Saints Expelled from Playoffs

[St Chalet]

3 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

What was our longest thread ever? In 20 years this forum has existed this must have a chance of breaking the record. 

The Takeover threads, both Saints and Pompey eat this for breakfast. 

[SNSUN]

2 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Oh so they’re back to trying to influence the case through local journalists again 

The statement obviously didn’t have the desired impact. 

A new English Civil War is imminent. 

I'm going covert with hundreds of stickers of Will Salt that I'll plaster all over their town. I'll need to find my face mask first. 

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

If this Taylor chappie joined us from Middlesbrough and then returned after a couple of months what information could he have supplied them with about our training routines? How do his dates correspond with the matches between us?

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

[SNSUN]

3 minutes ago, Colinjb said:

To give a certain thread about the blue few a run, this really would be years in the solving.

Challenge Accepted. 😁

[badgerx16]

6 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

What was our longest thread ever? In 20 years this forum has existed this must have a chance of breaking the record. 

PTS ?

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

PTS ?

Paul Allen thread probably as well.

[St Chalet]

Still remember the first page of the Skate takeover thread. Was like Genesis. 

[saintant]

48 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I've seen some posts saying that Gibson is pushing so hard because he is standing up for the integrity of football and it's because he cares so much about the league. Do me a favour! 

Since when has there been any integrity in football 🙂

[Danwulfe]

The rumoured submission

 

Quote

A collaboration of the EFL rules broken, but also UK Law that Gibbo has put forward...

"Southampton FC's conduct constitutes breaches of:

• EFL Regulation 127.1 (Prohibited Conduct - Observing Training Sessions)

• EFL Regulation 3.4 (Utmost Good Faith)

• EFL Regulation 23 (Club/Employees Relationships - Corporate Responsibility)

• EFL Regulation 84 (Misconduct)

• English Common Law - Civil Trespass

• English Common Law - Breach of Confidence

• English Common Law - Misuse of Private Information

• Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018 - Unlawful Acquisition of Trade Secrets

• English Common Law - Economic Tort (Unlawful Interference with Business/Economic Interests)

• English Common Law - Fraud and Deception

This cumulative pattern of violations demonstrates a serious and systematic breach of both regulatory and legal standards.

FACTS

1.1 An official employee of Southampton Football Club was discovered conducting unauthorised surveillance of Middlesbrough FC's tactical training session.

1.2 This surveillance occurred within the 72-hour period immediately preceding the playoff semi-final match scheduled between the two clubs.

1.3 The surveillance was deliberate and systematic in nature, aimed at gaining competitive advantage through the illicit acquisition of tactical information.

1.4 This conduct was carried out by a club official, establishing organisational knowledge and corporate culpability.

2. MULTIPLE BREACHES OF EFL REGULATIONS

While the primary breach is Regulation 127.1, Southampton FC's conduct also violates several other EFL Regulations, demonstrating a comprehensive failure to comply with the League's standards of conduct.

2.1 Regulation 127 - Prohibited Conduct (Observing Training Sessions)

As detailed below, this is the primary breach, explicitly prohibiting clubs from observing opposition training sessions within 72 hours of a scheduled match.

2.2 Regulation 3.4 - Utmost Good Faith

Regulation 3.4 provides that "in all matters and transactions relating to the League, each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the League with the utmost good faith."

Southampton FC's conduct fundamentally breaches this foundational principle. The deliberate, systematic surveillance of an opponent's training session represents the antithesis of good faith conduct. This behaviour is deceptive, dishonest, and demonstrates contempt for the competing club and the League itself.

2.3 Regulation 23 - Club/Employees Relationships

EFL Regulations establish that Clubs are responsible for the conduct of their employees. Regulation 23 makes clear that a Club shall ensure employees associated with it comply with EFL Regulations and standards of conduct.

The fact that an official employee of Southampton conducted the surveillance establishes corporate responsibility. Southampton FC cannot escape liability by claiming rogue behaviour by a single individual. The use of a club official demonstrates either:

• Explicit knowledge and authorisation by club management

• Gross negligence and failure of governance by club management

• A failure to establish adequate compliance protocols and staff training

In any case, Southampton FC bears direct corporate responsibility for its employee's conduct.

