saint michael

If he is in goal we will be under siege

Yes very interesting read. Suggests that evidence was not used to spell out in the judgement for it reasons for the punishment. also suggests that the public nature of the sub jud gave an unfair view and possible bias to the outcome.

It is really a difficult one because it’s emotional with the cheating language being used. As a lot have stated rules are broken every match played and the right punishment is issued…usually ie yellow and red card, leading to bans. The consequence of these rules being broken we’re not clearly spelt out and we’re then applied to be very very punative. That is now done. Clearly Tonda is not the only manager who can manage a team to success but the fact he has done exceptionally well makes it difficult to accept the loss, because we haven’t seen this success for a long time. The additional bit is the complete lack of trust in the ownership and board to then replace him with the manager capable of creating success, so better to keep the devil you know? i think whether we would accept Tonda staying is immaterial as I’m sure the players wouldn’t. I’m sure their pain of being denied possible promotion and all that goes with it will make it impossible for him to stay anyway. it then makes it really hard to decide who could replace him and who we would want and trust. There in lies the issue for me. Tonda goes but who replaces…..

Forgive if already been posted but there is a very good article in the Times today on him and about spying on teams and a bit more about who he is and his background. As Crab lungs says it will be useful to hear him before he is hung out to dry. Not saying it changes views but may help with the emotional bit of the effect of what he has done. I cant post the article as was shared by a friend and supporter of another club who is seething by the way the saints have been treated.

I would think what the fab says is the least of their problems. Turkeys voting for Christmas moment, would be like for the board. Not sure holding a fans forum is a great idea if they are still dealing with legal stuff, but laying out timeline and what they are doing to make things clearer would be helpful.

Exactly. I think it’s ridiculous too. Use data by all means but if he couldn’t work out what they would do with or without says more about him.

Hackney not play was an advantage but planning for him playing or not playing should have been standard stuff and available from previous games they played with and without. Didn’t need spying to confirm this

Very good read and analysis. You should add in a bit about Seles too and then send this to Solak for response. I bet he has never looked at or considered the holistic position of his ownership beyond the financial.

Boro v saints first game of next season for sure

Howe will get sacked from Newc get him in

I bet Solak thinking he needs to keep Parsons or Spors to help make necessary changes. Trouble is Parsons as CEO is. Accountable, Spors knew Eckharts techniques so must have known, Eckhart admits it, coaches part of it, Analyst team all involved. if we look at who has some guilt or accountability in this the whole lot needs to go, and not by dribbling out the door but in one go. to do this we need clarity on couple of big hitters coming in, who are not bothered by this much change and can steady the ship quickly and who will impress the team, if that’s possible.

I guess they’ve been focussed on the appeal and now the clean up begins. There probably is a due diligence process of his contract and the FA also may have started some action on things too.

I’m not certain Solak is going to have an appetite to go again either, so how stable and what funds will be available may drive what the squad looks like. I think he will keep Parsons too. What he does next will tell us more and manager we will get will tell us loads.

. Membership Expulsions and Natural Justice Disputes frequently arise when a member is expelled or suspended for breaking club rules. [1, 2] The Lansdowne Club (London): In a well-publicized dispute, a member expelled for breaching Covid-19 rules on the premises sued the club. The court ruled in the club's favor, cementing the principle that courts will respect club decisions and constitutions, as long as the club acts in good faith, adheres to its internal procedures, and provides a fair hearing. Key Principle: Even though clubs have significant internal autonomy, they are legally required to provide "fair play". This means an expelled member must have notice of the charge and a reasonable opportunity to be heard before an impartial committee. [1, 2, 3, 4]

That sounds like a desperate excuse laden statement. We all know the effect on clubs elsewhere but doesn’t put a legal argument to it. They are considering precedent is set by what has happened previously and am guessing that they will use common law for this. I think the problem is the EFL is a private club and saints signed up to their rules. Going to be tough argument against it.