we, the fans, seem to get any clear indication of the financial status of our club is when the information is dragged out of the administration during a quasi-legal process.

I don't know how accurate Swiss Ramble is but this puts our losses over a three year period as £381m. Surely that is unsustainable?

Financial Fair Play, 2021-22, 19 June 2023

'The Premier League is referring Everton to an independent commission for an alleged breach of its profitability and sustainability rules.

The assessment period for which Everton have been charged covers four seasons from the start of 2018/19 to the end of 2021/22.

Everton are only the second club to be charged with breaking Premier League financial rules after Manchester City were charged last month.

The Merseysiders recorded losses of £371.8m over the past three years. Premier League rules allow clubs to lose a maximum of £105m over three years.'

Sky Sports, 25 March 2023.

Everton claimed £170m of this was because of Covid, bringing them down to £202m. They then claimed adjustments brought them down to £113m. Using the Everton figures the Premier League said the loss was £123m. That is where the dispute over interest and other adjustments is centred as per the report. But the Commission did not state that they accepted the adjustments and there is no mention of the £170m write off only as a note attached to the Final Accounts 2022 referring to 21/22.

But the bottom line is that these losses are still having a impact on Everton going forward. I have rounded off some figures.

Chelsea are not mentioned yet. But they have had a transfer ban, sanctions where applied to Ambramovich who walked away and the new owners have self-declared anything they found. But they still blew a massive hole in the 3-year loss threshold.

If Rabinowitz has prepared our defence, and unless the case is given to the most junior barrister in his chambers, then I'm sure we'll have excellent representation.

I have no idea what if any points deductions will follow this latest hearing but I think a further points deduction would be a bitter blow for players and fans alike.

So Everton with another first, the only club ever hit with the possibility of two separate points deductions in the one season.

Outcome is anybody's guess. A manageable 1 or 2 points or a draconian unfair 6 points. We have to take this into our hands, on the pitch, starting this week. We are in control of our own destiny, let's grab it now and take away the last day (post-last day?) misery and uncertainty. Time to be positive.

Perhaps Everton were disappointed that they didn't see more of a return on investment before the appeal board? After all, what should have been good solid arguments in favour of no less than seven grounds of mitigation — presumably argued in earnest on behalf of the club by Mr Lawrence Rabinowitz KC – were all just summarily brushed aside by the first commission and the appeals board.

It then depends how much credit you can place at the feet of Rabinowitz for the 4 points Everton were given back. Since these were legal arguments, maybe he earned his crust here.

But I worry that this indicates Everton may have given up on arguing the mitigation angles, especially having received nothing in terms of even grudging recognition of the issues, and may thus have concluded that it would be a waste of time, effort and money to have Mr Rabinowitz present the arguments for the club a third time (it would have been second time for him as counsel).

Worse still, they may have decided that little is to be gained from strong legal argument (including against double jeopardy) compared with overly compliant and obsequious cooperation, as manifested by Nottingham Forest in earning them a 2-point reprieve — albeit they have now gone down the appeal path also.

Let's hope the club's judgement in playing or not playing certain cards here bears fruit… but it does little to assuage the fear that yet another substantial points deduction will be heading our way — just so that the sanctions are shown to be 'consistent'.

I'm hoping the Premier League have got a genuine fear of facing the wealth of Manchester City in a courtroom and bring in double jeopardy which might make things easier when they determine their punishment, whenever they get around to trying to punish them.

Although FFP regulations may not be designed to maintain a level playing field in terms of resources available to clubs, it is vitally important for the integrity of the competition that the FFP regulations are applied, and applied equally to all clubs in that particular competition.

Yes, pursuing all 115 charges is a monster task. But surely they should not have been allowed to carry on profiting from their breaches season upon season with apparent impunity when it comes to amassing trophies?

Why didn't the Premier League pick out a subset of charges that could be dealt with quickly? Or are they all so intertwined that this could not be accomplished?

Either way, all talk about the integrity of the competition is severely compromised while this situation drags on unresolved.

"Rabinowitz was involved in the appeal hearing and has helped Everton prepare for their second case – but will not be present at the independent commission this time."

As Charles #37 suggests, as Rabinowitz has helped Everton prepare the case, it might just need a competent colleague to handle the case at the Commission hearing.

The recent hearings in relation to the government handling of Covid have had a lead and supporting lawyer, both putting questions at different times. Rabinowitz might have a much more lucrative case at this time that he needs to attend.

While I have always believed that we will not, or deserve to get any more point deductions, nor did we deserve the 10 points, reduced to 6 points, punishment in the first place.

As John Lewis, Civil Rights Activist in the 1960s, said in 2019. “When you see something that is not right, not just, not fair, you have a moral obligation to say something.”

