hypochondriac

After my initial post. Witness statements from staff at other clubs, phone records, bank statements and maybe someone does have something on cctv if its a more recent game.

Who mentioned anyone had cctv footage?

Because they weren't aware of it obviously. Not sure why people keep bringing this point up.

If that is the case-not sure it is but if- then no chance are we kicked out for one instance of spying by an intern.

Yes depends if there are specifics in the statement that can be substantiated. Although I wonder if we will outright lie if we have done it before or consider it better to fess up and plead mitigation (ie it was a couple of people in the analysis team who have now been sacked.)

Agreed but the written statement from the ex analyst (and the betting guy on here who said he knows we've done it before) does rather suggest this isn't the first time

Maybe so but they wouldn't have the outcome yet would they.

How would anyone know? Have they had the hearing yet? I assumed they would be deliberating first prior to any outcome.

I think it would be hard not to. Presumably we would attempt to pin it elsewhere though and Tonda said he is eager to talk about it so I assume he isn't just going to fess up to being behind it.

If nothing else this episode has inspired some very funny posts.

@Turkish will be distraught.

I agree. I doubt the leaks to the press and the statement trying to jeopardise the process will improve their chances of getting what they want.

Were you the pole?

That would be pretty funny and would make him back to being hated again!

But it's not the efl who decides? Isn't it just the independent panel ruling on what our punishment is for breaking those two rules (which it sounds like we are going to admit to breaking anyway).

Did we? I haven't seen anything like that anywhere.

No idea if that's true or not but if it is, would those articles saying "if Southampton are proven to have done this multiple times they will be kicked out" a load of bollocks then because this hearing will just be looking at if we have broken these two rules and not charges of systemic spying?

Can someone clarify. Is the evidence of other spying outside of this instance relevant to this case? Or would they have to bring charges for other spying instances separately?

Unless someone just stuck something into chatgpt.

I'm not sure I believe that's the submission. It's are we guilty of what we've been charged with and how egregious was the breach. All that other stuff might factor into a civil suit but is not relevant here.

We haven't been charged with half that stuff though. Just throwing stuff at the wall.

And still it goes on. 'strong written evidence' is essentially this one bloke unless he has written evidence from someone like Spors it isn't strong. 'At least one other team' means it's one other doesn't it

Spin that has been fed to a friendly journalist by Middlesbrough. They can't possibly know what is 'likely' prior to the independent panel that they have no part in.

So going by the latest articles it seems that boro have the statement from the ex employee and they want bank statements and phone records to try to prove it. Doesn't sound like they have any form of proof from other clubs.

Both Jon sopel and the football lowdown tweeting to say that expulsion would be an overreaction. I agree!