#Spygate

[pingpong]

Just because people keep mentioning the 14 days - it's not binding, see below.

 

> 90.4: A Respondent shall, within 14 days of receipt of the complaint (**or such other shorter time period as

ordered in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 92.1**), confirm receipt of the same

 

> 92.1: **The chairperson of the Disciplinary Commission shall have the power to abridge the time period set out

in Regulation 90.4**, on application by the Claimant, **if there is a compelling reason why the proceedings before the Disciplinary Commission need to be concluded expeditiously.**

 

https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/85c28e90-daa3-11f0-83d9-834d55a9075a.pdf

 

[Sheaf Saint]

17 minutes ago, SWLondon Saint said:

Absolutely, as I just did a compliance course which clearly stated in very big letters - if you supply this kind of data to anyone else who has no legitimate interest in it, you are PERSONALLY criminally liable. Feel bad for any employee who was bullied into handing over info, but that's the law.

Yep, spot on. I have to do yearly refresher courses on this at work because the consequences of an unauthorised leak of personal information, however minor and insignificant it might seem, are absolutely huge.

The golf club and hotel is a distinct legal entity from the football club. Even being owned by the same person doesn't grant them the right to share personal information without the explicit consent of the individual in question. 

I am sure that Gibson and the management team at the hotel will be fully aware of this, so I suspect the leaked report about the credit card transaction is just a bluff, intended just to put extra pressure on us to fess up.

The publication of the photo, on the other hand, is another matter entirely. If Will wants to, he could take Boro and the Daily Mail to the cleaners for distress caused by misuse of personal information.

[obelisk]

3 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

EFL have been actively looking at alternative Wembley dates and alternative venues. Not saying it's going to happen but they are preparing for a delay.

St Mary's?

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, Saint Pete said:

https://www.wearehullcity.co.uk/news/2026/may/11/City-are-bound-for-Wembley/

Yep, see last paragraph. Clearly some kind of decision, statement or at least holding response incoming from EFL before the ticket stuff goes out in my opinion. 

 

That text is 2days old and predate the Boro game?

[kitch]

8 minutes ago, Dr Who? said:

Look I’m quite a sensible person and can see that if we are kicked out of the playoffs that would be seriously OTT, but why would they delay the ticketing, get the clubs to take down the ticket information if the worst news is not incoming? Serious question. It seems like it is all lining up for something the change in the final, and surely that can only be one thing? The teams are changing that make up the final or there will not be a final, which is even more unlikely! 

Middlesborough won't feel like justice has been done if they've already allowed us to put tickets on sale before the hearing. They'll think it's a fix.

Unless there's something else lurking in the bushes (intended) that nobody knows about, we'll be at Wembley and probably be fined and have some senior first team coaching staff suspended for (up to) 6 months. They can't get give a points deduction for the PL and they won't want to issue a suspended one.

[trousers]

23 minutes ago, LegalEagle said:

The KC, who is the Chair, is a very sensible bright chap. 

This chap?

 

[Draino76]

I have booked my accommodation for the final.  MOTWUW.

[trousers]

24 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Daily mirror saying they’ll sit tomorrow 

 

13 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

Case is being heard today at EFL.

Assume your source isn't the Daily Mirror then...?

[Addict54]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

This chap?

 

Ha one of my former colleagues. Maybe time to reconnect…

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

43 minutes ago, bpsaint said:

Whilst the uncertainty around the ticket news is unsettling, there is no way on earth that Saints would roll over and allow themselves to be removed from the final with upwards of £200 million to be “won” at the end of it over a bloke watching them train through an iPhone. The punishment simply does not fit the crime, particularly after 2 playoff games that have already been played between the two clubs.

Fairly certain Mr Solak himself would be looking for the most expensive lawyer with the biggest pair of bollocks going if so.

Sorry mate.

There are a few Middlesbrough FC forums where they are saying the opposite. 

Its the most heinous crime in all of football history. 

[Mr X]

1 hour ago, Farmer Saint said:

Hull aren't going to be extra-motivated because we spied on Boro - behave.

We will see on the 23rd I still predict hull will give us much more of a game then we expect! it will not be easy with everyone in the country wanting us to lose 

[Midfield_General]

19 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

Case is being heard today at EFL.

 

15 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

I hope this ages well. I suspect it won't.

 

12 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

EFL have been actively looking at alternative Wembley dates and alternative venues. Not saying it's going to happen but they are preparing for a delay.

