Saints Expelled from Playoffs

[Whitey Grandad]

23 minutes ago, Dirkdiggler said:

But  we wouldn’t of surely as we have come out as part of our “defence” that didn’t consider scouting/spying to be a bad thing and apparently our manager didn’t know it was against the rules 🤣🤣🤣 

Our handling of this has been amateurish from the start!

Boro obviously had knowledge we had been doing this so would’ve been on alert of anyone suspicious hanging around the training facility and low and behold we turned up as expected and they acted accordingly.

Gathered their evidence contacted other teams and had us bang to rights! 
 

Fans have looked stupid trying to stick up for the club during this mainly due to the club not being honest from the start ffs they tried lying off the bat to the EFL when questioned. 
 

Whether Boros tactics in the media were correct or not it’s saints who have done this to themselves no other club has set this up we decided to scout/spy when we shouldn’t have been and sad as it is that our fault and the punishment has been dealt out.

A report that I read said that neither Ipswich nor Oxford were aware that they had been spied upon. Their 'evidence' came from Supersnot Taylor. 

[tdmickey3]

12 minutes ago, egg said:

That's a different question.

The simple question is what sporting sanction was available that would have had an impact that would have bitten in the event of promotion?

If it wasn't expulsion, it effectively meant no actual sporting sanction. 

Should we have avoided a sporting sanction for a sporting offence? 

is a points deduction not a sporting sanction?

Breaking the spending rule is a breach so why only points and not expulsion ?

[Toadhall Saint]

5 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

A report that I read said that neither Ipswich nor Oxford were aware that they had been spied upon. Their 'evidence' came from Supersnot Taylor. 

I’d like to read that any chance of a link?

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Points and a fine HTH

There’s no points in a knock out competition. God, you’re dopey. We cheated in 2 competitions, the one based on points, we got a points deduction. Once the play offs were deemed a separate competition, we couldn’t have points deduction 🤡

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

Some thoughts now the dust has started to settle.

1. I can’t believe that something as innocuous as checking out the opposition before a match has been blown up to be the sporting crime of the century.

2. How such a minor infringement of such a stupid rule has led to not only expulsion from a major game but the utter turmoil within SFC.

3. The club could not have handled the situation any worse than they have done and have been played by Gibson like a cheap fiddle.

4. We now live in an age where the answer to everything is to sack everyone in sight as if that is the answer to all of our problems rather than rehabilitation and education to change behaviour.

I agree with your overall sentiment. Although I am struggling to read 3 and 4 and wonder how on earth parsons is still here.

[Graffito]

A precedent has been set. Spying in the Play Offs means expulsion from the competition. Spying during the course of a regular season means a deduction of three points, subject to mitigation.

Had the EFL thought this all through and made these draconian penalties explicit in the rules when they introduced Regulation 127 none of this spying would have happened, none of the valid questions about process would have occurred and they would not have thoroughly pissed off everyone associated with the play offs except Middlesborough. They have also left themselves open to legal action from the likes of Hull, Wrexham, about which I care not a jot.

And while I’m moaning about the EFL, could they not have agreed a proper reciprocal arrangement with the Premier League to the effect that points deductions applied to the following season are applied automatically in whichever league the penalised team finds itself. Sporting sanction seems to be used synonymously with expulsion. Unless sporting sanction is so defined in the EFL rules, then what are points deductions if not sporting sanctions. This might have given the panel a bit more flexibility in applying a sanction that was both punishment and deterrent without applying the disproportionate sanction of expulsion.

[James]

Just now, tdmickey3 said:

is a points deduction not a sporting sanction?

Breaking the spending rule is a breach so why only points and not expulsion ?

I just cannot understand how an independent panel, which could presumably select from thousands of qualified people, is comprised of two people who have (however indirectly) a publicly identifiable link to MFC. I’m not saying it would have changed the outcome but it feels really naff. 

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

A report that I read said that neither Ipswich nor Oxford were aware that they had been spied upon. Their 'evidence' came from Supersnot Taylor. 

Backed up by Salt. The two grasses gave the evidence against. Again at risk of being accused of making a pointless post and not getting us anywhere if we'd spied on other teams then why didn't they say that too? Plus if their phones were examined then there would be evidence on the whatsapp group they were on. 

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, saintant said:

Over to those who are 100% sure Boro have played with a straight bat in all this. Let's have some comments.

You'll have to bear with Lighthouse I fear, reading his earlier post I can only assume he's on his way to fratton to grovel for an apology from the fans of our fishy friends over what some of you rapscallions have been writing on here. After that he's likely heading to Wembley to repeat the feat to Boro and Hull fans tomorrow.

😛😝

Said in jest lighthouse, please don't ban me for committing acts of bad banter on the forum (I think we've all had enough of Draconian sanctions this past week 🥲)

Edited 3 hours ago by Saint86

[Lord Duckhunter]

3 minutes ago, Graffito said:

precedent has been set. Spying in the Play Offs means expulsion from the competition. Spying during the course of a regular season means a deduction of three points, subject to mitigation.

