johnnyboy

SAINTS owner Dragan Solak insisted he believes in the integrity of his staff and has backed them to return the club to the Premier League. The Sport Republic lead investor, who became Saints chairman in January last year, has come out fighting following the recent Spygate scandal. While demanding they learn from their mistakes, Solak endorsed all of the club's major decision-makers to stage a top-flight promotion push. Saints were kicked out of the Championship play-off final at Wembley last month after admitting to spying on three opponents ahead of matches. Head coach Tonda Eckert authorised the costly missions, while technical director Johannes Spors and CEO Phil Parsons have also been criticised. But Solak, who believes the sanction meted out was grossly disproportionate, has explained his stance and more in a new, wide-reaching interview. "We looked deep into the mistakes we made and the reasons, and we didn't find anybody there with a kind of malicious intent," Solak told the Daily Echo. "We found, unfortunately, a lot of misunderstanding and bad co-ordination, and a bit of arrogance or ignorance, but I don't consider these capital. "I don't think heads need to roll for these offences. I still believe in the integrity of these people, and I believe that now they have learned their lesson. "I have never fired guys for making a mistake. I decided to keep all the people in the wake of this incident, but not that I will keep all of them forever. "They will not repeat their mistakes again, and I will do a lot of stuff on my side to make sure the mistakes are not repeated. Now, I can put that aside. "Then I think about their capability, about their ability and skills, and whether they make sense for us to be here. It is about what's best for the company." A big error was the initial misleading response to the EFL's charges on Friday, May 8, which proved costly for Saints in their disciplinary hearings. Saints falsely claimed no footage was filmed of the incident, and an arbitration panel pointed to it as a reason to offer no mitigation to the punishment. Had Saints been honest and accurate from the outset, they might have been dealt some mercy by the independent commission, who also docked four points. But Solak, speaking from his golf course in Bled, Slovenia, insists Parsons, who issued the response, did not intentionally mislead the EFL, and instead lacked knowledge due to the rushed timescale. "Phil called certain people, and these people were not aware of the incidents. They thought it was just this one [at Boro]," explained Solak. "Nobody had time to really go deep and talk to everyone who was involved. We would not be able to do that in just 12 hours as demanded. "Our football leadership are from Germany, where if you observe training from public grounds, it's considered legal. It's up to the clubs to put fences up. "I think Johannes heard that our guy was standing on a public spot and thought we are good. "What we actually did was a friendly investigation between a few members of senior staff that were all in a very imperfect information environment. "Then all of this went in as a wrong statement. Obviously, immediately after, we hired a law firm, we did a proper investigation, but that took a few days." Solak maintains that their biggest mistake was writing to the EFL within 12 hours in an attempt to show good nature, rather than delaying a response. "We had by law 14 days available to evaluate our mistakes, to evaluate the situation and to respond. Responding quickly didn't do good for us," he said. "What the panel did was take it as an additional offence, which I don't think is fair. Then they didn't give us their predicted punishment any time in advance. "In any court of law in England, you know what you are up against; what the prosecution want for you, and then your lawyers can fight that request. "They denied us the knowledge and then delivered this expulsion request to the panel at the last second without our lawyers being able to respond. "I'm not trying to put any sugar coating on this. What we did was bluntly wrong. But how we were executed for it was like a fifth-century type of thing." Without the Premier League's riches flowing in, anxieties over long-term job security are raised among many ordinary working people at the club. Solak insisted Spygate will not lead to job cuts, but stopped short of guaranteeing security as he hinted at trimming of the workforce for other reasons. "Nothing will happen because of this," Solak said. "That will not influence it. But my ideal outlook is an extremely high-performance environment. "Whether that is marketing, IT, medical science, or football. Everything we do. We have already started on the football side with a huge AI transformation. "That's what will demand a change in how Southampton is structured. Not because we lost this opportunity. We need every Pound to end up in the team. "If you go to the Premier League, we use the same superstructure, and we just add to it a little bit while we are in the Premier League. If we aren't, we lift it off. "We have this Championship structure that makes us sustainable. I want to be 100 per cent sure every time we are Championship, we fight for promotion." That aim is ultimately one of the biggest factors in all of the decisions that Solak has taken. He believes the current leadership can bring promotion. "Johannes and Tonda can definitely do that," he added. "I think that Phil definitely can run our club. Can they do it better? I'm going to push for more. (Image: Peter Tarry) "But I think that all of them showed us actually, apart from this terrible incident, that we were almost there, despite the start of the season we had. "Once we put the team together, especially after the January transfer window, where we fixed a few things for Tonda, we performed extremely well. "Plus, I have to say that I saw a huge improvement in our health and science, if you want. We, with Mark Bitcon, kept a really high player availability. "We lost only one player for a long time [Mads Roerslev], but he carried that injury even when he came to us but then it demanded a serious surgery." What could throw a spanner in the works is the ongoing FA investigation into Eckert, which is likely to punish the German in one way or another. Solak has said he will support Eckert even in the event of a coaching ban, but accepts a serious, lengthy sanction of many months would force change. "We'll have to discuss that, but I honestly didn't talk about this with Tonda and with Johannes," he said. "I think we have a very capable legal team now. "We have a very negative