Saints Expelled from Playoffs

[Cuddles]

Why have all the posts stopped?

[Turkish]

1 minute ago, Cuddles said:

Why have all the posts stopped?

All the good posters stopped posting and you can see why

[RedArmy]

2 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

Why have all the posts stopped?

Everyone is busy searching for these so called funny posts from farmer. 
 

It’s a difficult search. 

[Cuddles]

Just now, Turkish said:

All the good posters stopped posting and you can see why

Good I thought Gobbo broke saintsweb for a minute there.

[CheshireSaint]

As a Northern Monkey, can we not just fuck the Northern Monkeys off? Fooking North EAST Monkeys. Bored now. 

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

Good I thought Gobbo broke saintsweb for a minute there.

Gobbo is the type of bloke who blames the cow when his missus fucks the milkman

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

Boro's next gambit. 3 way final. 

[6ft8saint]

1 hour ago, The Kraken said:

What you’re describing is a mitigation factor. 

What seemingly is factual is that our employee was there and he was pointing an iPhone at the Boro players training, which is blatantly against the rules.

Mitigation is important, but the factual basis of “did you break the rules”? is first and foremost. Everyone but the most rose eyed spectalist would tell you we’ve more than likely broke the rules. So there should be a punishment. The mitigations will establish just how much was gained by us / lost by Boro and, one would think, issue a proportional punishment based on that.

It’s the job of the panel to make a judgement based on our response to the EFL’s charges. Some of that will be the gain/loss. Much will be why we there in the first place.

Is he our employee????

I thought he worked for the villa 

[Cuddles]

2 minutes ago, 6ft8saint said:

Is he our employee????

I thought he worked for the villa 

I think that was an old article. Whether he is still with us after his latest stint, is another matter.

[Saint Pete]

2 minutes ago, 6ft8saint said:

Is he our employee????

I thought he worked for the villa 

I know there is stuff out there that says he went to Villa but can't honestly think all this would have gone this far if the guy Middlesborough caught is not even a current Saints employee or contractor. Surely??!! 

[SaintsLoyal]

Blah blah has this the been on here yet....

 

Saints new crest

 

 

Edited Friday at 22:12 by SaintsLoyal

[Saint Pete]

32 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Boro's next gambit. 3 way final. 

Could be fun to watch to be fair! The yanks would love it, might result in a late change to the rules in the World Cup?

[Cuddles]

4 minutes ago, SaintsLoyal said:

Blah blah has this the been on here yet....

 

Saints new crest

 

 

Haha it looks just like Will Salt (not our fault)

[Whitey Grandad]

1 minute ago, Saint Pete said:

I know there is stuff out there that says he went to Villa but can't honestly think all this would have gone this far if the guy Middlesborough caught is not even a current Saints employee or contractor. Surely??!! 

Unless we're playing rope-a-dope and letting Karen FC have enough rope to hang themselves. 

For me, there are some suspicious timings here. Let's see if I have got this right.  Both Salt and his friend/comrade/ ex-colleague/co-conspirator Taylor(?) deleted their LinkedIn profiles around the same time soon after the story broke. This Taylor fella left Karen FC to join us around Christmas time but left after a couple of months to rejoin Karenbrough. If that's not spying on another team then I don't know what is. He allegedly tells KFC that we do this spying stuff all the time. Surely there was some sort of confidentiality clause or NDA in effect?

The whole business stinks on their side of the public highway. 

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, Cuddles said:

Haha it looks just like Will Salt (not our fault)

Mr no-fault Salt.

[Whitey Grandad]

7 minutes ago, Saint Pete said:

Could be fun to watch to be fair! The yanks would love it, might result in a late change to the rules in the World Cup?

 

41 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Boro's next gambit. 3 way final. 

The women's football would be fun to watch when two of the sides gang up on the other.

Or so I'm led to believe. 

[MB]

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

[Dirkdiggler]

2 hours ago, coalman said:

It's one of those rumours that's been out there but doesn't seem to be substantiated to any extent.

I would've thought that's a pretty weak point to build any defence around and something that could explode in our faces.

Maybe we have said yes we did send him up but was told not to go past the set 72hr rule. He did that of his own accord but not sure how that would wash? 

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, MB said:

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

I think it would be hard not to. Presumably we would attempt to pin it elsewhere though and Tonda said he is eager to talk about it so I assume he isn't just going to fess up to being behind it. 

[Cuddles]

4 minutes ago, MB said:

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

Make him pay the fine instead. Obviously give him a new contract first though.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

1 minute ago, MB said:

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

Nope, hope he comes out and does a Biesla. Defends his position. 

[Willo of Whiteley]

Middlesbrough will come out of this worse

[Miltonaggro]

2 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

While there's a lull in proceedings, can we focus on the real scandal here? 

Which is that @Miltonaggro has scored a new forum record for reactions to a single post (97 and counting), while clearly gaining an unfair advantage from the deployment of a previously unknown 'moderator's recommended post' feature. 

Where's this feature been for the rest of the season? 

