IAN LADYMAN: It wasn’t Covid, and it wasn’t frozen assets that killed it for Everton; it was pouring large quantities of money at subpar players… they bet by trying to compete with their oil-rich peers, and they paid the price.

In the end, it was determined that football was to blame for Everton’s predicament.

Not the costs of a new stadium, the failure of a naming rights agreement, or the consequences of the Covid epidemic. It was the football, not the other way around.

According to the Premier League, and now confirmed by an independent ruling commission, Everton spent money on players they couldn’t afford in the hope that they would propel them up the league table and into the money places. Or, at the absolute least, it would be offset by future player sales.

In short, Everton was attempting to compete. Everton were attempting to rise in an atmosphere filled by oil states and state-backed football clubs.

They imagined a future in which they would once again be a top six club, possibly even playing European football. So they stretched for it and didn’t make it.

Toffees boss Sean Dyche has seen his team slip from 14th to 19th in the rankings.

In layman’s terms, it’s a gamble, and the commission’s written reasons, published on the Premier League’s website on Friday, appear to indicate they were fully aware of it. The Premier League describes Everton’s player acquisition policy as’reckless’ in a report that admits the club’s Profit and Sustainability Rule violation was not intentional.

Meanwhile, the commission claims that Everton shown ‘poor judgment’ by failing to reduce its transfer activity while it was aware that it was sailing ever closer to the wind.

So, without fear of contradiction, we can state that Everton’s gamble has failed.

Whether or not you agree with the punishment of a 10-point deduction is largely determined by whether or not you agree with the principles.

There are many reasons to be sympathetic to Everton’s situation. The club was enraged when the verdict and circumstances of the punishment were announced on Friday.

They have the right to wonder why the six Premier League clubs who plotted to launch a new European Super League in 2021 were only fined around £3.6 million each. Why, exactly?

They will undoubtedly be watching what happens next with Manchester City, who have appealed against 115 individual accusations, and Chelsea, who are facing financial concerns dating back to Roman Abramovich’s ownership.

Ex-Everton striker Gary Lineker posed this query on the X platform, formerly known as Twitter.

‘With Everton punished ten points, it will be very intriguing to see whether other clubs are sanctioned,’ remarked the TV host.

And what of the Premier League’s motivations? Is this a power move, a signal that it can handle itself in advance of anticipated government regulation?

The independent commission deemed Everton’s violation to be sporting rather than related to the current state-of-the-art stadium construction at Bramley-Moore Dock.

If so, it feels a little late. Football has always been associated with the Wild West in terms of finances, particularly outside of the Premier League in the EFL.

So the wrath that erupted around Goodison Park on Friday as the club began to plan its appeal was understandable. Similarly, given that the circumstances behind Everton’s breach were determined to be sporting rather than, say, related to the current stadium construction at Bramley-Moore Dock, there is an inclination to believe that the punishment should also be one that hits on the field.

Everton might have faced a fine. That is what they hoped for following months of negotiations and discussions with the Premier League that they believe were open and transparent. But how severe would a fine have been for a club that was already in debt?

The same argument may be applied to a transfer embargo, another conceivable punishment.

Everton cannot afford to sign pricey players. During the summer, their net spend put them in the black by around £35 million. As a result, it is the points deduction that truly sends the message, not only to Everton, but to everyone.

Financial transparency has long been a source of contention. Some argue that it merely serves to unfairly limit upwardly mobile football clubs.

There would have been no Jack Walker-funded title success for Blackburn Rovers in 1995 if regulations had been in place.

Nonetheless, disagreeing with a set of rules has never been a good reason to break them.

Under the recently implemented FFP, Blackburn Rovers’ 1995 Premiership triumph might not have occurred.

Manchester City will have been keeping an eye on these developments with 115 charges hanging over the Etihad.

Friday’s decision might set a precedent for investigating Chelsea’s financial activities under former owner Roman Abramovich (seen carrying the Champions League trophy).

According to the study, Everton knew they were up against it as they attempted to reduce their three-year losses below the legal maximum of £105 million, but they continued to push at the margins.

Over three years, the team spent £19 million on the wrong side of the line. In light of that, would a 10-point penalty seem excessive? Maybe.

‘The panel thinks it foolish for Everton not to have reduced player purchases,’ the report says.

‘It was aware of potential Profit and Sustainability Rule difficulties, but pressed on in the hope that it would make sales of players that would enable it to achieve PSR compliance. That has been proven incorrect by events.

‘The root of Everton’s PSR issues was that it overspent (mostly on new players and the difficulty to sell existing players) and ended lower in the league than expected.

‘Everton’s natural desire to improve its on-field performance drove it to gamble with its PSR position.

‘The situation in which Everton finds itself is entirely of its own creating. Everton bears a large share of the blame.’

It’s a devastating report, only partially mitigated by the gains Everton has made since the accounting period in question, according to the commission.

In terms of our game, it feels like a tipping point. Everton properly contended that there was no precedent for this. Portsmouth were docked only one point.

But there is now a precedent, and in terms of City, Chelsea, and possibly others, this judgment and penalty will now be considered as the starting point for all future negotiations, properly or unjustly.

Sean Dyche is unquestionably the correct man in charge at Goodison Park at the moment.

The Toffees were on the rise, but in order to stay in the league, they must now demonstrate true grit.

Everton’s season is far from done.

All of this occurred before to the arrival of manager Sean Dyche. But, when it comes to the fight against relegation, they surely have the proper guy for the job.

Everton are only two points from safety following the deduction, thanks to recent improvements on the field (ten points in their last five games). The challenges of the three promoted teams to adjust to Premier League life provide more reason for hope.

If it was football that got them into this mess, it may now be football that gets them out of it.