Saints Charged With Spying on Mboro Training

[revolution saint]

Have saints done a “Pitchside Unseen” video for the game.yet?

 

[Fabrice29]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

Yep... Adam Blackmore not tweeted anything for two days... Make of that what you will...

The lack of narrative control the club have sought via the local media on this is odd and for me is the biggest sign of their guilt.

Edited 11 hours ago by Fabrice29

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 minute ago, revolution saint said:

Have saints done a “Pitchside Unseen” video for the game.yet?

 

Confiscated by MI5 as part of ongoing investigations.

[Willo of Whiteley]

Boro will be even more insufferable now in wanting us out and for them to get let through to the final.

[Killers Knee]

 

 

[Graffito]

18 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

The lack of narrative control the club have sought via the local media on this is odd and for me is the biggest sign of their guilt.

Saints have an important match to win. That’s the only thing that matters right now.

[Willo of Whiteley]

28 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

The lack of narrative control the club have sought via the local media on this is odd and for me is the biggest sign of their guilt.

What do you want them to do?

There’s a game tomorrow; and you want to engage with tabloid gossip which could hinder rather than help.

I would say today the media frenzy has changed direction, why add fuel to the fire?

I’s rather the club shut up than engage in slanging matches through the media.

[Saint NL]

 

 

[The Wyvern]

Can anyone tell me why the punishment given to Leeds isn't a precedent?

They were found guilty having done the same thing we have, so why is the punishment not the precedent to follow for us?
Bringing in a new law doesn't change that in my opinion, as the offence was already punishable when Leeds were caught. 

[Fabrice29]

48 minutes ago, Graffito said:

Saints have an important match to win. That’s the only thing that matters right now.

 

38 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

What do you want them to do?

There’s a game tomorrow; and you want to engage with tabloid gossip which could hinder rather than help.

I would say today the media frenzy has changed direction, why add fuel to the fire?

I’s rather the club shut up than engage in slanging matches through the media.

Come on now. It’s not the only thing that matters and isn’t tabloid gossip. It’s a very serious charge. And unless they have been drafted onto spying duties I don’t think the media/pr team are otherwise engaged on prepping the team for tomorrow’s match.

What I would expect them to do is what they always do and put out messages unofficially via the local media, if of course they had a message to be put out. Given they haven’t, and in fact they have seemingly let Blackmore especially go quite hard on them without pushing back, I can only assume they are reasonably content with the narrative and some of the details being put out there, which suggests it’s not all bullshit. 

Edited 10 hours ago by Fabrice29

[BarberSaint]

1 hour ago, revolution saint said:

Have saints done a “Pitchside Unseen” video for the game.yet?

 

No just a training session seen video.

[Saint_clark]

9 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

 

Come on now. It’s not the only thing that matters and isn’t tabloid gossip. It’s a very serious charge. And unless they have been drafted onto spying duties I don’t think the media/pr team are otherwise engaged on prepping the team for tomorrow’s match.

What I would expect them to do is what they always do and put out messages unofficially via the local media, if of course they had a message to be put out. Given they haven’t, and in fact they have seemingly let Blackmore especially go quite hard on them without pushing back, I can only assume they are reasonably content with the narrative and some of the details being put out there, which suggests it’s not all bullshit. 

To be fair you assume they haven't pushed back against Blackmore but he went hard on them and now has gone completely silent. That seems to me like they HAVE pushed back.

[Willo of Whiteley]

10 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

 

Come on now. It’s not the only thing that matters and isn’t tabloid gossip. It’s a very serious charge. And unless they have been drafted onto spying duties I don’t think the media/pr team are otherwise engaged on prepping the team for tomorrow’s match.

What I would expect them to do is what they always do and put out messages unofficially via the local media, if of course they had a message to be put out. Given they haven’t, and in fact they have seemingly let Blackmore especially go quite hard on them without pushing back, I can only assume they are reasonably content with the narrative and some of the details being put out there, which suggests it’s not all bullshit. 

