PJ

My point was not the results - sure, losing those players makes it harder to win. The point (obvious in the following sentence) was that we have dropped off massively in fitness, application, and the mentality. This is on the manager and coaching staff in my view. Or is your explanation for looking unfit due to losing some key players? That makes no sense.

The drop off from last season is so hard to explain. We looked fitter and sharper than everyone else. And we even had far more games than anyone else. But this season we look unfit and not mentally right. And that comes from the culture at the club, which starts with the manager. He's under pressure for sure. We don't have the luxury of a slow start.

So frustrating. Play it forward. Sure, sometimes we'll lose possession. But take a chance

So dull. Bree, fellows, bragg - just keep coming back inside and playing a safe pass. We scored by taking players on. Fellows got to the goal line and put in a great cross by taking players on. But nearly every other time, we play safe and west ham get back into shape...

I love this. Our sash kit is still my favourite - helped of course by great memories of the team. And having no logo. Personally, I've never been bothered by stripes. The sash looks better, and is more unique. I'd prefer we had the sash every year

totally agree that football is crooked. My point is that the EFL have now said (and i actually think the written verdict from last night was quite well written and had logic to it) that a sporting advantage was sought, so a sporting sanction must apply, and that in the case of the playoffs (knock-out competition) the only sporting sanction suitable was to exclude the guilt party. Following that stance (which definitely has logic to it), regardless of how well or badly a club handles cheating offences in future, the EFL have set this precedent. On the basis that the evidence obtained (for the Middlesborough game alone) was sufficient to prove our guilt, I'm not sure if how it was handled by us made any difference?

I've been thinking of other cheating offences and how the EFL have now set a precedent they should follow. I get that diving on the pitch is different - there is the potential for the player/club to be punished in the act and during the game (if the referee is crap, that's a different issue). But there is one off-the-pitch cheating that i reckon all sensible fans of all clubs will acknowledge happens everywhere - tapping up players. Tapping up is clearly cheating, and in a way that unquestionably tries to give you a sporting advantage. The club is unlawfully trying to get a player in their side at the expense of other clubs. Based on the EFL's position on Spygate, whenever a club is found to have tapped-up (or tried to tap up a player - regardless of whether the player then joined the club), then the EFL must prevent that club from competing in the playoffs and add points deductions.

I almost don't want to ask this...but is there a chance the players will have known about the spying, too? Could Ekert have shown footage during their pre-match prep?

Yep. Presumably eastleigh make some decent income by loaning their training ground to other clubs. Maybe other clubs will think twice about it now. So a non-league club up the road set to lose an income stream because of our cheating...nice one

Completely agree. Parsons doesn't seem to be the issue here.

it's obvious we admitted to Oxford and Ipswich games - hoping to get some good favour with EFL for transparency - knowing that these games wouldn't cause the EFL even more headaches with the affected teams. We know Ipswich won't kick-off with the EFL (because they're up and don't care) and Oxford can't complain our cheating prevented them a chance of survival.

I've got no legal expertise whatsoever, but I think that might only be credible if we were thrown out after beating Hull. If we're thrown out before the final, then there is only the possibility, and not the certainty, that the club has prevented the players from the pay rises etc.

We should just say we were spying for the 2nd leg, not the first, and outside the 72hrs. Checking on any penalty shootout choices etc.

It's probably his position a few frames later as well. I actually think he's improved a bit this season - but his positioning still leaves him unable to make saves a better keeper could make. Some goalkeepers make a goal seem small (Boruc) and others make it seem big (Forster). I think Gav is in the latter group

Exactly this

But why would we have more genuinely PL quality players in the squad the season after?

And he didn't even celebrate the goal. Not even a hint of a smile. What's that about? We equalise at anfield and he doesn't even seem to care. There is zero connection between him and the rest of the squad. People don't want to pass to him. No point him being on the pitch. He's probably someone who always had a physical advantage. No way is he a footballer, though

👀

But for him, it wouldn't be glory hunting. He's never lived in Southampton - it's not like he'd be rejecting his local team to get glory with some other club. He lives far nearer to Arsenal/WestHam/Spurs. Yes, we did Wembley. I'm probably just feeling depressed, like we all are, watching us this season.

Rarely post here. A few days ago my 7 year old said to me "why do I support Southampton? Can't I support Arsenal"? We live in Essex, he's never lived in Southampton, we have no family there anymore, and so he has no connection with Saints apart from through me. We go to St Marys when we can. Long all-round trip. Honestly, after watching last night with him on TV, I felt guilty that he supports saints. He doesn't enjoy the games, and why would he? He's 7 and wants to see his team score goals - or at least take a shot every now and then... I'm really close to letting him choose who he wants to support. Arsenal or whoever. Maybe a poll on here: should I force my son to keep supporting saints, or let him enjoy football instead?

Exactly what I thought. I was scratching my head - why not run at the defence, like in the first 30 mins? Half their team were on yellow cards as well…odd

I’m taking advantage of kids for £1 to take my 6 and 4 year olds to their first game. Hats off to the club for this. I appreciate some fans might not want a load of young kids in the ground. It probably doesn’t help with the atmosphere. But hopefully it helps make my two lifelong saints fans (hard to do, now I live in London)

Thanks! That’s the explanation I was looking for. It’s a crazy rule. It encourages Armstrong to leave the ball alone and hope/trust the linesman does his job and flags offside (if Leeds player attempts to play the ball). That would be ok if we could always trust the linesmen to get it right.

Not disagreeing with you, but why unlikely? Have you seen the replay for the first part of the Leeds goal? If I knew how to post an image I would…

Haven't seen it mentioned anywhere, but would VAR have ruled-out Leeds' goal on Saturday? It seemed from the TV replays that Leeds' first attempt was cleared by Armstrong (I think?) with a Leeds player immediately behind him. Armstrong was stretching to clear the ball, when presumably he would had let it go passed him and out for a goal kick if the Leeds player wasn't there. From the resulting scramble, Leeds scored. Because i've not seen a single comment about this, perhaps i've got it wrong, and the leeds player was being played onside by someone...but i can't see it from the TV replays