egg

Yep, that's how I think it'll play out, although it's more touch and go than people want to believe.

Yep. He's an ADR man, although he sits as a Recorder in the crown court, so will be used to dishing out unpleasant penalties.

All comparisons are comparing apples with kebabs. There is no legal comparable relevant to this; it's entirely unprecedented.

Things like this, and comparisons to other decisions, keep being made. This was done to get an advantage in a match where, theoretically, we could have sewn up the tie, and got our place in a final with a massive prize. Trying to get an illegal advantage to help towards a £200m prize has no precedent, none, so we will be the precedent, and it won't be a finger wagging and token penalty.

That could be for a variety of reasons, a lack of judgement being one of them.

👍 Sorry mate, I've got a sense of humour bypass now on this issue.

Err, no. There's no niceties involved in spying in breach of a clear rule prior to a massive game. The panel will be interested in that, not how Boro got the picture or name.

I'm not sure that particularly matters tbh. The panel will be more interested in what's happened, not how Boro know what they know. In an inquisitorial ISH tribunal, the focus is on what's happened, not niceties around the evidence gathering process.

I think that's optimistic. Double the points and fine, and I think it'll be thereabouts. People are underestimating how the panel will see this though. I think we'll have been kicked out if if were before the final, or even the second leg.

It's only worrying to the people who've laid out money and are expecting to see it again.

It's an opinion. Nothing more.

💯

Seems that way. I'd imagine it's deliberations today, the headline decision to be delivered tomorrow, with full written decision to follow.

Makes sense. 3 day hearing Friday to Sunday, today to deliberate and write decision, tomorrow to publish.

Oh, we've moved onto that. I'd rather focus on what's actually happening.