And maybe they are content with the narrative, maybe they’re content that there is sufficient evidence against them and the best thing to do now for the club AND THE TEAM is not to rock the boat further.

Maybe the best way forward is to take the punishment and shut up, the less you say the less engagement with the media. Hardly rocket science.

Honestly find it baffling how you don’t see that, and would rather have a social media/tabloid rampage on the eve of the biggest game of the season.

The only people talking about it today are Boro fans. National media has moved on. You don’t add fuel to a fire that is slowly going out.

[Fabrice29]

1 minute ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

And maybe they are content with the narrative, maybe they’re content that there is sufficient evidence against them and the best thing to do now for the club AND THE TEAM is not to rock the boat further.

Maybe the best way forward is to take the punishment and shut up, the less you say the less engagement with the media. Hardly rocket science.

Honestly find it baffling how you don’t see that, and would rather have a social media/tabloid rampage on the eve of the biggest game of the season.

The only people talking about it today are Boro fans. National media has moved on. You don’t add fuel to a fire that is slowly going out.

I do see that and that’s why I said I find it the biggest sign of their guilt. Thanks for reading.

[Legoman]

2 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

I do see that and that’s why I said I find it the biggest sign of their guilt. Thanks for reading.

I see it more as the club retaining a measured response as and when appropriate to do so rather than adding more speculation to the hysteria being whipped up by Boro and their supporting media 

[Saint Fan CaM]

Seen a story that it was an intern working for Saints but that his actions were entirely his own initiative to try to impress. Sounds feasible.

[Willo of Whiteley]

18 minutes ago, Legoman said:

I see it more as the club retaining a measured response as and when appropriate to do so rather than adding more speculation to the hysteria being whipped up by Boro and their supporting media 

This entirely, the club arguably are now being more professional than the reaction (from Boro) on the actual event.

[The Kraken]

54 minutes ago, The Wyvern said:

Can anyone tell me why the punishment given to Leeds isn't a precedent?

They were found guilty having done the same thing we have, so why is the punishment not the precedent to follow for us?
Bringing in a new law doesn't change that in my opinion, as the offence was already punishable when Leeds were caught. 

Leeds weren’t ‘found guilty’ of anything. At the time they got caught of their spying, there wasn’t an official rule in the football league that actually forbade it. After that the football league introduced that rule.

so, Leeds were caught being a bit sly. Then a rule was enforced. Then, it seems, we broke that rule.

That is why Leeds aren’t a precedent.

[Saint_clark]

12 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

Leeds weren’t ‘found guilty’ of anything. At the time they got caught of their spying, there wasn’t an official rule in the football league that actually forbade it. After that the football league introduced that rule.

so, Leeds were caught being a bit sly. Then a rule was enforced. Then, it seems, we broke that rule.

That is why Leeds aren’t a precedent.

Don't rules of a competition usually set out what the punishment is beforehand? 

[The Kraken]

1 minute ago, Saint_clark said:

Don't rules of a competition usually set out what the punishment is beforehand? 

Do they?

what have the rules of the football league set out about what we did? Apart from that it’s against the rules.

[Saint86]

3 hours ago, trousers said:

Moving on...

 

 

https://maps.app.goo.gl/gDm1DSAn1hBacMTG6?g_st=ac

Now I'm not saying anyone should do this... but there does happen to be plenty of bushes and a convenient hill to the immediate north west corner of their training ground, right by what looks like the main pitch 👀

Equally though, if a team were prepared to pay fines (ala Leeds), they could just offer a fair wedge to one of the overlooking home owners instead, and then set up a professional recording studio in a bedroom etc that overlooks the pitch? As far as I'm aware, the training ground staff wouldn't be able to break into a property to challenge any covert operatives... These teams really do need to start thinking about security 🤷🕵️‍

Edited 8 hours ago by Saint86

[Dark Munster]

2 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Leeds weren’t ‘found guilty’ of anything. At the time they got caught of their spying, there wasn’t an official rule in the football league that actually forbade it. After that the football league introduced that rule.

so, Leeds were caught being a bit sly. Then a rule was enforced. Then, it seems, we broke that rule.