2.4 Regulation 84 - Misconduct and Failure to Cooperate

Regulation 84 grants the EFL power to "initiate and prosecute disciplinary proceedings against any person subject to these Regulations for breach of these Regulations or other conduct amounting to Misconduct."

The unauthorized filming and surveillance of a training session, conducted by a club official within a restricted timeframe before a playoff match, constitutes Misconduct under this broad regulation. This regulation also requires clubs to cooperate with EFL investigations and provide information as requested.

3. BREACH OF EFL REGULATION 127.1

3.1 The actions of Southampton FC directly violate EFL Regulation 127.1, which explicitly provides:

"Without prejudice to the requirements of Regulation 3.4 (that each Club shall behave towards each other Club with the utmost good faith), no Club shall directly or indirectly observe (or attempt to observe) another Club's training session in the period of 72 hours prior to any match scheduled to be played between those respective Clubs."

3.2 Southampton FC's conduct satisfies all elements of this regulatory violation:

4. BREACHES OF ENGLISH LAW

Beyond breaching EFL Regulations, Southampton FC's conduct constitutes multiple breaches of English law, rendering the club liable for both civil and potentially criminal violations.

4.1 Civil Trespass

The alleged surveillance took place on Middlesbrough's private property. Under English property law, the Southampton employee had no right to be present on that property without explicit permission from Middlesbrough FC. This constitutes civil trespass, a tort actionable under common law.

The fact that the employee was apprehended by Middlesbrough staff while taking pictures and videos demonstrates trespassing conduct. Middlesbrough FC retains the absolute right to exclude persons from their private training ground and to seek damages and/or injunctive relief for trespass.

4.2 Breach of Confidence and Misuse of Private Information

Training methodologies, tactical formations, team selections, and coaching strategies constitute confidential business information. These are proprietary intellectual property of Middlesbrough FC, developed through years of coaching expertise and protected investment.

Under English common law and the Human Rights Act 1998, Middlesbrough FC has a reasonable expectation of privacy and confidentiality in its training sessions. The unauthorized observation and filming of these sessions breaches the equitable doctrine of breach of confidence, which protects confidential information shared or obtained in circumstances importing an obligation of confidence.

Southampton FC's conduct constitutes "misuse of private information" - a standalone tort recognized in English law that protects against intrusive gathering and use of information where a reasonable person would regard it as highly offensive and lacking legitimate justification.

4.3 Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018

Under the Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018, "trade secrets" are protected where they: (a) are secret in nature; (b) have commercial value because of their secrecy; and (c) are subject to reasonable steps to maintain secrecy.

Middlesbrough's tactical information, training methodologies, and team preparation clearly meet all three criteria. These are not publicly available, have substantial commercial value, and are protected by standard sports industry confidentiality practices (secure training grounds, restricted access, non-disclosure agreements with staff).

Southampton's unauthorized acquisition of these trade secrets through deliberate surveillance is unlawful under the 2018 Regulations. Middlesbrough FC can seek injunctions to prevent use of this information, damages for losses incurred, and an account of profits from any competitive advantage gained.

4.4 Economic Tort - Unlawful Interference with Business

English law recognizes the economic tort of "causing loss by unlawful means" or "unlawful interference with economic interests." This tort arises where a defendant:

• Commits an act that is unlawful or wrongful

• Acts with the intention of causing loss to the claimant

• The unlawful act directly causes economic harm to the claimant

Southampton's conduct satisfies all elements: (1) the deliberate, unauthorized surveillance is both a trespass and breach of confidence; (2) Southampton intended to gain competitive advantage by obtaining confidential tactical information in the restricted 72-hour pre-match window; (3) the interference caused Middlesbrough to lose the exclusive benefit of their tactical preparation, affecting their competitive position in a playoff semi-final worth over £200 million in potential revenue.

