The Premier League has laid charges of big-spending breaches for the third time in 12 months, leaving Everton and Nottingham Forest facing season-defining sanctions. Here, Telegram Sports examines important issues. . .
Why were Everton charged twice before City’s case was resolved?
A change in the rules in recent months has conspired against Everton. The sheer volume of alleged wrongdoing is also significantly easier to uncover than the City’s.
The Merseyside club’s two accusations come alongside a change in rules under which the Premier League is forced to resolve alleged financial breaches within a season. Everton are extremely disappointed that the latest potential sanction includes accounts for two of the three years for which they have already been suspended. Given that the club has been one of the lowest net spenders over the last two seasons, Everton are certain to escape a second charge if judged solely on last year’s financial dealings.
City’s case, by contrast, benefits from an exemption in the Premier League rulebook; This exemption says that “the most exceptional cases” do not have to comply with the 12-week charge rule.
Given that UEFA completed its own case against the Abu Dhabi-owned club in February 2020, it is fair to question why City’s case remains unresolved. But comparisons with Everton’s situation serve to underline how complex City’s case will be ahead of this turning point. It’s a legal fight for the league against the mega-rich’s triple winners.
Unlike the two cases against Everton, which spanned a total of four years, City’s catalog of accusations covers 14 seasons from 2009-10. If proven, this would amount to the biggest scandal in English football history.
Little only highlights that the Premier League is enforcing its Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) with greater rigor than ever before.
The league’s decision to re-charge the club underlines that City face unprecedented penalties if found guilty, given that the competition is pushing for a points deduction ahead of Everton’s suspension in November. Suspension, point deductions, huge fines and the ultimate sanction of expulsion from the league are all included in the potential sanctions rulebook.
City was banned from European cups for two years by UEFA in 2020 for allegedly violating Financial Fair Play rules, but the club successfully overturned this penalty in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas).
How different are Forest’s violations to Everton’s?
Promoted in 2022, Forest are only being eyed for a spending season that ended on June 1 last year. The season before Brennan Johnson’s £47.5m departure included a total of 30 new players, including Morgan Gibbs-White, who signed for a record £25m from Wolves, rising to £30m as the club avoided relegation. A total of 30 new players arrived.
By contrast, Everton’s transfer deals in recent years have been relatively modest. The departure of £250,000-a-week James Rodríguez was a huge relief to the wage bill as he leaves the club in the autumn of 2021. The following year, Richarlison was sold to Tottenham for around £50 million, bringing in Anthony Gordon. More than £40 million from Newcastle. But Amadou Onana, Dwight McNeil and Neal Maupay arrived for multi-million pound fees and the club faced further financial difficulties off the field. Sanctions imposed on then sponsor Alisher Usmanov in March 2022 to offset costs amid a global spending crunch have since proven costly last season.
Are Forest likely to also face a points deduction if found guilty?
There has only been one such test case in Premier League history and it was Everton’s first charge, which led to a 10-point deduction in November. Given the circumstances, Everton may protest that Forest were spared such a severe penalty. But Forest have so far signaled they will cooperate as much as possible, which could work in the independent panel’s favour. The club said in a statement on Monday that the club “intends to continue to co-operate fully with the Premier League on this matter and is confident in a swift and fair resolution.”
Do both clubs have a strong defence?
But both Everton and Forest believe they have strong cases to fight the possibility of new penalties being handed down under the new stepped-up penalty model. Forest will argue that the exemption should include profits from the sale of Johnson two months after the end of the period under review. Meanwhile, Everton may have to explain complexities surrounding repayments of loans for its stadium.
Kieran Maguire, a chartered accountant and lecturer in football finance at the University of Liverpool, expects some of Everton’s previous arguments to prevail again. “It seems very harsh to impose sanctions on the club in relation to a stadium that has not yet been built and therefore offers them no advantage,” he said.