Jump to content

Saints Expelled from Playoffs

St Chalet

By St Chalet
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Oisin

Oisin

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, The very right reverend said:

There are a number of suburbs in Liverpool that to be fair are equal to or superior to Southampton's Chilworth, Ocean Village and Basset, Liverpool's Calderstones, Grassendale, Woolton and Allerton are very very posh.

But everyone still has a horrific accent that makes me want to rip my ears off

  • Haha 5
Toadhall Saint

Toadhall Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Andy Hill said:

We are keeping very quiet through all of this - which is probably the right thing to do. But does anyone ITK know what our defence is likely to be ? 

There probably are but you really don’t expect them to post it on here do you?

Edited by Toadhall Saint
  • Like 1
sockeye

sockeye

Posted
Posted
Just now, Andy Hill said:

But does anyone ITK know what our defence is likely to be ? 

I'm thinking Bree, Wood, Manning and Harwood-Bellis.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 28
St Chalet

St Chalet

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, The Kraken said:

Is it?

The 72 hour rule specifically mentions not watching or attempting to watch another club’s training session. Why impose the 72 hour limit if it’s still an offence outside of 72 hours?

This

  • Like 1
pingpong

pingpong

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Andy Hill said:

We are keeping very quiet through all of this - which is probably the right thing to do. But does anyone ITK know what our defence is likely to be ? 

Unchanged I reckon.

As someone said, baz not available yet, so peretz, bree, thb, wood, manning.

Edited by pingpong
Darn it, I got beaten to it, but keeping it here for the baz reference.
  • Haha 6
Midfield_General

Midfield_General

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Gary R76 said:

I know its a mates mate but this has just come up on Not606 forum

Le Saint

Le Saint

Well-Known Member
 
 
 
 
 
 
one of my mates is mates with Ed Chamberlain who is currently at York races where boro are having a day out. He spoke with Gibson who said they are expecting £5 million and 6 points

Hang on a sec, that can't be right, surely Snivellin' Kim and his boys are in training for their big final next week, not pissing it up at the races?? 

Unless.... it was a LIE *gasp* 

 

Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, sockeye said:

I'm thinking Bree, Wood, Manning and Harwood-Bellis.

 

1 minute ago, pingpong said:

Unchanged I reckon.

As someone said, baz not available yet, so peretz, bree, thb, wood, manning.

With Stephens back on the bench for the 2nd leg he might start the final.

  • Like 1
Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

I hope we don’t have to take any refugees from up there. They’re all mental. 

If any refugees were sent there, they’d go mental. And insist the Kurdish smugglers gave them a return inflatable trip to Calais immediately,

  • Haha 1
saintant

saintant

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

If he didn't think it was an issue, he wouldn't be hiding behind a tree.

Doesn't appear to be attempting to hide. Looks to be stood alongside the tree posing in full view for whoever is taking his picture.

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Andy Hill said:

We are keeping very quiet through all of this - which is probably the right thing to do. But does anyone ITK know what our defence is likely to be ? 

Bree - Stephens - THB - Manning

Edit: bollocks... Beaten to it! Well played chaps! 

Edited by trousers
Saint_lambden

Saint_lambden

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Andy Hill said:

We are keeping very quiet through all of this - which is probably the right thing to do. But does anyone ITK know what our defence is likely to be ? 

I don't know but I would be going with:

  • Internal review shown that this is not a club-orchastrated tactic to spy, just one or two bad apples who will be dealt with internally through suspension or sacking
  • Saints not denied the charge and complied with the investigation throughout
  • Middlesbrough played out their case through the media, including leaking photo which has big ramifications from perspective of protecting identify of the individual involved and his wellbeing (whether GDPR has been breached is unclear)
  • Ambiguity of the 72 hour rule, it suggesting that spying before this time window is okay
  • Filming/notes collected by the analyst were deleted and therefore not used by Saints to gain advantage
  • Committment that no spying will take place again in the future (if it does, stronger sanctions should come our way)
  • Despite new rule being added since, Leeds were fined £200k despite admitting to spying throughout the season vs the one case in front of the commission here, so removing us from the play-offs therefore would be signifcantly disproportionate given the £200m+ windfall as a result of winning PO final
  • Like 6
Dirkdiggler

Dirkdiggler

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, bpsaint said:

That is fucking disgusting it really is. Crying about not being allowed in the hearing and then trying to sway the verdict.

