VectisSaint

Trained by Andrew Balding, brother of Clare, she is well known to be a Saints fan, don't know about her brother, but they were brought up in Kingsclere.

I seriously doubt it. I'm fairly sure that they would not have released the commission findings if they had intended to appeal. They probably consider the commission has got them off the hook.

The outcome of the FA investigation and the independent commission's report and sanctions, actually makes a lot more sense the more you look into it and after (skim) reading the documented reasons. In the end the Commission decided that Tonda (himself) actually did very little wrong; they specifically dismissed the idea that the EFL had come up with, that he had coerced or bullied junior staff (for which the Club received a reprimand from the EFL, something that tends to get forgotten, it was the 3rd part of the punishment, after expulsion from play-offs and points deduction). They found no evidence to support this, or at least dismissed the sketchy evidence of the EFL enquiry. So, this left the 3 "spying" related events, none of which we need to be reminded Tonda was directly involved in. (1) the most serious, Middlesbro, he asked someone to find out if Hayden (?) was training or not, he did not ask for a video of their training or any update on tactics, really the analyst could have just taken a look and messaged back "yes, he's training", no one would have been caught filming or spying. the analyst clearly overstepped the mark, with good intentions no doubt. (2) Ipswich, Tonda appears not to have been involved at all, but when he was offered the chance to view the video he agreed to view it, and dismissed it swiftly as of no use anyway (because they had finished preparations for the game). (3) Oxford, which was very soon after he got the job, he simply wanted to know whether they were training with 4 or 5 at the back because the new manager had taken over. So there is really very little evidence that Tonda himself did much at all, but being a good manager (small m) he has effectively taken the blame on himself to protect his staff, as any good man manager would do, and I suspect he has also taken the blame to protect his "superiors", who frankly must have known what was going on and should have done what Tonda did and taken the blame. So, in summary most of what was done wrong was done by "the club", either by omission (not ensuring Eckert was aware of rules for instance) or by junior staff working off their own initiative. The Club have (justifiably) been punished, and maybe heavily so. My view is that that is where the blame lies for 95% of what happened, the Club not Tonda himself, and therefore the punishment from the FA (or the Commission) is justifiably "lenient", notwithstanding that the supporters, the players and the Club had been punished enough, there was no justification for throwing Eckert under the bus with a long ban that would have ended his career at the Football Club. It may have taken a long time to get here but it seems like the right outcome. I don't think we were lucky, I think its the logical outcome of a fair process by the FA, and it seems the Commission have serious doubts about how the EFL conducted their process, maybe that will have legs in the future, but we will probably never know. Pretty sure the FA won't appeal the judgement or sanction. Now, all that remains, stuff the Skates on Sunday.

No the ban ends end of June 27/28 (which is the FA definition of end of season). Besides we will be in the PL by then so the playoffs would be irrelevant.

Agreed. Underlying the document is a feeling that the FA consider the EFL to have wildly overstepped the mark and that their commission was somewhat amateurish. Dragon's statement seems to have the same view. I said all along that the FA would be very interested in the matter of bullying/coersion. If they had found any evidence of this they would have been serious aggravating factors for the sanctions. That they didn't find any evidence largely enabled them to give out a fairly minimal sanction. It was clearly bad form of the EFL to make this a matter of concern with no substantive evidence (and indeed to issue reprimands against SFC specifically for this). I won't say told you so.

Makes some sense if it's announced today given the players are back training. Suspect a very hefty fine and suspended ban.

No need it's hard to keep up with 299 pages of nonsense 😉

I know it's been a long time, but it's not news, was talked about on here and elsewhere, thought it was common knowledge.

The club's gross debt as of 2025 was R$1.37 billion(€214 million), the second largest in Brazil.

Assuming it gets paid, there's probably a reason they haven't paid, like they have no money.

Surely if Peretz was to be injured, they would have to bring in Ramsdale in order to keep Long as #2, as per his contract. 😉

I read we lost 1-0 but nothing else. Last week people on here were saying it was this week. With all the ITKs on here it's odd that no one even mentioned it last week. I've lost faith in this place as a source of information 🤣🤣🤣

Don't we have a friendly with Villa tomorrow, or was that last week, one report said we lost 1-0 but not seen it mentioned anywhere else.

Bazunu on the bench tonight, Azaz played 90 minutes in Ireland's 2-2 draw with Austria (Manning also played 90)

He was the Mayor of Manchester, probably had a lot of contact with them and their supposedly massive investments in the City.

They did, you learn something every day.

The owners, directors, primarily but yes it could come down to any manager, coach, player that was knowingly involved. Probably won't include any interns though.

As I said it's not black and white in cases like this (bringing the game into disrepute). How serious is the disrepute, what are your mitigations, etc etc. It's not rocket science, it's how all judicial systems work (at least in this country). You may find this link of interest, if you don't fall asleep reading it. https://www.footballlaw.co.uk/football-discipline-overview

That's not how it works. Even if Tonda admitted guilt there is a hearing, like a Court, where the FA seek to establish guilt before an independent panel, and the defence are provided the chance to provide mitigation evidence. In cases like this, bringing the game into disrepute, it's not as black and white as guilty/not guilty.

Being charged is not ascertaining guilt. That was done at the hearing last week. Sanctions determined separately. Sanctions will be determined and announced when the commission meets, maybe today maybe later. Exactly the same happened with the EFL back in May, but the timescales were.comoressed with the agreement of Saints because of the urgency in getting it sorted. Same is happening with Man City. Punishments are not decided by the same people who determine guilt,.they make their decisions based on the advice of the board, it's all to try and preserve independence, whether it does of course is a different matter.

Probably not for us though

He should be admired for taking a moral stance. Can't see how it can possibly damage his career 😉

I thought the Villa friendly was next Friday. I read elsewhere we lost 1-0. No details. Surprised no one on here knows anything about it if it did get played.

Almost certainly a condition of membership of the organisation, EFL, FA etc. All member clubs agree to abide by the decisions of the governing body. The Citeh decision today has brought into perspective that although the hearing took place yesterday, the decision on sanctions is separate and takes place after and separate to the hearing. The same happened in May, but the timescales were compressed as agreed by the Club.

That's why Woy and/or Arry would be the right choices. Short term. Big bonus for promotion, hopefully they would make it to the end of the season (no offence intended)