TheSoundman

If you exclude the fact that an EFL rule was broken, then it wasn't worse that Bielsa, in fact Bielsa's transgression was far worse. But... we are little old Southampton and our place in football is to be made an example of. Chelsea can admit loads of historic offences and get a petty cash fine, Argentina can show political banners / commit GBH and turn their back on the deserved winners, hell Infantino can even try to sell the World Cup and they can't even get Man City's many offences over the line to judge... but hey, lets make an example of Southampton. Big enough to be heard of but too small to fight back. Football really is fucked.

But saying you don't know the rules doesn't exonerate you. TE broke the rules, there's no argument there (even if it is a stupid rule and we gained no benefit). There were no rules when Bielsa did it - maybe he knew it, maybe he didn't - but he was only guilty of poor sportsmanship.

Arguably (puts tin hat on), Eckert's breach is worse than Bielsa's. The FA are charging TE with disrepute and misconduct. Eckert 'knowingly breached an EFL rule that was in place, Bielsa didn't breach any rules because there weren't any. On that basis you could easily argue for a stronger punishment for TE (if you wanted to).

You'd hope SR have a plan for all possibilities...

It's interesting that in this case it's the 'intent' that seems to count, rather than the result, which is actually quite unusual. If you drink and drive then get pulled over you might get banned, but if you hit someone and kill them, you'll probably end up in prison. The intent is the same, the outcome is down to (mis)fortune, but that's what you'll be judged on. The same could be said on the pitch when the defender tries to pull back a forward when he's through on goal. If the forward shakes free and has a shot, the defender gets away with it, but if the forward goes down, it's probably a red. The intent was the same though. I know I'm rambling, but we gained no advantage from this stupidity, and yet we're being crucified as a club. It's not often you get judged on intent alone...

This for me is the real crux, and why the FA need to show some common sense (for a change). 1). If the FA go heavy on Tonda and ban him from football for 12 months... it's no punishment whatsoever for him. We'll have to sack him and he walks into another job in Italy or Germany next week. There's no way their FA's will uphold an English FA ban for this. So he effectively gets no punishment but we get another one as we need to start looking for another manager on the eve of the new season. 2). The FA go midway and ban him from the stadium for 10 games. It's an inconvenience for him and a pain in the arse for the club. Together with the 4 point deduction it could be the difference between us coming top 2 or facing some north east team in the playoff final 😉. It's still another punishment for Saints. 3). Or, the FA make Tonda wear a luminous pink T-shirt, a red nose and dye his hair green for 6 months. He'll feel like a prat but he can do his job and Saints genuinely don't get punished again (other than having a clown for a manager). What is a fair punishment, when Saints have already been punished (twice)?

That is brilliant brilliant news

Wow, how many different punishments can they come up with? Would every opponent like a 2 goal start next season? Or maybe 4 points for a win against us? FFS

You mean some capacity other than Goalkeeper?

I hear the Sheffield Wednesday guy is looking for a new club...

They won't get the chance. The FA are really good at flexing their muscles against clubs that can't bite back as well. They'll just take 6 weeks to reach their well considered conclusion to fuck us over a little more. We can't even plan ahead unless we act decisively and clear the decks right now..

The EFL would have you believe that, yes. Weird isn't it.

I wonder if this is focusing the Barnsley hierarchy's minds. TE was an analyst there, then came to Saints thinking it was ok to spy on other teams and that there wasn't any rules to the contrary. Sounds like he thought it was standard practise. Sounds like he did it at Barnsley too.

If they have a contract, then they'll leave if the price is right. Simple as.... I also recall Spors saying we weren't spending all our money in this (the January) window because we might need a second shot at it next season. Now we'll see.

They're both under contract. If they want to go, there still has to be an acceptable offer.

We had a deal in place to buy both if we got promoted, which says to me that we want them but needed to be sure we had the cash. The selling clubs were happy to sell, it won't be them insisting that they'll only sell to a premier league team. I imagine if we still want to complete a transfer for either the deal would still be there... except, would either want to come here now? They also both did so well that they'd probably get premier league offers elsewhere anyway.

Our owner won't have made his money by being nice, or forgiving. Parsons is a dead man walking at SFC.

Let's hope that another 10 cases don't come to light later then....

This... totally. Saints did wrong, no question. If it's being treated as a cup comp and we get kicked out, feels harsh but so-be-it. What is completely wrong is Boro going through. The first half at the Riverside proves there was no advantage gained and in a holier-than-thou world, a decent owner should have put his hands up and acknowledge that they lost on the pitch, and that was fair and square - the whole world can see that. Hull should go through. But Gibson is as scummy as the rest and his clubs behaviour is bent too. His is equally a case of 'it's about getting the result, it doesn't have to be fairly achieved.' I hope Hull slaughter them in the final but if they don't, I'll be supporting every team that plays against Boro next year.

Being contrarian (not like me at all normally), maybe he left Middlesbrough to move to a larger more progressive club and further his career, but then couldn't believe what he was being asked to do and so left swiftly. Maybe he actually has integrity?........ Naaaaaa.

If TE was genuinely unaware of the rule, then a doubt WS would have hid behind a tree and then runaway when challenged.

They're footballers, they only get in at 10.30am and need to be fed breakfast and check their mobiles first 😉

At least if we do a total reset we should get 'Chelsea' protection. Ah, yes we did spy on another 10 teams and put piss in their halftime tea, but it was under the last ownerships watch so you have to let us off with a slap on the wrist.

It may be as you say Tommy, the FA never fail to amaze me, they are the EFL's big brother after all. I'd love to hear their argument that the club hasn't been punished enough!!!

Yes, sack them as long as you follow due process. I assume the internal investigation proved guilt of said individuals. You don't want to end up in an employee biased tribunal. You know how it goes, 'He may be guilty but you didn't give him 3 written warnings. Now pay him £50k for the hurt caused.'