coalman

Realistically there's no way to hold any kind of meaningful hearing before the play off final without invalidating the results of it. So the EFL finds itself in a bit of a bind here. They also, by their own rules, have to allow an independent panel to run it and cannot be seen to be interfering with the panel. Their ideal situation is Boro beat us in the second leg or they have a total mess to deal with in very little time. They also don't want to set a precedent that you can go back and appeal results after the event because every team affected by another team breaching the rules will be looking to rewrite past wrongs in court. In the mean time Middlesbrough's lawyers also know this and will have briefed the club to that effect so the club has decided to make as much noise about it as possible in the hopes of causing sufficient distraction so we don't show up on the pitch knowing full well it might well affect the hearing later. You might argue that it worked during the first half on Saturday but, the longer it goes on, the more it becomes a distraction for Boro than for us. They've had the adrenaline of the immediate outrage and the players have to be wondering why their club isn't confident that they can get the job done on the football pitch. Allied with the sense of hopelessness that, even when they were completely dominant, they couldn't stick the ball in the net. Meanwhile, the Saints leadership has refused to get involved in a public war of words - which allows us to keep focus on the game. On top of that we weathered the storm and came out level when we were at our absolute worst and probably should have nicked it based on the chances we created in the second half. And, if anything the hysteria coming out of Teeside is likely to be motivating for us now.

Including the fact that they're cherry picking which part of their regulations they're choosing to abide by. Though I suspect the statement about asking the independent panel to expedite it is more of a media sop to Middlesborough to say "hey we tried to move the timescale up" while knowing full well that the panel can't deny us the right to due process.

Another item on my bucket list ticked off then 😉

Club have put out a statement https://www.southamptonfc.com/en/news/article/a-message-from-ceo-phil-parsons-2026 We would like to provide a brief update regarding the incident reported at Middlesbrough last week. The club is fully cooperating with the EFL and the Disciplinary Commission, whilst also undertaking an internal review to ensure that all facts and context are properly understood. Given the intensity of the fixture schedule and the short turnaround between matches, we have requested time to complete that process thoroughly and responsibly. We understand the discussion and speculation that has followed over recent days, but we also believe it is important that the full context is established before conclusions are drawn. Having spent a significant amount of time around this football club, I know the character of the people within it. The togetherness shown by players, staff and supporters throughout this season has been a huge part of the progress we have made, and I am confident that spirit will remain unchanged. This season has represented another important step forward for the football club. While we know there is still more work ahead of us and we are not yet where we ultimately want to be, the unity shown during challenging moments has continued to define Southampton Football Club. The support from our fans throughout the season has once again been exceptional, and everyone connected with the club remains fully committed to building long-term success in the right way. Dragan Solak continues to support the club financially, and we remain proud to have stayed competitive while operating within financial regulations, something that is important for the long-term stability of the club. Our focus now turns fully to this evening’s game. This is the time for all of us to get behind the team and create another special atmosphere at St Mary’s. Phil Parsons CEO Southampton Football Club

Given we don't have to play in such a way as to prove we haven't gained an advantage from any training observed I think we're going to see a very different side tonight. We won't be as passive. They'll have emotionally exhausted themselves with all the drama they've created and their inability to take advantage of us not showing up for 45 minutes. 4-0 to Saints.

There's no upside to the club trying to control the narrative. Complying fully with the EFL investigation also includes not trying to prejudice the case in public. Boro have been loud and public which harms them later because Saints can point to the fact that they're trying to influence the process publicly including the outcomes of it. You would imagine the people they hire in to run the process are going to have legal backgrounds and will know this. There's also the reality that it might wind up in a real court of law if either side disputes the decision at which point some of Middlesbrough's public statements are going count against them.

Every ounce of effort he's putting into outrage in the media is effort that isn't going towards preparing his team for the 2nd leg.

- anyone who has ever worn a replica Saints to shirt to be rounded up and matched through whatever hell hole passes for a town centre in Middlesbrough while they shout "shame" at us

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/may/09/spygate-playoff-row-championship-southampton-middlesbrough-hellberg-eckert At a certain point you've got to think that this becomes more of a distraction for Boro than for us. How do you say "we don't think we can beat Southampton in the next game" without saying "we don't think we can beat Southampton in the next game"?

If we were talking civil litigation then you'd be correct. However this is about following EFL rules for which they have a wide scope for deciding from a range of punishments in the event of a breach. Being able to compete in the EFL includes the acceptance that you will abide by their rules and sanctions.

Stewart -> Larin Matsuki/Edozie -> Fellows Bragg/Charles -> Azaz We have to get on top of the midfield or it's a shooting gallery.

Would it be fair to say that this is Tonda's first real test? 😉

Azaz looks knackered.

Imagine how demoralising it would be for Boro if we score now.

We're neither pressing them nor in good shape in the middle of the park.

Not so much. They can ask. They can be refused. As I understand it, any handing over of data would be voluntary unless it winds up in civil litigation and is subject to discovery. Noting that while I've spent way too much of my adult life in the room with lawyers that I am not one.

I have nothing but the utmost respect for anyone capable of watching the pre match buildup to any football match on Sky.

Assuming that people doing dumb things will do them in a non dumb way tends to be a losing proposition 😉

Telecoms companies wouldn't be able to tell you. Depending on the method used to delete it someone that knows their way around cybersecurity may be able to. Depending on the level of sophistication of the person using the phone and how good the cybersecurity person is (there is a very wide variance in capability here ranging from Mossad to my gran).

The regulations give the disciplinary panel a wide scope in deciding appropriate punishment.

They have the right to ask for them and also the ability to interpret refusal to hand them over in a variety of ways including as an admission of guilt.

They would also ask for the call logs of any of the coaching staff at Southampton to corroborate.

It could. At which point it would be a short call. His phone will also have a record of whether it was a video call or a voice call. There are more signals there you can use. Also, if Middlesbrough stir up enough outrage that might also to affect the decision making process of any disciplinary committee.

You're correct. It is not a police matter. He could refuse call logs though a disciplinary panel might take the legal precedent that refusing to share them is a tacit admission of guilt. Any competent solicitor is likely to argue this. An example would be Rebeka Vardy's phone which was "mysteriously" lost in the North Sea during her case against Colleen Rooney. The judge, in that case, decided to assume that the loss was deliberate to hide evidence and to assume that the evidence would have been incriminating.

If we didn't send him then we're not breaching regulations. Though if he was on a video call to a Southampton employee we may be. At which point any disciplinary process is likely to use balance of probabilities. Also noting that Middlesborough are contacting other clubs to gather evidence might indicate that they're less confident of their case than they make out. Though it might also mean they want to maximise the punishment for Saints. Let's face it - if they can get this expedited, skip due process and go straight to the play off final that's a whole lot of win for them.