That is why Leeds aren’t a precedent.

Agreed. As an example, decades ago Leicester spent like drunken sailors and went into administration, without punishment. After that administration meant being docked 10 or more points, even though Leicester got away with it originally. That being said, the no spying rule with 72 hours doesn't specify the type of punishment (unlike administration), so any point deduction, or even worse awarding the tie to Boro, would result in the shit hitting the fan.

[trousers]

5 hours ago, Legoman said:

I see it more as the club retaining a measured response as and when appropriate to do so rather than adding more speculation to the hysteria being whipped up by Boro and their supporting media 

## interesting first post (and user name) having been registered for 4 years klaxon ##

P.s. welcome to the forum Rasmus 😉

Edited 4 hours ago by trousers

[Sunglasses Ron]

9 hours ago, The Wyvern said:

Can anyone tell me why the punishment given to Leeds isn't a precedent?

They were found guilty having done the same thing we have, so why is the punishment not the precedent to follow for us?
Bringing in a new law doesn't change that in my opinion, as the offence was already punishable when Leeds were caught. 

Yes, I’ve been thinking about this.

Whilst there wasn’t an explicit rule back then, they were simply charged (and fined) under a more general one, which oddly is also being applied this time round.

There is little precedent here though as they were fined for multiple admitted breaches, whereas ours could literally be one act by a rogue employee.

So we could end up with a slap on the wrists and a sacked analyst to a £500k fine and possibly even points deducted.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Sunglasses Ron

[goodymatt]

8 hours ago, revolution saint said:

Have saints done a “Pitchside Unseen” video for the game.yet?

 

 

[Turkish]

8 hours ago, Fabrice29 said:

 

Come on now. It’s not the only thing that matters and isn’t tabloid gossip. It’s a very serious charge. And unless they have been drafted onto spying duties I don’t think the media/pr team are otherwise engaged on prepping the team for tomorrow’s match.

What I would expect them to do is what they always do and put out messages unofficially via the local media, if of course they had a message to be put out. Given they haven’t, and in fact they have seemingly let Blackmore especially go quite hard on them without pushing back, I can only assume they are reasonably content with the narrative and some of the details being put out there, which suggests it’s not all bullshit. 

Given tactics don’t matter the surprise here is that anyone bothered doing it in the first place or that anyone even noticed let alone care about it 

Edited 2 hours ago by Turkish

[StrangelyBrown]

Before the media go clutching their pearls about our spies perhaps someone should ask the question why media favourites Ipswich got over 60% more penalties than the next team and more than 3 times the number we got...

[coalman]

There's no upside to the club trying to control the narrative. Complying fully with the EFL investigation also includes not trying to prejudice the case in public. 

Boro have been loud and public which harms them later because Saints can point to the fact that they're trying to influence the process publicly including the outcomes of it.

You would imagine the people they hire in to run the process are going to have legal backgrounds and will know this. There's also the reality that it might wind up in a real court of law if either side disputes the decision at which point some of Middlesbrough's public statements are going count against them.

[AlexLaw76]

Boro fans (online) are convinced they will be playing in the final no matter what.

 

[die Mannyschaft]

21 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Boro fans (online) are convinced they will be playing in the final no matter what.

 

That's good, over confident and Boro definitely favourites to win they are the Hollywood of cheating.  I am sure Boro have been involved in corruption but will research later.

[Midfield_General]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Given tactics don’t matter the surprise here is that anyone bothered doing it in the first place or that anyone even noticed let alone care about it 

And managers, don’t forget. Managers don’t matter either. So to placate the mob we should assume Tonda knew all about it, give him the boot and just let Jack Stephens take over for the play-offs. 