4.5 Common Law Fraud and Deception

The deliberate, covert nature of the surveillance suggests fraudulent conduct. By knowingly entering Middlesbrough's private property without authorization, misrepresenting their purpose or identity, and surreptitiously recording training sessions, Southampton engaged in deceptive conduct.

This deception was designed to obtain a dishonest advantage in a competition. Common law principles against fraud protect against exactly this type of deliberate, dishonest interference with another's rights and interests.

5. SEVERITY AND CONTEXT

5.1 This breach is not a minor technical infraction. It represents deliberate misconduct aimed at gaining an unfair competitive advantage in a playoff match worth over £200 million in potential revenue.

5.2 The financial stakes make this breach particularly egregious. Winning the Championship playoff and gaining promotion to the Premier League generates revenues in excess of £200 million for the winning club over the subsequent seasons, including:

• Premier League broadcasting rights and central distributions

• Increased gate receipts and attendance revenue

• Enhanced commercial sponsorship and merchandising opportunities

• Player valuations and transfer market advantages

• Extended European competition opportunities (if applicable)

5.3 By engaging in unauthorized surveillance, Southampton FC sought to secure a competitive advantage worth over £200 million in additional revenue. This transforms the breach from a mere regulatory violation into an attempt to illicitly secure extraordinary financial benefit through fraud and misconduct. The potential gain is commensurate with the severe sanctions proposed."

 

[Whitey Grandad]

5 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

A new English Civil War is imminent. 

I'm going covert with hundreds of stickers of Will Salt that I'll plaster all over their town. I'll need to find my face mask first. 

Is that the face mask that you dropped outside their training ground?

[Willo of Whiteley]

Ironic isn’t it, the day the media stop talking about Boro and a lot of fans are now saying that Saints should go throw and throwing us out is ridiculous.

Then Boro release the statement, and the northern journos release their “leaks” from the club; the same journos who have been wrong a lot of the time; and the media lap it up, and the fans wank it off.

This is very desperate. This is a very Donald Trump thing to do, deflection tactics, media persuasion and ignoring the basic facts:
- Couldn’t score any of there 639,538 shots against us.
- Lost two games over 210 minutes of football.
- Were 1st in the table at one point, shat the bed and suddenly won two games in eleven.
- Manager was hired and managed them from 2nd to 5th.

They are a very special breed of club.

This is not acting in good faith. 

This is reckless, borderline inflammatory and clearly trying to influence the independent panel.

Shameful rotten club.

Arguably now, their reactions and actions to our initial breach is the biggest over-exaggeration and is a stain on the club now.

The club that isn’t accepting of due process.

[Appy]

The Telegraph headline basically says we’ve been spying on others as a matter of fact. 
 

Then goes on just to mention the statement from our ex analyst and suspicions of other clubs because of our tactics (because we beat them) 

 

It’s all very desperate.

[Toadhall Saint]

6 minutes ago, Danwulfe said:

The rumoured submission

 

 

Crikey that’s the kitchen sink! No wonder it’s lasting as long as it is.

[AlexLaw76]

It has been a clear effort to push the decision in a certain direction. Clear from literally Sunday or so

[James G]

10 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Oh so they’re back to trying to influence the case through local journalists again 

The statement obviously didn’t have the desired impact. 

I think it'll go quiet soon

That statement has turned the tide of opinion, and their forum is looking slowly more quiet and reflective 

I know Gibson will want a pound of flesh, but good luck against Dragan

I'm still wondering if there will be a twist at the end. 

[James]

3 minutes ago, Appy said:

The Telegraph headline basically says we’ve been spying on others as a matter of fact. 
 

Then goes on just to mention the statement from our ex analyst and suspicions of other clubs because of our tactics (because we beat them) 

 

It’s all very desperate.

I’m kind of tempted to register a complaint against the Telegraph reporter. He’s been writing inaccuracy as fact throughout this process, it was his article that claimed that Salt had professional surveillance equipment when it was an iPhone.

