Nolan

Chorley was put in charge as DIrector of Football at Valenciennes 3 years ago. I seriously wonder if he only was ever under a 3 year contract given the timing. His time at Valenciennes certainly didnt work out and the "restructuring" that occurred moved him to a newly created position of head of UK scouting.

Göztepe flirted with European qualification, arguably, had Ankersen been hands on at Southampton, there may have been someone in the club structure to tell Spors / Eckert (or whoever that was involved) that spying wasn't allowed

the second half of the season was quite enjoyable to be fair, until the tree and the spy stuff. Arguably, if Ankersen had been more involved, given his years in English football, it might not have happened. SR have lots of reason to hold themselves accountable, to conserve the Capital investment in the club.

I think it actually points to the depth of what is going on problem is, who is going to authorise that statement? if Dragan is looking at Parsons, Eckert and Spors, then how does the message cascade to the social media team? in my mind it can only come from Solak and it sounds as if he may be quite busy at the moment.

You can't just get rid of Parsons, Sports and Eckert without having some kind of plan in place to have a structure to buy/sell players and sort a manager. Solaks going to be having a lot of discussions to rescue reputations, and figure out how to reset the club

He has a podcast for legal and chambers matters at www.thelawyer.com.

assertion is this was external to the panel

whoever art the forum ITks' can someone make sure the club know about Simon Jordans assertions

the legally cleanest option for the EFL is to reinstate Southampton You'll only have Gibson complaining, not multiple clubs.

which goes back to the point, if the Knockout competition is being taken on its own, why are previous games not in the same competition being used as aggravating factors.?

the people who wrote the rules badly, the EFL

If there wasnt a chance of us being reinstated why bother hiring one of the best sports regulatory barristers in the country?

because this was an unfairly expedited hearing with limited time to gather information.

Yes, proportionality is the central argument, but it's not the only one and it's not completely subjective: The play-offs are a separate competition (separate rules document). The original charge was Middlesbrough-specific. Using the two regular-season incidents (added Sunday) to justify expulsion from the play-off final is open to challenge as inconsistent. Procedural unfairness: only approximately 48 hours to respond to two matches from months earlier, in a separate competition. That's a legitimate natural justice point. No proven competitive advantage + the breaches appear to be systemic ignorance rather than deliberate top-down cheating. Massive collateral damage to innocent players and fans.

I am grasping at straws here, but the EFL are treating the play offs like a separate competition in places. But conjoining the league and the play-offs in others. If the play offs are separate then the punishment specifically for this competition should only be with regards to Middlesbrough, and the other charges added on Sunday should not be a part of this judgment as they relate to a separate competition.

Posted last Thursday at 14.27, for anyone doubting Stfrancisofbenalis' insider knowledge.

Prediction: we'll play in the final Middlesborough will be awarded another 10 shots off target for the first leg match Will Salt will gain an iPhone sponsorship deal

This. This. This. Saints extra could repost journalists, or directly link to newspapers or websites. They choose not to and instead editorialise and reword what was intended by the original reporter. They are the worst, most useless, type of account on social media.

this is Gibson we're talking about. Any compensation given would be seen as an admittance that they should have been involved and they will simply ask for more.

wont happen, will open up a can of worms elsewhere. Would essentialy admit that Boro should have been part of the preceedings. EFL and Saints are the two parties.

Adjust settings for more posts per page?

In this context "believe" and "have no proof" are pretty synonymous.

from an Boro fan of both Football and Acrostics' Busted at Rockliffe with camera in hand, clear as day Every Boro fan knows Saints sent their spy our way Lurking by a tree, filming sessions before the game Integrity thrown out, they cheated to gain an edge, no shame EFL must kick them out, it's the only fair reply Victory was tainted, we all see through the lie Every Middlesbrough supporter believes — Saints bloody cheated!

If you have a 3pm kick off Saturday. You're allowed to observe at 2.30pm on a Wednesday, but not at 3.00 pm on a Wednesday. Saying 72hours is a badly written rule. It would be better to say for the three calendar days before a match.

Why? I would expect analysts to simply provide a dossier on the opposition to the manager, and the analysts to simply get on with sorting that dossier for each opponent.