I demand an independent enquiry, and — if found guilty — Miltonaggro's expulsion from the forum. 

Well up for this. See you in Court!

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

While there's a lull in proceedings, can we focus on the real scandal here? 

Which is that @Miltonaggro has scored a new forum record for reactions to a single post (97 and counting), while clearly gaining an unfair advantage from the deployment of a previously unknown 'moderator's recommended post' feature. 

Where's this feature been for the rest of the season? 

I demand an independent enquiry, and — if found guilty — Miltonaggro's expulsion from the forum. 

Postgate

[Dark Munster]

2 hours ago, The Kraken said:

What you’re describing is a mitigation factor. 

What seemingly is factual is that our employee was there and he was pointing an iPhone at the Boro players training, which is blatantly against the rules.

Mitigation is important, but the factual basis of “did you break the rules”? is first and foremost. Everyone but the most rose eyed spectalist would tell you we’ve more than likely broke the rules. So there should be a punishment. The mitigations will establish just how much was gained by us / lost by Boro and, one would think, issue a proportional punishment based on that.

It’s the job of the panel to make a judgement based on our response to the EFL’s charges. Some of that will be the gain/loss. Much will be why we there in the first place.

Sigh. No it's not. 

It's only against the rules if you do it less than 72 hours before the match. 

All the people, including some posters here, seem to imply we did something sleazy by sending out an employee to do spying. No we didn't, we messed up by going past an arbitrary window, maybe simply a cock up by not reminding the kid.

And as for "if they find out we did it throughout the season we're in big trouble" ... good grief, spying on clubs outside the 72 hour window is allowed. Do you think they'll dig up that we spied inside the 72 hour exclusion?

This thread be should renamed 72hourgate

Edited Friday at 22:47 by Dark Munster

[Cuddles]

8 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Middlesbrough will come out of this worse

Yes, they're stuck with Gobbo for a start.

[Dark Munster]

.....

Edited Friday at 22:47 by Dark Munster

[Colinjb]

14 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Middlesbrough will come out of this worse

The empty vessels make the most noise.

[MB]

I got on to their forum earlier told them what I thought and now every Saints fan is banned. Sorry folks 

 

https://www.oneboro.co.uk/forum/topic/14127-message-for-all-southampton-fans-applying-for-membership-on-oneboro-forum/

[sadoldgit]

57 minutes ago, SaintsLoyal said:

Blah blah has this the been on here yet....

 

Saints new crest

 

 

They should wear this on their shirts in the final!

[Lord Duckhunter]

30 minutes ago, Dark Munster said:

All the people, including some posters here, seem to imply we did something sleazy by sending out an employee to do spying. No we didn't, we messed up by going past an arbitrary window, maybe simply a cock up by not reminding the kid.

And as for "if they find out we did it throughout the season we're in big trouble" ... good grief, spying on clubs outside the 72 hour window is allowed. Do you think they'll dig up that we spied inside the 72 hour exclusion?

This thread be should renamed 72hourgate

Don’t talk pony man.

We broke the fucking rules, we knew we were breaking the rules. It wasn’t some sort of timing issue. Thhi pathetic defence of our club is as ridiculous as the Boro over reaction. We are entirely 100% in the wrong, however much people try to dress it up. The only issue now is what is a proportional punishment. 

[Dark Munster]

Just now, Lord Duckhunter said:

Don’t talk pony man.

We broke the fucking rules, we knew we were breaking the rules. It wasn’t some sort of timing issue. Thhi pathetic defence of our club is as ridiculous as the Boro over reaction. We are entirely 100% in the wrong, however much people try to dress it up. The only issue now is what is a proportional punishment. 

Pony. It was a timing issue ONLY. If he had done it more than 72 hours before the match we would not have broken the rules.

 

[Polaroid Saint]

50 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Postgate

Gatepost, surely?

[DrSuess1979]

Not claiming to be in the know in any shape or form.

When he’s dropped me little snippets before  they’ve not be far wrong.

he’s said £4.5m fine 6 points deduction which only applies to the EFL.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, DrSuess1979 said:

Not claiming to be in the know in any shape or form.

When he’s dropped me little snippets before  they’ve not be far wrong.

he’s said £4.5m fine 6 points deduction which only applies to the EFL.

How would anyone know? Have they had the hearing yet? I assumed they would be deliberating first prior to any outcome. 

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, MB said:

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

Absolutely not. We give him a pay rise and do a "tonda on tour" sticker attack around that filthy  scabby shit hole on the side 🤷

Edited Saturday at 00:21 by Saint86

[DH93]

19 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

How would anyone know? Have they had the hearing yet? I assumed they would be deliberating first prior to any outcome. 

Hearing began today

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, DH93 said:

Hearing began today

Maybe so but they wouldn't have the outcome yet would they. 

[DH93]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Maybe so but they wouldn't have the outcome yet would they. 

I mean people talk who knows 🤷

[qwertyell]

1 hour ago, MB said:

Should be it proven that Tonda is behind it, do we sack him?