[StrangelyBrown]

7 minutes ago, Danwulfe said:

The rumoured submission

 

 

Blimey. The English law stuff is beyond mental.... Fraud??? 🤯 🤯 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Toadhall Saint said:

Crikey that’s the kitchen sink! No wonder it’s lasting as long as it is.

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

[Tommy]

[BotleySaint]

Just now, Toadhall Saint said:

Crikey that’s the kitchen sink! No wonder it’s lasting as long as it is.

Surely each of these claims needs to be backed up by sufficient evidence. Not one picture of a guy standing near a tree...

[James G]

Just now, James said:

I’m kind of tempted to register a complaint against the Telegraph reporter. He’s been writing inaccuracy as fact throughout this process, it was his article that claimed that Salt had professional surveillance equipment when it was an iPhone.

Go for it

Gibson will have all these reporters in his pocket, they'll spin for him if necessary. I'm sure even the MP for Middlesbrough spoke about it

He's just gone too far with it all

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, James said:

I’m kind of tempted to register a complaint against the Telegraph reporter. He’s been writing inaccuracy as fact throughout this process, it was his article that claimed that Salt had professional surveillance equipment when it was an iPhone.

Do it and Saints follow suit with legal action, that horrific rag the Barclay brothers have ruined will go out of business. Win win.

[bpsaint]

9 minutes ago, St Chalet said:

Still remember the first page of the Skate takeover thread. Was like Genesis. 

That wanker Corp Ho who had been a bragging skate twat lost all of his bottle and quit the forum before it got really juicy as he knew what was coming his way.

[Appy]

2 minutes ago, James said:

I’m kind of tempted to register a complaint against the Telegraph reporter. He’s been writing inaccuracy as fact throughout this process, it was his article that claimed that Salt had professional surveillance equipment when it was an iPhone.

He also spent the entirety of last summer telling Liverpool and Newcastle fans that Isak would be going absolutely nowhere. 

[Toadhall Saint]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

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

Yep but my god the wall needs to be big 🤣

Just now, BotleySaint said:

Surely each of these claims needs to be backed up by sufficient evidence. Not one picture of a guy standing near a tree...

Yep backed up evidence - which as the days go by seem to be less and less that can be substantiated 

[scumbag]

Henry W at the Torygraph pumping it out. Touchline ban was too strong for Biesla last time though eh? What a waste of money on those school fees.

[hypochondriac]

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. 

[The Wyvern]

12 minutes ago, Danwulfe said:

The rumoured submission

 

 

Referencing the Human Rights Act, hadn’t even thought of that one 🤣

[AlexLaw76]

6 minutes ago, James G said:

I think it'll go quiet soon

That statement has turned the tide of opinion, and their forum is looking slowly more quiet and reflective 

I know Gibson will want a pound of flesh, but good luck against Dragan

I'm still wondering if there will be a twist at the end. 

Yeah, but you dont mess with the "Gibbo"

[Gloucester Saint]

3 minutes ago, scumbag said:

Henry W at the Torygraph pumping it out. Touchline ban was too strong for Biesla last time though eh? What a waste of money on those school fees.

Out of a job soon like most of them are there. Very hollowed out, loss making operation even with the German takeover.

Edited Friday at 18:14 by Gloucester Saint

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

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. 

Anyone semi professional in the legal world would not have let that out. 

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, Gloucester Saint said:

Out of a job soon like most of them are there. Very hollowed out, loss making operation even with the takeover.

Henry Winter is a sycophantic wet wipe

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, The Wyvern said:

Referencing the Human Rights Act, hadn’t even thought of that one 🤣

It doesn't mention exactly how many babies we killed.

[Gloucester Saint]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

Henry Winter is a sycophantic wet wipe

Bild will get rid of him,

Edited Friday at 18:15 by Gloucester Saint

[coalman]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Yeah, but you dont mess with the "Gibbo"

Karen Gibbo will talk to your manager because he's very important.

[E_H_Saints]

Middlesbrough acting like spoiled little children and their entitlement.  Even if things were to go bad by no means do they deserve to go forward.  Hull should just win it and pack out the stadium and have a party.  