Where the fuck are our club mouthpieces fighting our comer on social media over this? We should be swaying the narrative back in our favour now.

Honestly what a vile little shithole club they are. Never had hating Boro more than Pompey on my 2026 bingo card but here we are.

I like that fact that as a club we are staying quiet during all this and doing things correctly. Boro on the other hand are looking more and more ridiculous by the day! What they are doing isn’t doing themselves any favours and any sympathy will have disappeared by now. 

  • Like 2
Mattio

Mattio

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

In this season or next? This one would cause all kinds of FC issues 

If it’s this season that means we take Hulls place and Hull take Boro’s place, so does that mean it’s Saints vs Boro at Wembley? 

 

edit: actually I can’t count, ignore me 😅

Edited by Mattio
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

Is it?

The 72 hour rule specifically mentions not watching or attempting to watch another club’s training session. Why impose the 72 hour limit if it’s still an offence outside of 72 hours?

Hmm, fair point, but why have the EFL charged us under both rules then if the 72 hour rule trumps the other rule? 

MarkSFC

MarkSFC

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Let's just lay out the two potential cases here.

1) We have been found to have foolishly spied once, that's the only evidence. No other clubs impacted and thus the only punishment in that sense is a fine. They couldn't issue sporting sanctions for a one off event.

2) We have been found to have foolishly done it all season, and there's tons of evidence to back it up. This does in fact bring the game into disrepute in a bigger level, and you then certainly have the power to impose sporting sanctions as the severity and potential advantages you could have gained is much higher.

But digging into point 2 a little bit more is where it gets tricky in this timespan. If that were the case, lots of clubs would have legal cases and stacks of evidence against us. Derby and Wrexham would be up in the arms and demanding to go into the playoffs in place of us. We'd obviously appeal, everything would be delayed, no one would know what league they'll be in and the entire competition is a mess and can't start next year. They wouldn't allow that to happen.

Personally the chances of 2 are very slim, because like I said we'd have had more about other clubs by now. This seems to be a Middlesbrough solo effort pinned solely on point 1, which they blew out to try and gain an advantage - which they couldn't take. So at this point Sporting Sanctions shouldn't really be in the equation for a one off evidenced event, which has been proven to have had no impact on the result. A fine and a slap on the wrist is the worst case IMO.

If point 2 is happening, as in other clubs are saying we have illegally spied on them, my first question to those clubs is why have you mentioned it now, why not when it happened? 

If zi understand this correctly though this kid will Salt who is supposedly the man by the tree, is now working freelance for Villa and last Thursday was not employed by saints?

This is all pretty messy and horrible and I hope Saints sue the arses off Boro and journalists/media outlets who have committed slander/libel. 

 

  • Like 2
coalman

coalman

Posted
Posted
Just now, sockeye said:

Corroborates with someone I know who's dog's owner's brother's cat had a Chinese with Gibson. His fortune cookie said "Six beatings follow the southern wind."

Can't get any more official than that.

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

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

Exactly. No one is going to know anything yet. Least of all Middlesbrough. 

  • Like 1
Saint NL

Saint NL

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, sockeye said:

Corroborates with someone I know who's dog's owner's brother's cat had a Chinese with Gibson. His fortune cookie said "Six beatings follow the southern wind."

Never trust the wind after a chinese

  • Haha 4
Dirkdiggler

Dirkdiggler

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

In fact... aren't they breaching the same regulation Saints have?

EFL Regulation 3.4 — clubs must “act towards each other with the utmost good faith.”

Attempting to prejudice and influence the outcome of an ongoing investigation is not acting in good faith!

We may bring our own case to the EFL once this has been dealt with possibly even one outside of the EFL for defamation? 

saintant

saintant

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Gary R76 said:

I know its a mates mate but this has just come up on Not606 forum

Le Saint

Le Saint

Well-Known Member
 
 
 
 
 
 
one of my mates is mates with Ed Chamberlain who is currently at York races where boro are having a day out. He spoke with Gibson who said they are expecting £5 million and 6 points

Presume if that turns out to be the case we'd appeal that as far too excessive a punishment.