press pushing for the punishment, but I believe to prevent Tonda from managing would be a double jeopardy punishment "If they ban him, we will appeal. If we lose the appeal, and it's such a long ban, we'll have to take a new manager. We can't leave the club unmanaged. "So we'll see what the details of any sentence are, but I still have hopes that we can compete with Tonda next year. I think all the eyes will be on us. "If anybody sees that we are breaking the rules again, they should come up and say it. If they don't, then they should accept Tonda's managerial skills." There is also the possibility of the club losing the head of their football departments, Spors, with reports in Italy claiming AC Milan are interested. Those reports have suggested that should Ralf Rangnick be appointed to oversee Milan this summer, he will turn to Spors as sporting director. Solak admitted he is "worried" by the links, but the only indication he has had from Spors - currently on holiday, albeit working remotely - is that he is not departing. He said: "I sent him and I asked, 'Are you leaving?' He said, 'No'. I'll talk to Johannes. I didn't talk to him yet because the club was in fighting mode. "I've already sent him a couple of bits that I want to discuss with him about our future projects that look very interesting, and we will talk more. "We need this continuity, but we'll see how to achieve it. At the end of the day, if Johannes gets an offer to work in Milan, it's going to be tough." Saints are keen to move forward from a disastrous few weeks and build for a team capable of winning promotion to the Premier League next year. They have made a stellar start to proceedings, with the signings of goalkeeper Daniel Peretz and striker Cyle Larin before the window even opened. Both players excelled on loan last campaign and have penned permanent deals, opting to return to St Mary's after the love they'd been shown. "I think it's a great statement because, at the end of the season, everybody said Daniel Peretz is a Premier League-level goalkeeper," said Solak. "The fact that he decided to stay is a huge statement. I think he did it out of the love and out of the belief that for his development, this is the place to be. "Cyle Larin is at a different stage of his career, but he really transformed himself from the time he came to now, and I think he really enjoyed it. "What happened with Daniel and Cyle, and hopefully a few other guys soon, will show that actually there is a huge faith in the club and our system. "They could definitely go to various places, and they decided to stay." Solak hopes that the good news will not stop there, with the club hoping to quickly agree a new deal with out-of-contract defender James Bree. (Image: PA) Bree, 28, enjoyed a shock resurgence in the second half of the season for Eckert, after he was initially sent out on loan to Charlton Athletic in August. "I think that Bree should stay," teased Solak. "I'm pretty sure that we have made a pretty competitive offer for him to stay, so I hope he accepts it." Things are trickier with striker Ross Stewart. Saints want him to stay, but play-off expulsion meant they missed the expiry date of a deal extension clause. "We had to initiate the option up to five days after the last game of the season, and we were out of the five days when our final got cancelled," said Solak. "When we knew there was no last game, we immediately sent the notice of the extension, but his lawyers say that they're disagreeing with us. "Ultimately, it's on Ross and his team to basically decide whether they want to stay or not. In my opinion, nobody would be better for Ross than us. "We worked hard to allow him physically to show how good he is. He went from a guy who didn't play for two years to be invited to the World Cup team. "I'm really proud of that. If he wants to try his luck somewhere else, I can't stop him, but I would love to have him back. We have made an effort to keep him." Saints will also address contracts for players on deals only until 2027 - including Ryan Manning, who has asked to extend his stay on the south coast. Solak believes the current squad have shown they are capable of winning promotion, especially given their ongoing 21-game league unbeaten run. He only wants to add one player in the transfer market; a number 10 to support ever-present talisman Finn Azaz, who has had no back-up. "Our team is really good," he insisted. "We have contracts for players and are sorting some for others. If nobody's leaving, I have a full team. "But we need somebody able to play at the level of Finn at his position, although the problem is that Finn insists on playing every minute of every game. "He has said he'll do whatever to manage that. He'll keep his legs on ice for 10 days if it means playing every game. But you could see he's hurting. "He was tired. He played two games a week for months. So, I said to Tonda, can we please get somebody else, otherwise he's going to die on the pitch." The reality is that Saints will sign more players than that, because some will leave this summer. Ultimately, the club do need to raise some funds. The likes of Taylor Harwood-Bellis and Shea Charles are expected to draw Premier League interest, and Saints will negotiate if the prices are right. But Saints also have not ruled out stars staying, such as Caspar Jander or Leo Scienza. The market and what offers that come in will determine that. Spors will pursue direct replacements for any regular players that leave, with Solak authorising a budget to replace them and remain on the front foot. "We'll see how the summer goes," he said. "I do have to raise a significant amount of money, but that's only part of my plan of revitalisation of future finances. "I have told the players that if you are a Premier League player and were denied that because we were thrown out of the final, I agree it's devastating. "But at the end of the day, if you really, truly have this quality, I'm pretty sure I'll have some calls from Premier League clubs, and we'll discuss. "We are willing to be very realistic given the contract that we have, or the time they spent with us, and the place where they are in their career. "But it also has to be the right business for the club, and then we look for a replacement. And don't get me wrong. We have prepared for this. "For every guy we thought might have an offer, we have five to six guys already lined up that we are monitoring, because it's also very important. "When we replace our players, we need to get guys with the right mentality. The fact we were so united as a team and loved playing together was huge."