Can you explain it to Metal Mickey 

[tdmickey3]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

There’s no points in a knock out competition. God, you’re dopey. We cheated in 2 competitions, the one based on points, we got a points deduction. Once the play offs were deemed a separate competition, we couldn’t have points deduction 🤡

There was no designated punishment for what we did you bell, none they just listened to outside influence.

[tdmickey3]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

Can you explain it to Metal Mickey 

Point out to me where this is stated in the rules

[Disco Stu]

1 hour ago, LeBizzier69 said:

Are people going to watch the final tomorrow? Honestly not sure i can, probably a lengthy dog walk instead...just watching the Boro fans loving their day out, along with the non-stop spygate references, not to mention if they win it and go up. 

I managed to get a dental procedure brought forward to tomorrow so with any luck, I'll be in considerable enough pain to distract me from the days events.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 minute ago, tdmickey3 said:

There was no designated punishment for what we did you bell, none they just listened to outside influence.

Dear God, Just because there’s no designated punishment doesn’t mean there can’t be one. 

[trousers]

Just now, Disco Stu said:

I managed to get a dental procedure brought forward to tomorrow so with any luck, I'll be in considerable enough pain to distract me from the days events.

2:30 ? 

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Point out to me where this is stated in the rules

Wow, why didn’t Lord Panic think of this. Shame we didn’t employ you instead, we’d defo be heading to Wembley tomorrow 🤣🤣🤡

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

15 minutes ago, trousers said:

The obvious answer is 'yes' of course.

IMO, the "fairer" sporting sanction would have been for the first leg to have been awarded 3-0 to Middlesbrough (before the second leg was played), but then we get into discussions of how ineptly the EFL (c/o Gibson) have handled the whole situation...

Quite right. The sanction should have been 3-0 to Boro before a ball had been kicked. We would not have grumbled and would have just got behind the team. 

Without sounding like a smart arse, I said at the SMS leg that Noro should have been awarded a 1-0 lead and the matter would have been dealt with....

[Disco Stu]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

2:30 ? 

10.30 so the local anaesthetic should have worn off nicely by mid afternoon.

[John Boy Saint]

1 minute ago, Disco Stu said:

10.30 so the local anaesthetic should have worn off nicely by mid afternoon.

Whoosh!

[Disco Stu]

6 minutes ago, John Boy Saint said:

Whoosh!

I'm afraid so. 😅

 

Edit: Oooooh, just got it. 😂 Not yet but it will!

Edited 3 hours ago by Disco Stu

[trousers]

6 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Quite right. The sanction should have been 3-0 to Boro before a ball had been kicked. We would not have grumbled and would have just got behind the team. 

Without sounding like a smart arse, I said at the SMS leg that Noro should have been awarded a 1-0 lead and the matter would have been dealt with....

Yep... A 'proportional' sporting sanction was available to the EFL but I'm guessing it didn't get Gibson's blessing*

(*That last bit is banter, for any 'unhinged comment' inspectors looking in... There is of course absolutely no chance that Gibson was influencing proceedings... )

Edited 3 hours ago by trousers

[Whitey Grandad]

14 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

I’d like to read that any chance of a link?

I think it was in the Times a couple of days ago. Or maybe in a link to the Athletic that was posted on here. I'll try to find it myself if I've got a chance later.

[tdmickey3]

5 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Wow, why didn’t Lord Panic think of this. Shame we didn’t employ you instead, we’d defo be heading to Wembley tomorrow 🤣🤣🤡

 

1 minute ago, trousers said:

Yep... A 'proportional' sporting sanction was available to the EFL but I'm guessing it didn't get Gibson's blessing*

(*That last bit is banter, for any 'unhinged comment' inspectors looking in )

 

[John Boy Saint]

3 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

I'm afraid so. I know that's KO time but don't get the joke 😅

I’ll help you out Stu 

2:30 = too-th-urty 😁

it’s a good old Dad joke

[Disco Stu]

Just now, John Boy Saint said:

I’ll help you out Stu 

2:30 = too-th-urty 😁

it’s a good old Dad joke

 pondered over that for far too long 😂

[egg]

30 minutes ago, trousers said:

The obvious answer is 'yes' of course.

IMO, the "fairer" sporting sanction would have been for the first leg to have been awarded 3-0 to Middlesbrough (before the second leg was played), but then we get into discussions of how ineptly the EFL (c/o Gibson) have handled the whole situation...

Again, that misses the point. The panel, this week, couldn't turn back time. I repeat, what sporting sanction was actually available to them that would have impacted us - points in a league we may not have played in for years to come, would not be a sporting sanction. 

[Turkish]

He’s getting on my tits droning on but can’t disagree with any of this 

 

 

[tdmickey3]

3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

He’s getting on my tits droning on but can’t disagree with any of this 

 

 

Shame he didnt show the same attitude when doing his love in for Bielsa

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Again, that misses the point. The panel, this week, couldn't turn back time. I repeat, what sporting sanction was actually available to them that would have impacted us - points in a league we may not have played in for years to come, would not be a sporting sanction. 

