badgerx16

I am sworn to secrecy. If I told you I would then be obliged to keeel you.

Not really. The issue is that the EFL regulations, unlike the Law, fail to stipulate what level of sanction applies to any particular breach of their rules. Therefore technically "all options" are available for ANY transgression: it's like a Judge telling a shoplifter that he faces a penalty ranging from 10 hours of community service all the way up to a life sentence without parole. There is an argument for following precedent, however in this case there is none; Swindon committed a serious financial breach, and Leeds admitted they were "spying" all season. We are the first to be charged under this rule so we simply have to wait to see if the club's pleas on mitigation are successful. Any noise coming from Teesside SHOULD be irrelevant.

I trust the KC chairing the panel to ignore the smoke screen and concentrate on the specific charge and only the evidence relating to that.

The EFL have only announced charges relating to the 2 rules and Middlesborough alone, not multiple clubs - unlike the Leeds case.

What's the Serbian equivalent to waking up next to a horse's head ? Gibbo better lock his doors and windows at night.

Presumably there will somewhere be a new financial rule that says Middlesborough can sue any team that beats them.

They just don't get it; the EFL, a member's club, have brought an action in terms of a potential breach of the club's rules, this is not a criminal, or even civil, Law case, so none of that waffle is relevant.

PTS ?

The second match wasJan 4th, 4-0 to Boro at the Rivershite.

What was their financial loss ?

Have you ever seen a cat "hiding" behind a single blade of grass ?

It would be tidier.

Do they not understand the process ? Inquiry ==== verdict ==== sanction. We haven't had stage 1 yet.

Which of course you cannot work out from watching publicly available full match videos of every game they play ?

How do you know they are ITK ?

Legit. How much advantage do you realistically gain ?

Abso-fucking-lutely

TalkShite going on about the possible outcomes; award Boro a 3-0 win for the first leg, or give them a bye to the final.

Unlike the totally spotless FA Cup finallists.

No, that is Boro's recently uncovered "whistleblower". Doesn't have any grievance against saints, no sir.

EFL say "on or before Tuesday".

Could just be more Gibbo BS.

https://www.southamptonfc.com/en/match/hull-city-vs-southampton--sky-bet-championship-play-off-final-23-05-2026

No way Boro should benefit - they had their chance over 2 legs and blew it. "Spying" had nothing to do with that. If there is a financial hit, make it a donation to CRUK or BHF.