  • Like 3
SWLondon Saint

SWLondon Saint

Posted
Posted

Had a day off from all this, but sounds like Boro are getting increasingly desperate in the media, which says to me they know their case is shit so they're trying to win the 'court of public opinion'. If they were confident, they'd just have got on with training, kept quiet and waited for us to be kicked out.

  • Like 4
coalman

coalman

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, saintant said:

Presume if that turns out to be the case we'd appeal that as far too excessive a punishment.

I think you'd take it because the alternative leaves you liable for all the mess delaying the final is going to cause.

If we're guilty and it looks like we are then we take our medicine and focus on next weekend.

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Midfield_General said:

Whoosh

A welcome intervention even though belongs on the Hull match thread, just for the sheer normality of discussing that, rather than these mentalists from their Billingham-snogged hovel. 

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SWLondon Saint said:

Had a day off from all this, but sounds like Boro are getting increasingly desperate in the media, which says to me they know their case is shit so they're trying to win the 'court of public opinion'. If they were confident, they'd just have got on with training, kept quiet and waited for us to be kicked out.

They had a day out at York races by the sounds of it. 

saintant

saintant

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, coalman said:

I think you'd take it because the alternative leaves you liable for all the mess delaying the final is going to cause.

If we're guilty and it looks like we are then we take our medicine and focus on next weekend.

Why would appealing a fine and points deduction delay the final?

The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, trousers said:

Hmm, fair point, but why have the EFL charged us under both rules then if the 72 hour rule trumps the other rule? 

I thought that too. Maybe because the infringement of the 72 hours rule also automatically brings the other one into play. Dunno lol. But the 72 hour rule is definitely written in such a way that one can assume watching training outside of the 72 hours is ok.

  • Like 3
kitch

kitch

Posted
Posted

Dear Leicester City,

If Southampton also spied on you this season, and hadn't thumped you twice, you wouldn't have been relegated, so I think you have a legit claim to the EFL to not be relegated and for Southampton to take your place instead and have the 1/4 final against Arsenal replayed by yourselves, but a bye into the semis against Man City at Wembley because that's fair.
Oh, and Tonda has to wear a fox costume for one week.

Sincerley,

Steve G
 

  • Haha 4
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, 6ft8saint said:

I work in security systems and id be amazed if any club in the league is storing cctv footage beyond the industry average of 30days so I think its hardly likely that many have any footage if it even has happened. However I wouldn't put it past Gibson to pay people to say anything at this point

I was thinking more of something like an email from Spors telling him to do it and when however unlikely that may be. 

Midfield_General

Midfield_General

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, coalman said:

#BoroForumWatch

https://fmttmboro.com/index.php?threads/breaking-news.81160/post-2194175post-2194175

Hearing 6 pts deduction

Oh that thread is going to be a joy as the realisation finally sinks in that the entire thing has been a complete waste of time and they're not getting some magic ticket into the premier league after all, and they are still just a shit nothing team from a cesspit, and they are going to be in the Championship not only next season, but, without parachute payments, forever. 

Gibbo lied to you lads. He lied to you. 

🍿 

  • Like 3
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, The Kraken said:

I thought that too. Maybe because the infringement of the 72 hours rule also automatically brings the other one into play. Dunno lol. But the 72 hour rule is definitely written in such a way that one can assume watching training outside of the 72 hours is ok.

Fair enough 👍🏻

Midfield_General

Midfield_General

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

I know the joke he was doing. Punchline was wrong 😉 

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt just this once that it was something about 'approaching the bench'

We all need to pull together at this difficult time 😉

  • Like 1
saintant

saintant

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Turn it up, gangsta Gibbo will crush all those suits at the EFL 

 

😂😂😂

 

 

Gibbo hasn't aged well has he. Years of trying to play the hard man have obviously taken their toll. Time to curl up in your dressing gown and slippers with a mug of Horlicks and grow old gracefully Steve.

whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

I hope we don’t have to take any refugees from up there. They’re all mental. 

And they all eat too fucking much.

  • Like 1
LGTL

LGTL

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, whelk said:

I really wouldn’t be bothered if Putin decided to attack Middlesbrough 

Would cheer the place up, that’s for sure.

  • Haha 4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...