How is this shit on the main board , not relevant to Southampton anymore, mods get this moved to the lounge where it deserves to be , oh and by the way FUCK RUPERT FUCKING LOWE

Matthew knows for certain 🤪🤪

As to the premier league doesn’t have the no spying 72 hours before rule , I read somewhere that they (premier league)have a kind of acting in good faith to other teams kind of thing which if needed could be used to cover the spying thing ??

What the fuck is carbonada is it a Portuguese carbonara with squid and cream ?

Hope not as that’s going to send @SaintsLoyal over the edge !!

Yes but our punishment should not reward Boro ,

What I can’t make sense of is ,Boro lost over 210 minutes as did Millwall in their tie against Hull , so why are Boro getting a pass to the final , why aren’t Millwall in the shake up ? Our cheating didn’t mean Boro get a free ride to the final as part of our punishment, why is our punishment to award a place in the final to Boro and not millwall , how is that possible 🤪🙄

Apparently the Iran war is our war really

How far has JWP fallen can’t even start for relegated Burnley , he was one of my favourite players when we were on the up ☹️

That’s how we should have done it !

THE Independent Disciplinary Commission hearing into the ‘Spygate’ scandal is due to take place tomorrow, with a judgement set to be released at the earliest possible opportunity with a written verdict to follow at a later date. A three-person panel will rule on allegations that a Southampton employee spied on a Middlesbrough training session ahead of the first leg of the play-off semi-final. The EFL have charged Southampton with breaching two of their regulations, the first of which requires clubs to act towards each other with “the utmost good faith” and the second of which explicitly prohibits clubs from “observing or attempting to observe” a training session “within 72 days of a scheduled match between the two clubs”. The independent commission can impose a number of potential penalties if Southampton are found guilty, ranging from a fine at one end of the scale to expulsion from the play-offs at the other. Middlesbrough issued a statement on Friday spelling out their position, which is that if Southampton are found guilty of breaking the EFL’s rules, “the only appropriate response is a sporting sanction which would prevent Southampton FC from participating in the EFL Championship play-off final”. In ordinary circumstances, it could take an independent commission up to a fortnight to publish their judgement along with the written explanations for their findings. Given that the Championship play-off final is due to take place on Saturday, though, the hope is that the verdict in this case will be issued within 24 hours of the hearing taking place. Written conclusions will then be published later in the summer. The judgement will initially be delivered to the two legal teams involved in the case, before being more widely released. Both the EFL, who are effectively mounting a case on Middlesbrough’s behalf, and Southampton, as the defending party, have a right of appeal against the judgement. An appeal would almost certainly mean that Saturday's final would have to be rescheduled. Middlesbrough’s players and coaching staff were given time off at the weekend, with head coach Kim Hellberg having made a brief return to his homeland in Sweden with his family. However, Hellberg was back at Rockliffe Park today with his coaches and the whole of Boro’s first-team squad to continue their preparations for a possible appearance in the play-off final against Hull City. A training schedule has been planned for the rest of week, but can easily be adapted if the EFL are forced to postpone Saturday’s game and rearrange it for an alternative date and/or venue. While the current uncertainty is far from ideal, senior Boro figures are confident the club’s players will be ready and prepared for whatever is asked of them if they are reinstated into the play-offs and Southampton are expelled.

