Sheaf Saint

But that is exactly what happened, according to the statements given to the EFL... https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/4863abd0-5dc8-11f1-9347-83110955f550.pdf The Ipswich Incident 22. The Club was scheduled to play Ipswich in a home fixture on the evening of 28 April 2026. In preparation, Ipswich trained at Eastleigh Football Club (“Eastleigh”) prior to the match. The evidence before the Commission was that Southampton and Eastleigh had a close working relationship. 23. Mr Eckert’s evidence before the Commission was that he had understood that someone from Eastleigh had sent CCTV footage of the Ipswich training session to someone at Southampton, the existence of which he (Mr Eckert) knew only a couple of hours before kick-off. After a short while, he asked for it to be switched off, so he could concentrate on the pre-match meeting. He said the footage showed nothing of influence, and he made no alterations to the match preparations which were in any event complete by that time. 24. However, it was Analyst 1’s evidence that the Assistant Coach (one of Southampton’s First Team Coaches) told him that Mr Eckert had said at an earlier match preparation meeting that “someone should go to Eastleigh to look at Ipswich”; and the Junior Analyst Intern said he was approached by the Assistant Coach to go to Eastleigh to watch Ipswich “as the boss is adamant that someone needs to go”. The Junior Analyst Intern felt uncomfortable doing this and said, “No”, and no further pressure was applied for him to go. Analyst 1 also felt uncomfortable: he said in his evidence that he grouped himself with the younger members of the analysis team who were being pressurised into carrying out observations, and he felt pressurised himself. Furthermore, at the time of the Ipswich match, he was attending a UEFA Coaching Course. So, he did not go to observe the Ipswich training session either. But Analyst 2 called him when he was at that course, saying the coaches were insistent that someone should go to Eastleigh, and Analyst 1 called an Academy Analyst Intern who had worked with Eastleigh before, and he said he would go. Analyst 1 asked that he be provided with Eastleigh kit and a legend, i.e. what his supposed “role” was at Eastleigh. 25. The Junior Analyst duly went to Eastleigh and observed the training sessions. Someone at Eastleigh video recorded the whole session on the morning of the match, this was sent to Southampton. From that footage, the Club was able to predict the exact Ipswich team for the fixture. So there was much more to it than us just obtaining CCTV footage and not watching it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgz2xq7ykvo Man admits violent disorder at Henry Nowak protest The 44-year-old, who has 25 previous convictions for 55 offences, was remanded in custody to be sentenced at Southampton Crown Court on 16 July. The court heard Frost's previous offending included four instances of public disorder and possession of a blade. Nola Bond, prosecuting, told the court Frost had thrown dustbins and a chair at police. She added: "He had around his neck a dog lead with a carabiner and wrapped it around his knuckles and taunted police officers to come and take it off him." Sounds like a nice chap 🙄

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZFxXIXsB4O/ Stay safe out there everyone 🤣

I have to say the only thing I'm actually looking forward to about this world cup is Trumpty Dumpty, the thin-skinned orange man-baby, losing his shit when fans of other countries start chanting nasty things about him. Especially the Scottish. He's convinced they all love him in Scotland - boy is he in for a surprise 🤣

No, it's not. It would still be a breach of rule 3.4 regarding acting in good faith to other teams.

So unlike you to take such a firm position on something trousers.

Yeah wasn't there some talk recently (forget from who) about other Champ clubs being well aware of us doing it and running dummy drills / formations to mitigate it? If that's the case, I would be astounded if it really was just the three occasions.

In which case perhaps Soggy was wrong (imagine!) and it actually was 'crime of the century'.

Tonda admitted in his statement to the EFL that he authorised the use of spying on numerous occasions. What more proof do you need?

True. But if they were capable of being so complacent about the outcome of the hearing, what makes you think their confidence in Tonda escaping a FA ban has any stronger basis?

The same people that fully expected to get away with just a fine from the EFL?

Wrong I'm afraid. The fact that the rule doesn't exist outside the EFL is irrelevant. The fact is that a rule was broken, systematically and repeatedly, and untruths were told in trying to cover it up initially. The EFL impose the sanctions on clubs found guilty of rule-breaking, but the conduct of individuals is the responsibility of the FA as the overall parent body. Anyone who thinks it won't happen is as much in denial as most of us were about the possibility of being expelled from the playoffs.

All good points Turks. Dragan has given his full backing, so as long as everyone else inside the club is on board with it then let's bring it on. But... Tonda clearly still has questions to answer about the way he conducted himself throughout all of this. The report released yesterday by the EFL doesn't show him in a particularly good light, and the FA investigation might uncover more that hasn't yet been made public. So while Dragan's full support is welcome, I really hope he isn't putting all his eggs in one basket and that he and Spors have a decent backup plan in the likely event of Tonda getting a lengthy ban.

It's not the club that the FA would punish, it's the individual.