All that matters is what players you’ve got, so you can stick anyone in charge and you’ll get the same results. 

Unless you’re Rangers of course.

Or Celtic.

Or Man Utd.

Or Norwich. 

Or Saints.

Or anyone 

Edited 1 hour ago by Midfield_General

[Appy]

35 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Boro fans (online) are convinced they will be playing in the final no matter what.

 

Because they’ve deluded themselves beyond belief. 

[Zorba]

1 hour ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

There is little precedent here though as they were fined for multiple admitted breaches, whereas ours could literally be one act by a rouge employee.

I bet he is after stirring up all this shite!

[Saint NL]

56 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Boro fans (online) are convinced they will be playing in the final no matter what.

 

They'll be resting players tonight so they're fresh for the final 😂

[CheshireSaint]

53 minutes ago, coalman said:

There's no upside to the club trying to control the narrative. Complying fully with the EFL investigation also includes not trying to prejudice the case in public. 

Boro have been loud and public which harms them later because Saints can point to the fact that they're trying to influence the process publicly including the outcomes of it.

You would imagine the people they hire in to run the process are going to have legal backgrounds and will know this. There's also the reality that it might wind up in a real court of law if either side disputes the decision at which point some of Middlesbrough's public statements are going count against them.

Bang on this. Saints can defend by co-operating fully, holding their cards close to their chest whilst maintaining the action was not sanctioned by the club. What will also be in our favour, is any decision makers will know that with promotion into the most lucrative league in the world at stake, Saints will throw everything into an appeal. The obvious thing to do is to punish Saints with something that tells us we have transgressed, but not to the point of denying us access to the Premier League. We would unlikely challenge a fine and Boro couldn't say we got away with it. It's the obvious play.

Anything further would also set a precedent where clubs could openly seek out anything deemed nefarious by rival clubs in a bid to remove them from the competition. Slippy slope.

[Toadhall Saint]

So let’s assume we get found to be breaking both the rules.

There is the 200k precedent that Leeds were fined (Leeds admitted to multiple occasions) for the existing rule. So breaking that is going to mean a fine of 200k.
Which begs the question what do we feel is a “fair” outcome of breaking the new rule specifically aimed at spying? Me, probably the same amount in fine plus 3 point deduction for the specific case of spying on boro.

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

Based on their fans at the weekend, is it possible that the rogue employee just thought he was at the zoo?

[Farmer Saint]

At what time are Saints going to announce Boro's lineup for tonight?

[Farmer Saint]

5 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

So let’s assume we get found to be breaking both the rules.

There is the 200k precedent that Leeds were fined (Leeds admitted to multiple occasions) for the existing rule. So breaking that is going to mean a fine of 200k.
Which begs the question what do we feel is a “fair” outcome of breaking the new rule specifically aimed at spying? Me, probably the same amount in fine plus 3 point deduction for the specific case of spying on boro.

There was no existing rule, so precedent is a little irrelevant.

The issue is there was no set of punishments set out against the new rule when it came in.

[Toadhall Saint]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

There was no existing rule, so precedent is a little irrelevant.

The issue is there was no set of punishments set out against the new rule when it came in.

There was an existing rule that Leeds breached. Which we are accused of breaking as well as the new anti spying rule.

[Turkish]

36 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

And managers, don’t forget. Managers don’t matter either. So to placate the mob we should assume Tonda knew all about it, give him the boot and just let Jack Stephens take over for the play-offs. 

All that matters is what players you’ve got, so you can stick anyone in charge and you’ll get the same results. 

Unless you’re Rangers of course.

Or Celtic.

Or Man Utd.

Or Norwich. 

Or Saints.

Or anyone 

Another similarly brilliant post which wasn’t on this forum but I remember someone saying Alex Ferguson was massively overrated, Alan Pardew would have done just all well, when Fergie leaves all they’ll do is spend £200m and win the league again. 