Ok, son top of all the other reasons, apparently Wembley will also now just hand over the game which is personally worth £8m to them, to another venue. 

Presuming this is from some claimed ITK status? 

Or just stirring with no substantiation whatsoever and conflicting with what the Mirror is saying about the day the panel sits? 

Care to elaborate, or just looking for bites? (in which case, doh, well done) 

Edited 1 hour ago by Midfield_General

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, Addict54 said:

Ha one of my former colleagues. Maybe time to reconnect…

Do it now....! 🙂 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Midfield_General said:

 

 

Presuming this is from some claimed ITK status? 

Or just stirring with no substantiation whatsoever and conflicting with what the Mirror is saying about the day the panel sits? 

Care to elaborate? 

Moving the final would really be the absolute nuclear option and would be the very last thing the efl would want. I can't see it in any way likely. 

[WALK DMC]

6 minutes ago, kitch said:

Middlesborough won't feel like justice has been done if they've already allowed us to put tickets on sale before the hearing. They'll think it's a fix.

Unless there's something else lurking in the bushes (intended) that nobody knows about, we'll be at Wembley and probably be fined and have some senior first team coaching staff suspended for (up to) 6 months. They can't get give a points deduction for the PL and they won't want to issue a suspended one.

In the article in today's Guardian, it stated that any penalty points deduction could be applied in either the Premier league or Championship. I don't know if they are right, merely that they they stated it with certainty. Middlesbrough to train for playoff final in case Southampton are expelled over spygate | Middlesbrough | The Guardian

[coalman]

Just now, WALK DMC said:

In the article in today's Guardian, it stated that any penalty points deduction could be applied in either the Premier league or Championship. I don't know if they are right, merely that they they stated it with certainty. Middlesbrough to train for playoff final in case Southampton are expelled over spygate | Middlesbrough | The Guardian

They changed the rules after Leicester so it's possible.

[MB]

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

[Andy Hill]

Does anyone have an update as to who was doing what, where and specifically why on that Thursday ?

[Saint Pete]

8 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

That text is 2days old and predate the Boro game?

Yeah, that was the point. To show that the original plan was for both finalists to release the ticket details on Wednesday. But there has been an unexplained delay, which now looks almost certainly to be related to the investigation/charge. Other posters were disputing that. 

[Midfield_General]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Moving the final would really be the absolute nuclear option and would be the very last thing the efl would want. I can't see it in any way likely. 

Quite. And how long do they wait before they play it? Until the appeal process plays out? How long does that take? What if the appeal gets escalated to the courts, gets stuck and we get to August without a resolution? Do they delay the start of the season too? 

They may be trying to pretend it's an option to use it as negotiation leverage, but there is not a single chance in hell that the final gets moved. Not one. 

[EssEffCee]

6 minutes ago, Andy Hill said:

Does anyone have an update as to who was doing what, where and specifically why on that Thursday ?

I think I washed my hair that day.

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

Sorry mate.

There are a few Middlesbrough FC forums where they are saying the opposite. 

Its the most heinous crime in all of football history. 

The Crime of the Century ?

[Football Special]

[Patrick Bateman]

4 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Quite. And how long do they wait before they play it? Until the appeal process plays out? How long does that take? What if the appeal gets escalated to the courts, gets stuck and we get to August without a resolution? Do they delay the start of the season too? 

They may be trying to pretend it's an option to use it as negotiation leverage, but there is not a single chance in hell that the final gets moved. Not one. 

Agreed. Too many variables, especially policing, can't see the Met being open to suddenly having to shift officers / overtime and so on around. 

[badgerx16]

7 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

No, Boro say there is.

[Addict54]

3 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

Is there though? Admissible evidence? Or actually does that open a whole can of worms into what we all really know which is that every club in the league has stuff like this going on, such that if it’s systemic with us, then it’s systemic generally.

99% of everything that has been said on this is absolute nonsense. Clubs going back over 6 months of training ground cctv? Doesn’t sound very likely does it. I wouldn’t pay attention to anything put out by any media outlet prior to the hearing. There is no prospect that they have any credible source. It’s all sensationalist speculation based on the extreme sanctions that are technically available under the letter of the regulations. 

[trousers]

8 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

Source?

[kitch]

8 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

Only until that evidence is brought to light, there isn't.

[saintstowin]

2 minutes ago, Football Special said:

210 minutes!

[trousers]

9 minutes ago, Andy Hill said:

Does anyone have an update as to who was doing what, where and specifically why on that Thursday ?