I know that there is a vast difference to the way Black people were treated, and still are, then and the way Everton are being treated over this but we should be more robust in verbally defending our case, and not weakly accepting another 2 points deduction, as quite a lot are amongst Everton fans.

With respect to Man City, they are specifically charged with 7 breaches of PSR from 2015-16 and, whilst the rest of the charges are bad enough by themself, I see no reason why those breaches cannot be addressed with the same degree of zeal Everton face?

I wrote a post asking why some items couldn't be challenged independently, then deleted it. I came to the conclusion that the charges are all intertwined, eg, openness could disclose financial impacts which could affect the balance of PSR or FFP.

Equally, the accounting anomalies could also affect PSR and FFP etc etc. If the items are handled independently, the club could be charged but then a knock-on impact from the wider case could cause the same case to be re-opened.

It's not our way. We are a city that doesn't accept fools gladly. Apart from me when it comes to Everton maybe!!

Stand up and fight, Everton. Don't accept it. Don't back down.

In the interim, just win games. Whatever they try to do to us, throw it right back up the proverbial. If we win games, we will be fine.

Sorry to revert to type but, to use a military analogy, you are never defeated until you accept defeat, even when the odds are seemingly against us.

We have a lot of matches and travel ahead of us. Fight Everton and Evertonians. We can do this.

Man City have already said they intend suing the Premier League for a billion pounds over how they address sponsorship deals. Something I think PIF at Newcastle may also consider.

A nation state just tells businesses to sponsor their club and of course the nation state can reimburse that sponsorship in a number of ways.

Seeing Leicester have said they will take their case to a civil court if charged with breaking the P&S rules if they gain promotion.

Also, the Premier League have said that there will be changes to the P&S rules next season, so again it will no doubt give wriggle room to Man City and Chelsea.

Also I don't believe that the Premier League would want to do anything that damages their brand and punishing the possible Premier League Champions and the possible Champions League winners, I doubt that very much.

Is it right that money influences these decisions? Absolutely not… but unfortunately that's the way of today's world.

The owner doesn't speak, and the board members who tried to throw the only people with the conviction to fight for the club, under the bus, have been sacked or are no longer with us.

We all know that Everton Football Club are a complete shambles and it will remain this way until Moshiri finally departs.

When I stop and think how Manchester City are operating and winning everything with all these charges hanging over them, then it is apparent to me that the Premier League are terrified of their owners, Michael. We will see…

We are told that we couldn't afford the lawyer who won the appeal to represent us in the recent hearing.

It seems Dyche and Thelwell are the only ones that are paying any attention to the rudderless ship.

Where did you get it was for financial reasons that Rabinowitz didn't represent Everton?

I've also seen it suggested [not a particularly relable source] that it was because he was already committed to another case.

Yes everything you say is correct but I have to believe that our case in the second charge has been covered by Mr. Rabinowitz through his representative and the result will be in our favour.

If it goes against us, it would be natural to think other clubs will get the same punishment as us, but different commissions might see things differently and the rules change this year so will Everton, Forest and possibly Leicester be the only “fall guys”?

That's the way the law is formed, says our mate Brent, even though the rules are changed after only one year of being used a different way, with only two offenders being punished and the rest starting afresh with their slates being wiped clean.

Whoever ends up running the club, I hope they chuck out the fig leaf of the 'Everton Way', 'getting the club', and focus on instilling a winning attitude throughout the club.

People may bleat about Man City's money and 'Kopite behaviour', but they win things regularly. Success leaves clues – I wish we'd start paying attention to them.

Dave, their slates are not being wiped clean.

Brian, Leicester City are not taking the Premier League or EFL to court.

Jay, who told you that we couldn't afford the lawyer?

Brian, the Premier League are taking on Man City – date set… just not published yet.

And Man City are not suing the Premier League for a billion pounds…

What is this? Wack-a-Mole? Jeez!

At the end of the day, it's all bollucks anyway. Nobody can foretell what's going to happen at any tribunal or in any courtroom.

One thing I do know that's got to happen though: Everton must win 4 or 5 more games out of 10 – or once again, they are relying on other teams losing to stay in the Premier League. I think Forest will win their next 2 games as well. Luton, will lose their next 2.

Dyche needs to release the handbrake and let these players play – stick Dobbin or Danjuma up front with Calvert-Lewin and get Coleman back in the team. Put Gomes at No 10 and get someone else to do his defensive bit, because he is a liability at that.

Give Calvert-Lewin some help up there and he will get 4 or 5 goals in the next 10 games. Probably go in off his arse or the back of his head, who gives a shit.

Dyche won't change now though, and if I hear "Well, we should be on 31 points really" once more, I will bloody implode!! Forget that — just win some games of football!!!!

Get after Bournemouth, they are weak right through the middle of their team. Sit back and you will get beat Seany boy! I am telling yer!!!