 

[Sunglasses Ron]

5 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

There was no existing rule, so precedent is a little irrelevant.

The issue is there was no set of punishments set out against the new rule when it came in.

Yup, just because there's now a rule about observing a training session, doesn't mean that the fine will be any more than what Leeds had.  In fact, and by rights, if we're only pulled up on this one infraction then you could argue that we should be fined less. All that's changed is that they don't have to pigeon-hole a charge into the vague rule that Leeds got done under. I'm still a little unsure why we've also been charged with breaking the old rule though, as surely the new one supersedes that.

A total guess from my side, but I reckon we're on for a £500k fine.

[The Wyvern]

8 hours ago, The Kraken said:

Leeds weren’t ‘found guilty’ of anything. At the time they got caught of their spying, there wasn’t an official rule in the football league that actually forbade it. After that the football league introduced that rule.

so, Leeds were caught being a bit sly. Then a rule was enforced. Then, it seems, we broke that rule.

That is why Leeds aren’t a precedent.

How and why were they fined if they weren’t found guilty of anything? 

[RedArmy]

Good morning to the Boro fans. 
 

It’s another glorious day of not being kicked out of the playoffs. 

[Football Special]

Middlesbrough and their various PR outlets have been relentless, even this morning they're reminding everyone they'll keep squad together even if they lose so they're fully prepared for the final should we subsequently be expelled 

[Midfield_General]

2 minutes ago, Sunglasses Ron said:

Yup, just because there's now a rule about observing a training session, doesn't mean that the fine will be any more than what Leeds had.  In fact, and by rights, if we're only pulled up on this one infraction then you could argue that we should be fined less. All that's changed is that they don't have to pigeon-hole a charge into the vague rule that Leeds got done under. I'm still a little unsure why we've also been charged with breaking the old rule though, as surely the new one supersedes that.

A total guess from my side, but I reckon we're on for a £500k fine.

There’s another charge/ rule as well - the absolute nonsense one about how all clubs must always behave ‘in the utmost good faith’ towards each other.

Because that’s exactly how football works and no club, player or manager have ever got away with doing anything against another club that wasn’t completely in the spirit of fair play. 

Thank god these moral guardians are there to uphold these vital principles at all times throughout the sport. 

[Midfield_General]

7 minutes ago, Football Special said:

Middlesbrough and their various PR outlets have been relentless, even this morning they're reminding everyone they'll keep squad together even if they lose so they're fully prepared for the final should we subsequently be expelled 

God I hope they do. Imagine them still running around training, when everyone else has forgotten about it and been on holiday for weeks, desperately waiting for a phone call that never comes like a bunch of total dicks 

Edited 53 minutes ago by Midfield_General

[bolo]

I still cannot work out where this alleged spying act sits in the hierarchy of dark arts. 

The amount of bile and crap we hear about this is quite undeliverable given man city's 100+ charges, arsenals bear hug corner routines, playacting from most players. 

 Chelsea got fined 30mil for seriously dodgy financial practices 

Granted that is with the FA and not the EFL, but Leicester got a 6PT deduction for £20 mil losses. Talk of being thrown out of the play offs is mental given the punishment already given for much bigger offences. 

 

[Football Special]

15 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

God I hope they do. Imagine them still running around training, when everyone else has forgotten about it and been on holiday for weeks, desperately waiting for a phone call that never comes like a bunch of total dicks 

Im sure Chinese whispers but belief seems to be coming from someone at Middlesbrough being told by EFL that expulsion is very much an option on the table , hence the need to stay prepared 

Soviet levels of propaganda 

If any of that is true then efl must be desperate for us to lose tonight 

Edited 38 minutes ago by Football Special

[Dman]

1 hour ago, Appy said:

Because they’ve deluded themselves beyond belief. 

Yep. I saw a handful of them online yesterday trying to convince themselves that if we go on to win the play-offs, we have commited fraud.