One sec.... I'll just check my notes...

😉

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

The Crime of the Century ?

Ever.

Seriously though. Its getting on my nerves with all the media pile in without waiting for all the facts out.

Most of these pundits would be too scared to talk out against the likes of City or Liverpool if they caught doing something like this. Most would laugh it off.

[Give it to Ron]

🚨 The independent hearing into 'Spygate' will take place on Friday to decide the fate of Southampton's promotion hopes — a commission made up of three legal experts is expected to hold the meeting in London #saintsfc @CrossyDailyStar

[St Chalet]

10 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

Worrying given you clearly have some ITK credibility history.

[Saint Pete]

3 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Quite. And how long do they wait before they play it? Until the appeal process plays out? How long does that take? What if the appeal gets escalated to the courts, gets stuck and we get to August without a resolution? Do they delay the start of the season too? 

They may be trying to pretend it's an option to use it as negotiation leverage, but there is not a single chance in hell that the final gets moved. Not one. 

I agree it's extremely unlikely and almost impossible the final would be moved. But I guess the EFL can't be seen to be deciding the outcome of this based on the timetable rather than the offence (if there was one). I think that is why the EFL are attempting to get the hearing done before the final and that means before the tickets go out otherwise it would look like the decision on punishment had already been made before the hearing. That doesn't mean we will be kicked out, just that EFL want a decision out there pre final. 

[DrSuess1979]

4 minutes ago, Football Special said:

Finally.

is the penny starting to drop ? 

[Midfield_General]

12 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

Gosh, what a lot of people suddenly have access to the evidence that hasn't yet been presented to a panel that hasn't sat yet

[Dman]

13 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

I outright refuse to believe that we would have done anything to tresspass on an oppositions training ground. 

If there is eveidence, it would have to be from clubs with a training ground visible from a public place. 

[die Mannyschaft]

2 hours ago, Turkish said:

When this has blown over i see a new range of Saints merchandise 

"Dont be Salty" T-shirts & phone cases incoming 

Toilet blocked? Call Boro they can fix anything.

[die Mannyschaft]

More spying evidence sent by Boro.

[Midfield_General]

6 minutes ago, Saint Pete said:

I agree it's extremely unlikely and almost impossible the final would be moved. But I guess the EFL can't be seen to be deciding the outcome of this based on the timetable rather than the offence (if there was one). I think that is why the EFL are attempting to get the hearing done before the final and that means before the tickets go out otherwise it would look like the decision on punishment had already been made before the hearing. That doesn't mean we will be kicked out, just that EFL want a decision out there pre final. 

Exactly - which was my original point. And the logic of that also means that we're not getting kicked out, because if they try and do that, we immediately appeal, which means the final can't be played and has to be moved. 

👇

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Midfield_General

[trousers]

5 minutes ago, St Chalet said:

Worrying given you clearly have some ITK credibility history.

Hope it works out like this ITK snippet in that case...

 

[hypochondriac]

I must say that although I still don't think they will be able to kick us out it is slightly disconcerting that people with ITK info like @Saint_lambden and @MB are the most pessimistic. 

[Graziano94]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I must say that although I still don't think they will be able to kick us out it is slightly disconcerting that people with ITK info like @Saint_lambden and @MB are the most pessimistic. 

Didn’t @Saint_lambden tell us all to buy Armenia flags last summer?

[Doctoroncall]

2 minutes ago, St Chalet said:

Worrying given you clearly have some ITK credibility history.

 

1 minute ago, Midfield_General said:

Gosh, what a lot of people suddenly have access to the evidence that hasn't yet been presented to a panel that hasn't sat yet

This is the only factor which makes it a big deal from a one off small time standpoint. For ordinary fans it’s all unknown, if MB is ITK, it is worrying. However, I would have thought Boro would have leaked something about it. 

[Dman]

who else has grassed us up then?

[trousers]

22 minutes ago, MB said:

Issue is there is evidence it’s systemic. 

 

13 minutes ago, Addict54 said:

Is there though? Admissible evidence? Or actually does that open a whole can of worms into what we all really know which is that every club in the league has stuff like this going on, such that if it’s systemic with us, then it’s systemic generally.

99% of everything that has been said on this is absolute nonsense. Clubs going back over 6 months of training ground cctv? Doesn’t sound very likely does it. I wouldn’t pay attention to anything put out by any media outlet prior to the hearing. There is no prospect that they have any credible source. It’s all sensationalist speculation based on the extreme sanctions that are technically available under the letter of the regulations. 