Depends on the outcome. If it's a fine and we get promoted anyway, who outside of a small patch of the northeast cares?

If we get chucked out and consigned to another year in the Championship, he'll get a better job offer anyway. So we might as well hang on for the compensation.

Of course, he might get a ban, in which case we'll have to move on. 

[benjii]

8 hours ago, The Kraken said:

What you’re describing is a mitigation factor. 

What seemingly is factual is that our employee was there and he was pointing an iPhone at the Boro players training, which is blatantly against the rules.

Is he an employee? We don't know that. 

[coalman]

6 hours ago, Dirkdiggler said:

Maybe we have said yes we did send him up but was told not to go past the set 72hr rule. He did that of his own accord but not sure how that would wash? 

It would depend on if we could prove that either in this case or in the case of other analysts watching other teams.

It would also depend on any other evidence that's available. And on how much the panel found it credible.

It's easy to construct hypothetical situations in which it may be passed off as a misunderstanding. Doing so is grasping at straws. But, we only have the context of what we know.

Which boils down to. A Southampton analyst was watching KarenFC training within 72 hours of an important match.

Any information beyond that is speculation. For example KarenFC have said we sent a key member of our first team coaching staff. Yet if you read the job title on the screen grabs of Will Salt's LinkedIn his job title is/was "First Team Analyst intern" at Southampton. The university article oft misquoted to show he isn't a Southampton employee was published in January 2025 so it's clear he's a young lad at the start of his career. I'd argue the truth is somewhere in-between that. If the person in question is actually Will Salt which seems likely then the extent to which any analysis he has provided influences team tactics, preparation or performance is going to be much less than us being made out.

We don't know how big a role our analyst team plays in our match day preparation. I would imagine that is something we are presenting to the panel. But, more to the point neither do KarenFC and the way they're casting his role seems like an exaggeration to me for the sole purpose of fanning the outrage they want out there. The press and social media then happily take that outrage and turn it into clicks.

Due to Saints' stance of refusing to play this out in public the whole case is like that. Which, by the way, is the right thing to do. The people we have to convince are respected barristers. There is only downside to us not treating the panel  and this process with the utmost respect. KarenFC's lawyers also know this and will have advised accordingly. Karen Gibson has acted the way he has despite that.

As I see it, Karen Gibson wants to achieve two things from this. The first is to maintain his messiah status with the club's fans - he didn't stump up for the striker they needed and lets him be the hero.  The second is to get some money. If Saints get thrown out then that's a bonus but the way they've attempted to win this in the court of public opinion suggests they don't see that as realistic. Even the attempt to get in on the meeting as the injured party was performative. There's no way the EFL or panel could allow that without opening themselves up to denying Saints due process. The only reason for doing that is to stoke up more publicity and outrage.

[John B]

4 hours ago, qwertyell said:

Depends on the outcome. If it's a fine and we get promoted anyway, who outside of a small patch of the northeast cares?

If we get chucked out and consigned to another year in the Championship, he'll get a better job offer anyway. So we might as well hang on for the compensation.

Of course, he might get a ban, in which case we'll have to move on. 

So you think being guilty of cheating is fine I do not believe most responsible people would disagree with you.

I do not know if any cheating was carried out but if there was someone surely has to be responsible if SFC is to be respected club

[Fela]

Apologies if this has been discussed previously but do we know why we agreed to submit our case without taking the full 14 days?

 

Is it possible that we have been assured that helping expedite the situation will be considered in the final ruling?

[AlexLaw76]

Just looked online, yep, still chatter from the Boro side that this was the worst crime ever. 
 

 

Edited Saturday at 05:50 by AlexLaw76

[coalman]

#KarenFCForumWatch

Morning on the forum brings a certain eerie stillness as the breaking news thread goes quiet but for the chirping of posters whose lives are suffering under the weight of Spygate. An unlikely option has appeared for the next Bond in the shape of a certain Karen Gibson. The suave and in no way puce faced lumpen legal vigilante sat astride this case like an angry seething colossus. When does hero worship become delusion? What is truth on the Internet? Join us today as we explore the very basis of rational thought itself.

Edited Saturday at 06:07 by coalman

[coalman]

2 minutes ago, Fela said:

Apologies if this has been discussed previously but do we know why we agreed to submit our case without taking the full 14 days?

 

Is it possible that we have been assured that helping expedite the situation will be considered in the final ruling?

The EFL does have the right to expedite the case in exceptional circumstances. I would imagine we came to a compromise where we agreed to do it earlier as part of cooperating fully.

[Fela]

That seems like a positive sign to me.

[Toussaint]

7 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Mr no-fault Salt.

My condiments to you, I can see these forum will now be peppered with similar puns. 

[coalman]

5 minutes ago, Fela said:

That seems like a positive sign to me.

Maybe, maybe not. At this point we're naturally going to interpret everything we see on the basis of how we're feeling and what we want to believe to be true to fill in the many gaps in what we know. The human brain is riddled with blind spots in this kind of situation.

Edited Saturday at 06:00 by coalman