Just a thought , our alleged spy was an intern , does an intern get paid ? If not then he’s not , in my mind , an employee, yes I’m clutching at straws !

I wrote on Saturday that my best guess was that Southampton would be deducted six EFL points in their next EFL season and fined £500k-£1m. https://x.com/slbsn/status/2055184483783934150?s=20 . I felt, instinctively, that expulsion from such a big game was excessive and disproportionate. However, there are some technical points that would worry me as a Southampton fan. Worse than that, the key ones were considered recently by an EFL Disciplinary Commission in EFL v Swindon ( https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/f1a33090-1191-11f1-a071-51ac3b681d4e.pdf ) Liability is not the battleground Liability is unlikely to be seriously contested. Regulation 127.1 prohibits any club from directly or indirectly observing, or attempting to observe, a rival's training session in the 72 hours before a scheduled fixture between them. The "attempt" formulation means that whether or not Southampton obtained anything useful is irrelevant - the act of trying is enough. Expect an admission, or at minimum a rapid narrowing of issues, with Southampton's lawyers focussing hard on the proportionality of the sanction rather than fighting the underlying charge. Admitting early is the only realistic way to bank any credit with the Commission. If there are additional instances of surveillance beyond the specific fixture charged, and reports suggest there may be, those will likely be advanced by the EFL as aggravating factors. The knockout competition problem Middlesborough have already argued in their statement that "the only appropriate response is a sporting sanction which would prevent Southampton FC from participating in the EFL Championship play-off final." Whilst this is a lawyer drafted statement and obviously tendentious, it is possible that the EFL may adopt the same position at the Commission. In the Swindon Commission chaired by John Mehrzad KC the sanctioning principles were set out with clarity. Drawing on Derby v EFL and the Everton Appeal Board decision, it identified four purposes for any sanction: punishment, vindication of compliant clubs, deterrence, and restoring and preserving public confidence in the fairness of EFL competitions. It then identified that last aim as the most important of the four. During the hearing, there was some focus on the meaning of 'proportionality' in this disciplinary context with parties urging the Commission to arrive at a sanction which was 'balanced' (as submitted by the Club) or 'no lesser than would meet the aim' of a fair competition (as submitted by the EFL). It did not stop there. The Commission went on to say that a necessary part of restoring public confidence in the fairness of a competition is ensuring the competition is in fact fair. And herein lies a subtle but potentially crucial distinction for Spygate. The competition here is, arguably, not the League season itself because the Play-Offs are defined separately in Section Nine of the EFL Handbook. The Play-Offs are defined as a distinct knockout competition with its own rules, its own definitions, and its own prize structure - namely, a very valuable place in a different division. There are no points to win, just £200m of broadcast revenue (at least). The Swindon Commission confronted exactly this structural problem and its conclusion was unambiguous: where a club gains an unfair competitive advantage in a knockout competition, a points deduction is not available and a fine alone does not restore genuine fairness to the competition. The EFL argued that the key aim or objective of any sanction was the fairness or integrity of the respective competition. If that approach is repeated, a Commission will be asked to focus on sanction in the context only of the Play-Offs as a distinct competition. Proportionality is relative My position is that expulsion from the Play-Offs feels excessive given that Southampton finished seven points clear of sixth and nine clear of seventh. That is an intuitive position but it is not one the Swindon framework or the EFL's argument there supports. The margin by which Southampton qualified is not the relevant question. The relevant question may be whether Southampton obtained a sporting advantage in a specific knockout fixture by prohibited means. If they did, the Commission's primary concern is the integrity of the Play-Off competition from that point forward and not whether Southampton "deserved" to be there in the first place. The Commission also made clear that a club should not financially benefit from its own misconduct. Southampton's financial interest in a Play-Off final and potential Premier League promotion dwarfs Swindon's £40,000 prize money by several orders of magnitude. However, arguably, that context does not reduce the Commission's appetite for the ultimate sanction. Rather, it increases it. I stand by my best guess but as a matter of principle, the Swindon case and the EFL's arguments there suggests the Commission should be reaching for something more. A nervous 48 hours or so awaits for Southampton fans.

Was on talk sport just now , i think they said Martin Ziegler ? Could be wrong though as it was on in the background!