"The rules change this year so will Everton, Forest and possibly Leicester be the only “fall guys”? That's the way the law is formed, says our mate Brent, even though the rules are changed after only one year of being used a different way."

You're at it again, Dave, you cheeky rascal! That's not what I said and you know it. I said absolutely nothing about the Premier League changing the rules. I did refer to case law being developed by the Commissions and Appeal Bodies as they hear cases. Even you can see the difference?!

It's funny that you mentioned Philip Green because I was talking to someone yesterday who was telling me they can't believe how much Moshiri has been borrowing. Some of it seems very murky, possibly because their diligence has gone that far back, and Green's name was there in black and white, with connections to Everton's past.

The commissions are all different, so who knows what will turn up after the next two? Are not the premier league choosing these commissions? Aren't they choosing which club is getting charged? Did the Premier League recommend Forest be deducted a certain amount of points like they recommended we should lose 12 points?

Next you'll be denying me and Tony are not your mates!

Daily Telegraph 22/3/2024 Leicester City to take legal action against the EFL and the Premier League.

Daily Mirror and the Daily Telegraph 9/2/2024 both stated that Man City were preparing to sue the Premier League.

Now I know you shouldn't believe everything you read in newspapers, but I haven't seen anything that would contradict those stories.

As for the date of City's hearing being set for later this year, well why didn't Masters tell the select committee the date? Do you not find that rather strange? Surely they will have told Man City the date so what possible reason could Masters have for not telling everyone when that date is?

Brent, I have no problem with your views on the Premier League and the commissions. To be honest, to me, they are all part of the system created by the Premier League and it isn't fit for purpose which has been apparent for a long time.

Everton are now waiting again for next week's result which is nerve-racking for us fans and could have an effect on the players if it hasn't already done so.

By the way, Tony is only having you on that I said your e-mail address was in Southport. I'm not that daft — I know it is in Formby!

ps: I haven't moved to Formby – that's just my summer residence.

You can meet with Brian Murray. The poor lad is surrounded by the other side!

Yes, getting back to talking about football, it's not that easy these days, is it?

Anyway we have another thing in common, Norris bleedin' Green is just my summer residence!

I lived in Norris Green from 1940 to 1976. Danny, my future wife lived in Croxteth. We lived in Kirkby when we were married from 1970.to 1976 and moved to Canada.

I will be back home in April and would like to meet other Everton supporters. In Liverpool from the 19th April until the 29th.

It's strange, Danny, I've lived in Norris Green a lot longer than living close to the City centre but always feel more comfortable when I'm back down there. I very rarely drank in Norris Green, same as my mates who moved out but we drank together in town and around the same area we grew up in.

Nothing bad about Norris Green or the people up here, I just feel happier back in town.

It will be a pleasure to meet you, share a drink and compare notes about those times when you played football then coached and managed a team around, was it Joe Royle's old school?

I'll find out when we meet and talk about your late wife's old school which was the same as mine, except I went to The Friary boys school and your wife went to the girls school which was right next to the terrace my Nin and aunty lived in.

Yes my wife lived in the 4 squares I believe it was Queen Anne Place, always talked about the nuns in the Friary who sent her on the roof for misbehaving and it poured down, said she was soaked right through to her knickers. I don't know about you but she said she and her older brother and sister were evacuated to North Wales during the war, I ended up in Kent as my mums older brother lived down there. I would like to meet you as I am trying to get together with family and friends. Any local pub will do, I am stopping with my brother he is not far from Chillwall 5 ways if that is how you spell it.

I also think his holding of wealth is owned by other parties. He may appear to have the trappings of a billionaire, but that is his payment for being a puppet. He is completely owned. I think that Wander is in a similar owned camp.

I also think that Philip Green had something to do with the Moshiri - Kenwright link-up. Both Moshiri and Green are Monaco residents. Green would have all types of murky connections.

The outside American interest I suspect has a Moores connection, the same connection that was the revival bid to Moshiri, but Kenwright refused, because he wanted to be still in control.

If you're looking for a pub steer clear of the Highwayman in Belle Vale. Always was dodgy.

AI,

We could speculate that Philip Green helped his friend Bill Kenwright, to finance the running of Everton. We could stretch it further and speculate that Philip Green was an adviser to Usmanov.

A part of me struggles to think that Bill Kenwright is dead (sorry for being so disrespectful but that's what liars do to me) but if he his, then maybe they need to exhume his body if he had the power to make such an influential person change track Because he didn't want to be truly exposed.

Yes, The Chillwall Fiveways is dead handy for me, the 61 bus will drop me right outside that pub.

You are taking me back. The 61 used to take me to school and back. The Five Ways was my local / regular meeting place in my late teens & early 20s (Eugene Cato was the manager).

But times change. Last time I went in there the barmaid asked me which part of southern England I was from – and it's not a Higson's pub anymore.

I don't need any advice on the scouse language, I was born there, lived there for 36 years, and have been back on numerous occasions.