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Anyone semi professional in the legal world would not have let that out. 

Unless someone just stuck something into chatgpt. 

[SWLondon Saint]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

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. 

'Not sure'???? It's obviously complete AI cooked up bollocks because this is not a court case. The AI response is probably because there are not enough incidences of tribunal evidence in the training data, so it produces the most likely close guess - a court case submission.

[Saint NL]

Surely that can't be real, I'm going to assume it's a good fake

[LegalEagle]

You’ll love this guys. A WhatsApp literally just sent to me by an old mate who is a Derby County season ticket holder when he saw their press release. Love it. See below:

 

I absolutely loathe Middlesbrough. Horrible club which always falls short but with a mardy-arsed pathetic little rat of a chairman who looks to litigate to make up for his team’s incompetence on the pitch. If it were down to me I’d give your boys a fine of £2.5 million reduced to £250,000 if you don’t get promoted. And I’d fine Middlesbrough £1 million because they’re a load of c***s.

[Southner]

Gibbo the gobbo bleating on about fairness whilst trying to influence the EFL's decision and sweet talking his media chums.

Sausage.

[coalman]

Just now, LegalEagle said:

You’ll love this guys. A WhatsApp literally just sent to me by an old mate who is a Derby County season ticket holder when he saw their press release. Love it. See below:

 

I absolutely loathe Middlesbrough. Horrible club which always falls short but with a mardy-arsed pathetic little rat of a chairman who looks to litigate to make up for his team’s incompetence on the pitch. If it were down to me I’d give your boys a fine of £2.5 million reduced to £250,000 if you don’t get promoted. And I’d fine Middlesbrough £1 million because they’re a load of c***s.

Be sure to tell him it's not Middlesbrough any more. They've been rebranded

[Saint Marky]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

I've seen some posts saying that Gibson is pushing so hard because he is standing up for the integrity of football and it's because he cares so much about the league. Do me a favour! 

I’ve just seen a post saying Gibson pushed so hard, he’s just shat out his adams apple.

[James G]

3 minutes ago, SWLondon Saint said:

'Not sure'???? It's obviously complete AI cooked up bollocks because this is not a court case. The AI response is probably because there are not enough incidences of tribunal evidence in the training data, so it produces the most likely close guess - a court case submission.

Yeah, it'll be ai

It gives you a window into how strange folk are

[Saint_lambden]

21 minutes ago, Danwulfe said:

The rumoured submission

 

 

 

[die Mannyschaft]

It would be interesting to see the betting patterns in North Yorkshire for Boro to lose and if there are any betting terminal at any training grounds.

[coalman]

3 minutes ago, Saint_lambden said:

 

The Karen FC Forum are convinced it's the final nail in our coffin.

[manji]

22 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Ironic isn’t it, the day the media stop talking about Boro and a lot of fans are now saying that Saints should go throw and throwing us out is ridiculous.

Then Boro release the statement, and the northern journos release their “leaks” from the club; the same journos who have been wrong a lot of the time; and the media lap it up, and the fans wank it off.

This is very desperate. This is a very Donald Trump thing to do, deflection tactics, media persuasion and ignoring the basic facts:
- Couldn’t score any of there 639,538 shots against us.
- Lost two games over 210 minutes of football.
- Were 1st in the table at one point, shat the bed and suddenly won two games in eleven.
- Manager was hired and managed them from 2nd to 5th.

They are a very special breed of club.

This is not acting in good faith. 

This is reckless, borderline inflammatory and clearly trying to influence the independent panel.

Shameful rotten club.

Arguably now, their reactions and actions to our initial breach is the biggest over-exaggeration and is a stain on the club now.

The club that isn’t accepting of due process.

The Trump deflection comparison is spot on. I mentioned somewhere else it’s a very Poundland version of a popular political manoeuvre 

[Sheaf Saint]

Don't need an AI checker to confirm that submission is fake.

As if the EFL have the authority to try us for breach of UK law 🤣🤣🤣

[Hawkswood]

Can anyone paste a link to their forum please. No worries if not