Key point there from @Addict54 I reckon...

If there's proof that we've been doing it "systemically" then the EFL need to open up a wider investigation across ALL clubs, given the unlikely scenario that it's just us... as per @SaintlyAnd's post yesterday, whose ex-analyst friend said "all clubs do it" (paraphrasing)...

Edited 1 hour ago by trousers

[Saint_lambden]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

I must say that although I still don't think they will be able to kick us out it is slightly disconcerting that people with ITK info like @Saint_lambden and @MB are the most pessimistic. 

Don’t have any ITK on this. Club are keeping very tight lipped. I’m guessing we’re trying to go with the complete opposite approach of Boro in that sense and look to use that as a legal tactic of ‘they’ve been leaking to the media whilst we’ve tried to follow the proper process of disclosure’. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, trousers said:

 

Key point there from @Addict54 I reckon...

If there's proof that we've been doing it "systemically" then the EFL need to open up a wider investigation across ALL clubs, given the unlikely scenario that it's just us... as per @SaintlyAnd's post yesterday, whose ex-analyst friend said "all clubs do it" (paraphrasing)...

I'm not sure that's overly relevant given that we are the ones in the playoff final. Maybe see if we can catch hull doing it as well! 

[obelisk]

It's what I've been waiting for all season. This Independent Hearing is certainly getting the juices of anticipation going. This is where the action is. Will it go to penalties or will it be decided in the time allotted? This is most certainly what football is all about. Fine margins and master tacticians with the result in the balance. Can't wait. Perhaps they should have sold tickets.

[stfrancisofbenali]

On 13/05/2026 at 14:49, Miltonaggro said:

Apologies for the war and peace post chaps – bear with or scroll past.  For the last week I have been trying to provide a steer on here as to why I think this silly episode will be concluded with a fine (in the region of £200k) and / or a possible future points deduction (though if I were advising Saints I would appeal this).  Simply that talk of forfeit and bans opens a legal can of worms that is well beyond the remit and scope of both the EFL and / or Middlesbrough FC.

The best way to get your head around it is to think about intervention via the regulator in any other lucrative industry away from the emotion attached to sports.  If a rule imposed by the regulator is wildly out of proportion to any complaint of unfair advantage, the business or individual still has full recourse to law.  Be aware that in any field, a regulatory rule or penalty cannot trump or bypass the law.  My practice area doesn’t extend to sports law, but there is some allied knowledge of commercial litigation, which is what will commence if the EFL act rashly. 

This lunchtime I managed to have a chat with an old friend who does work in sports / commercial law and we agreed on what would likely happen in the event of the EFL overstepping.  I had a spare hour after this (might write a casenote on if it ever goes to law), so thought I would post this on here to put fellow Saints fans minds at rest.  This is only a reflective opinion, and you can never guarantee outcome of course – its complicated as they say - but it’s a measured / informed opinion at least:

Assuming Saints reasonable position is that a junior analyst did record half an hour of MFC’s training, without the Board’s knowledge, and the club are currently undertaking a review of this. 

Let’s say the EFL announce that they will fine and ban SFC from the Play off final, causing the club to miss out on promotion to the EPL.  Reacting to the white noise of the past week.

1. Targets for litigation by SFC

Should the EFL Independent Disciplinary Commission rule to expel Southampton FC from the Championship Play-off Final against Hull City on 23 May, Southampton should immediately file a claim in the King's Bench Division of the High Court naming two distinct parties:

A) Primary Defendant: The English Football League (EFL)

Cause of Action: Breach of Contract, Arbitrary Exercise of Disciplinary Power, and Procedural Unfairness.

Basis: The EFL Regulations form a binding contract between member clubs and the league. Southampton will challenge any expedited expulsion as an ultra vires (meaning beyond their powers) abuse of power that violates the league's own regulatory framework.

B) Secondary Defendant / Interested Party: Middlesbrough FC

Procedural Joinder: Middlesbrough must be formally joined to the High Court action as an Interested Party under Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), as it is likely that they are actively preparing to take Southampton's place at Wembley (as stated in recent MFC communications).

Tort Claims: Direct counterclaims for Injurious Falsehood and Defamation regarding public statements made by Middlesbrough personnel (e.g., Hellberg publicly labelling Southampton "cheats"), which have severely damaged the club's corporate reputation and stock value before a formal verdict has been rendered.