I don't now what our arrangements are going to be as my son will be with me. As far as Woolton Woods go, that was where we had our first ground in the Liverpool and District Sunday League.

I am trying to find out if anyone goes to their local during the week as it may be easier to meet there rather than promise where I will be on any given days apart from the Everton games.

Fair enough, whatever you decide I'll do my best to be there, no matter what day is best for yourself and family.

I know Bill is out of the equation (RIP) but his involvement in Everton right from the start started a chain of events.

I remember Jeffrey Robinson being described as someone who enriched himself at huge costs to the companies he was involved in. Bill Kenwright never did have the competence to run a football club, but he stayed on to enrich himself, using the assets of Everton to do so.

He got involved with anyone who would help him do so, including Philip Green who had a connection to Moshiri and Usmanov to do so. The running of the Club was a secondary consideration and, when it was able to realise a profit, he took it, but was able to keep his snout in the trough on the same wages as before. That is why Moshiri's take over not the Moores Connection takeover got chosen. It allowed him to do so.

I don't think it is any different now; the 777 Partners deal imo is a similar scenario. 777 Partners and Moshiri & Co are together in the richman's game and therefore there is no interest in other independent parties.

It is not about the running of the club, it is about getting rich at the club's expense. But it is not about the value of the asset, it is about moving the money around by loans and other methods. 777 Partners will persist and money will be produced, because the money is useful as it has the opportunity to be used legitimately.

This whole saga could go on and on in such a scenario.

When we lived in Liverpool, my wife was confused by some of the names of districts.

Childwall. Pronounced Chilwall but spelt "Child Wall"

Huyton. Pronounced "Highton"

Gateacre. Pronounced Gatecer but spelt Gate Acre.

Bill, I used to take my son to Camp Hill most weekends. I was in Woolton at the weekend for a family funeral Bill. I love the place. A self-contained village within a city.

True story. Camp Hill is also were I took my first steps into coaching. I was watching the kids train and the coach got frustrated, threw the towel in and stormed off.

The kids and parents were looking around, so I stepped in

I digress slightly, I played for Speke Town with my uncle a few times back when they played on the pitches outside the Dunlops Social Club. That was a tough football upbringing as a youngster!!

I've been saying that since Moshiri was first announced as the buyer 8 years ago.

My Belfast born Grandfather served with the Inniskilling Fusiliers.

I have his former cap badge that sits with his Burma Star and other medals.

He never spoke about it.

My 8 will sit alongside once I get them framed as I won't were them again.

I also played against Speke Legion who I think later became Town once or twice for Mackett's Grenadiers in the Liverpool League and we reached the quarter finals of the Liverpool (or Lancashire?) Amateur Cup beaten by Lucas Sports who were later, too late for us, disqualified for playing semi professionals.

Anyway, how and when will Forest"s appeal be heard?

Watching Everton is a privilege as as much as it is a traumatic experience right now.

I probably won't sleep much tonight and watch Howard's Way again!

Hope to meet you.

I would also recommend the Rose of Mossley, close to Mossley Hill Station and close to the station for the main line into Lime Street.

I have just copped on regarding Philip Green's involvement. But to get it confirmed he was advisor to Moshiri and Usmanov regarding their Arsenal investment just confirms my perspective regarding the current situation.

777 Partners just fit the type of vehicle that the drivers of Moshiri would use. 777 Partners are going to be around for a while. They will contest and worm about everything.

I don't think they will have any trouble coming up with money, but Everton will be in the doldrums for years, because of the web they are caught up in. Green could still be an advisor.

Agree with you about the teachers, they certainly gave me support. I didn't know what I wanted to do and decided on A levels and a few of the teachers' recommendations swung it for my parents to agree.

There were some pretty useless kids at the school though which is probably why it got its reputation. Although in the X-stream, there were only 5 of us that had further academic ambitions and 3 of them dropped out, the other 2 of us made it to uni.

Involving Chairman Bill's ill health, Green's payment for Gregg's shares, and Green and Moshiri having yachts in Monaco.

But now you say that Green and Moshiri knew each other before this which cements my thoughts.

Yes, Green was advisor to both Moshiri and Usmanov in their Premier League investment in Arsenal. He was also advisor to Kenwright as we all know. Your 2 plus 2 giving you a 5, now looks as if the answer is 4.

Giving Philip Green's history regarding BHS and their appearing to have been little consideration other than regulatory parameters regarding solvency. It is quite concerning that such an association should exist and probably still does in the super privacy of Monaco.

I still maintain that, given the source of the money which means it was worthless, having it in play even as high interest loans does give it a value it never had before.

I therefore expect the 777 Partners saga to go on and on. The Premier League appear to have control, but in reality they don't. Moshiri's reply to FAB is that of a Puppet or Muppet as I would call it.