They should have reacted when the offence was identified. You don't let a drunk driver drive home.

[trousers]

7 minutes ago, egg said:

Again, that misses the point. The panel, this week, couldn't turn back time. I repeat, what sporting sanction was actually available to them that would have impacted us - points in a league we may not have played in for years to come, would not be a sporting sanction. 

We'll obviously never agree (which is fine) but there was no need to "turn back time" if they'd intervened in a timely manner in the first place. 

[trousers]

5 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Shame he didnt show the same attitude when doing his love in for Bielsa

"Yeah, but the rules is diff'rent now... innit?"

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

"Yeah, but the rules is diff'rent now... innit?"

Or as many suspect Steve Gibson did not help shape his opinions....

[HedgeEnder]

1 hour ago, LeBizzier69 said:

Are people going to watch the final tomorrow? Honestly not sure i can, probably a lengthy dog walk instead...just watching the Boro fans loving their day out, along with the non-stop spygate references, not to mention if they win it and go up. 

No way I'm watching. Will be doing a 12 mile stretch of the South Downs Way finished off with a nice cold pint or two in Amberley!

[tdmickey3]

Just now, trousers said:

"Yeah, but the rules is diff'rent now... innit?"

All driven by faux outrage, smoggie media and Gibbo`s suggestion of expulsion backed up by the boro linked personnel  

[StrangelyBrown]

I'm still wondering when the EFL are going to deal with Boro trying to influence an ongoing investigation through misinformation spread via the media/social media?

[tdmickey3]

Just now, StrangelyBrown said:

I'm still wondering when the EFL are going to deal with Boro trying to influence an ongoing investigation through misinformation spread via the media/social media?

Hahahahahaha not a chance, boro man on the board

[Window Cleaner]

Just now, StrangelyBrown said:

I'm still wondering when the EFL are going to deal with Boro trying to influence an ongoing investigation through misinformation spread via the media/social media?

They aren't. 

[Cuddles]

Really fancy a spicy double header v KFC next year! The skate games were a bit boring after all.

Come on Hull!!

[Harry_SFC]

So it appears the EFL hired a criminal barrister for the hearing. Apparently Saints were shocked that the EFL were pushing for expulsion.

So basically Parsons went into this totally unprepared. Despite Tonda being the root cause, Parsons has made everything even worse. 

[LGTL]

Parsons and Tonda appear to be the two where the majority of the blame lies. Absolute amateur hour from Parsons, his lack of action on this is arguably worse than Tonda’s spying. 

[M271]

54 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

A report that I read said that neither Ipswich nor Oxford were aware that they had been spied upon. Their 'evidence' came from Supersnot Taylor. 

I hope that he doesn’t have ‘evidence’ of many other instances of us spying on other clubs training.

[Football Special]

10 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

Really fancy a spicy double header v KFC next year! The skate games were a bit boring after all.

Come on Hull!!

I'd be delighted if Hull win Saturday,  those games next season with KFC will be spicier than Millwall v West Ham, bring it on 

[leeham_69]

46 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

I managed to get a dental procedure brought forward to tomorrow so with any luck, I'll be in considerable enough pain to distract me from the days events.

probably more enjoyable than the last week

[Cuddles]

4 minutes ago, M271 said:

I hope that he doesn’t have ‘evidence’ of many other instances of us spying on other clubs training.

Taylor shouldn't have any evidence of Ipswich spying as he had left well before then.

I wonder if we've been warned not to take further legal action regardless? I.e. there were many more spying missions not included in the hearing?

Edited 3 hours ago by Cuddles

[davefizzy14]

17 minutes ago, StrangelyBrown said:

I'm still wondering when the EFL are going to deal with Boro trying to influence an ongoing investigation through misinformation spread via the media/social media?

Yeah exactly this. Surely this has got to be looked into by the EFL or are they just going to back down to them.

[davefizzy14]

Another thing, how come we didn't get the full fourteen days to prepare our appeal. The EFL got that totally wrong.

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, davefizzy14 said:

Another thing, how come we didn't get the full fourteen days to prepare our appeal. The EFL got that totally wrong.

Alas, not... the EFL rules state that the 14 days can be reduced as they see fit... which begs the question: why set an arbitrary timescale in the first place if they can set whatever timescale they like on a case by case basis....? Just another indication of how woolly their rulebook is in places...

Edited 2 hours ago by trousers

[Ralph Fastenbüttl]

2 hours ago, Colinjb said:

If you are in Basingstoke, it's possible.

We have a huge variety here. 

Basingstoke?! Born and raised, though not lived there now for coming on 30 years. Will always be home, though x

[saintant]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Changing counsel on an appeal 24 Hours later suggests that the previous counsel was properly shit. 

Agree, it was a complete fuck up by us.

[davefizzy14]

2 minutes ago, trousers said:

Alas, not... the EFL rules state that the 14 days can be reduced as they see fit... which begs the question: why set an arbitrary timescale in the first place if they can set whatever timescale they like on a case by case basis....? Just another indication of how woolly their rulebook is in places...

Yeah exactly. The EFL have got this wrong.