2. Legal position and precedent

Southampton's legal counsel will likely use four distinct arguments to block an expulsion from the play-offs, these are to use the Leeds 2019 case, employment law isolation, breach of natural justice, and the good old American Cyanamid principles.

i) Deviation from Established League Precedent (Leeds United Spygate 2019) In 2019, Marcelo Bielsa admitted to spying on Derby County and every other Championship opponent. The EFL established a clear, binding precedent by issuing a £200,000 fine and a formal reprimand. Escalating the penalty to total competition expulsion for a first-time alleged offense by an analyst is a gross violation of contractual consistency and proportionality under English sports law (Bradley v Jockey Club).

ii) The Rogue Agent Defence: Southampton's executive board will likely submit immediate formal statements confirming they never authorised, funded, or evaluated any illicitly filmed footage. Under standard employment principles, a club cannot face strict liability capital sporting punishment (expulsion) for an individual first-team analyst acting independently outside his explicit operational mandate – their must be a chain of command / causation in terms of proof.

iii) Breach of Natural Justice via Compressed Timelines: The EFL's decision to bypass the standard 14-day response period to force a hearing before 23 May actively denies Southampton its right to a fair trial (McInnes v Onslow-Fane). Depriving a club of adequate time to conduct a comprehensive internal review while Middlesbrough introduces unverified third-party "CCTV history" constitutes a fatal procedural flaw.

iv) Irreparable Harm Threshold (American Cyanamid Co). Southampton easily satisfies the High Court test for an Urgent Interim Injunction (this is absolutely key). The financial upside of reaching the Premier League is universally valued at around £200 million (ballpark extreme financial losses). If the EFL removes Southampton from the final illegally, no monetary damages paid by the league months later can adequately compensate for the permanent loss of global prestige, TV broadcasting distributions, and elite sporting merit. Essentially, were the court to find for SFC, Saints could effectively bankrupt the EFL and Middlesbrough FC.

3. Potential damages and remedies

If the EFL Independent Disciplinary Commission issues a sporting expulsion or points deduction before the weekend of the play-off final, Southampton must seek the following cumulative judicial remedies:

A) Pre-Match Urgent Remedies (Wembley Focus):

Urgent Interim High Court Injunction: An emergency judicial order freezing the Championship Play-off Final scheduled for 23 May, or alternatively ordering the EFL to permit Southampton to play Hull City as scheduled, until a full commercial court trial evaluates the legality of the charge.

Final Judicial Declaration: A formal court order declaring that the EFL Independent Disciplinary Commission's penalty is null, void, contractually invalid, and ultra vires.

Injunction Against Disparagement (Middlesbrough): An injunction ordering Middlesbrough executives and coaching staff to immediately cease public character assassinations and "cheating" accusations online and in press conferences until the formal legal channel has concluded.

B) Post-Match Monetary Damages (speculative as I don’t think EFL are that stupid)

£200 Million Promotion Expectation Damages (From the EFL): If the High Court denies the injunction but later finds the EFL breached its contract by expelling the club, the EFL will be liable for the full, audited £200 million loss representing missing out on the Premier League's central broadcasting revenue, parachute payments, and global commercial rights.

Reliance and Operational Damages (From the EFL): Full recovery of lost ticket sales for Wembley, pre-booked corporate travel packages, stadium concession refunds, and pre-negotiated club sponsorship bonuses tied to reaching the final.

Tortious Special Damages (From Middlesbrough FC): Punitive financial damages if Southampton can prove that Middlesbrough’s public agitating directly caused major commercial sponsors or e.g. shirt partners to execute ‘morality clauses’ and pull funding out of the club.

4. Advice to SFC on taking action if the EFL goes nuclear (I would imagine that all of this is already well in motion)

Club solicitors Paris Smith LLP to instruct specialist sports KC in terms of retention for the action.

Submit Response of Non-Authorisation: Issue the club’s formal observations to the EFL, officially isolating the analyst's actions from board knowledge.

Prepare the High Court Application Papers: Pre- draft the American Cyanamid skeleton argument to ensure that if the Independent Commission rules against the club court injunction papers can be served within two hours.

So that’s my legal tuppence in terms of shutting out the white-noise, hope it helps in terms of perspective.  Much sharper people that I will already be on board, and SFC seem to be acting with extreme professionalism and strategic edge.  Short advice to the Boro brains trust would be to move on, or be careful what you wish for.

Thank you for this. Extremely helpful. Shall tuck ultra vires up my sleeve for the comings days.