#Spygate

[Dman]

1 hour ago, TestValley said:

Bottom line is rules are rules and Saints knowingly broke them to try to get an unfair advantage in a crucial tie. 

Overnight has turned the club into the most disliked in the country. 

I doubt it will happen but if the punishment is expulsion from the final, no one can complain. 

There is a world outside of middlesbrough mate, a bloody nice one as well. You should try it. 

[LGTL]

If this week has taught me anything, it’s that I thank my lucky stars we have a rival. Boro don’t have a rival, and this is the result. It’s how I imagine Bournemouth would react too. 

[sadoldgit]

45 minutes ago, trousers said:

That idea was floated in jest by some at the outset, but, as it's since been suggested that one thing we might have been trying to get an insight into is their penalty taking, then that would of course have been reconnaissance for the second leg, and outside the 72 hour embargo... You never know I guess... 

(That said, I think it's fairly obvious the primary reason for someone being there was to establish the situation with regards Hackney's fitness) 

Not sure about the fitness thing. You have plan A if he is not fit and plan B if he is and implement either when the team is announced an hour before kick off. You see all kinds of analysis and instructions given to subs and even players during the game. I’m sure there is enough flexibility in the process to deal with all playing members of the opposition. It just seems odd to send someone along just to see is one player is “on the grass.”

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, Gloucester Saint said:

I work there and what you’re saying is 100% true. Most thought the photo by the tree was hilarious and not taken seriously particularly. They know there’s a rule breach that will be dealt with but their neutral perception is night and day with Middlesbrough’s.

Same where I am, mates of fans of lots of other club think it is hilarious, especially given it was touted the lad was hiding and using sophisticated recording and listening equipment.

[Dman]

1 hour ago, saintant said:

Agree. I keep wondering if Taylor the analyst we sacked in December who previously worked for Boro had a hand in all this.

I also wonder whether the club demanded Will Salt hand over his phone when this first broke. A forensic investigation might have shown who he'd been talking to or texting which would have been interesting.

Can we park this utter nonsense that the EFL are going to carry out forensic investigations on our technology. 

Its utter nonsense that they couldn't do even if they wanted to. 

[Saint Garrett]

Isn't this "witness" meant to be an angered former saints analyst who was supposedly unlawfully sacked in December?

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

Isn't this "witness" meant to be an angered former saints analyst who was supposedly unlawfully sacked in December?

He left in January and joined us from Middlesbrough prior to that. 

Edited 1 hour ago by hypochondriac

[Gloucester Saint]

1 minute ago, Saint Garrett said:

Isn't this "witness" meant to be an angered former saints analyst who was supposedly unlawfully sacked in December?

Funnily enough most of the ‘pundits’ and journalists who are the most vocal all seemingly had prior beef with SFC too - Sheldon, Austin, Jordan had the stuff with Lowe and Beattie not going there, and/or in Gibson’s pocket. Not sure what Deeney or Winter’s issues are, other than the former being a convinced violent thug. 

[trousers]

12 minutes ago, westmidlandsaint said:

Have you actually spoken to fans around the country. Living here in the West Midlands I can tell you I have plenty of Villa, Birmingham, Wolves, WBA (as well as the usual glory hunters) and not one of them gives a flying fuck about it. If anything they all find it hilarious when the image came out.

Indeed. My football supporter chums and I are always winding eachother up about our respective teams, yet, I've not had one message about this incident... Probably because they're mainly fans of premier league clubs, Chelsea in particular, and as such they're no doubt  thinking its wiser to keep schtum given the barrage of 'cheating' examples that I'd be able to fire back at them about their clubs!

 

[OurClau5]

Im privvy to some info because of my line of work. I can say with some confidence (although not 100% which I think will be a sticking point when this all comes to ahead today) that Saints have probably spied on atleast one other club, albeit outside of the 72 hour window. I wont ever disclose that info fully mind, but leads me to believe if I know of one, there are more than likely a couple of others and the whistleblower has some truth. And as a result I think some form of sporting sanction will be imposed as a deterrent. 

However, something I am willing to disclose, should the time be right, is a v long list of journos, some close to this story, that take info given to them in confidence by the club and sell them to betting companies. Important injury news, formation changes etc etc. Im quite amazed that some involved in this story have gone so hard on how outrageous it is to spy and leak info, when they are getting paid by some of the big syndicates to do exactly that. 

[Turkish]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Same where I am, mates of fans of lots of other club think it is hilarious, especially given it was touted the lad was hiding and using sophisticated recording and listening equipment.

same here, everyone round here i speak too says we should get a small fine and just get on with it but also finding highly amusing the reality v what it was made out to be. Interesting now quite a few more balanced journalists, ex pros etc are saying similar too

[Osvaldorama]

Basically this whole week has just been this:

 

[DT]

Really hate all this.

And I can't help but feel that the onset of VAR and its effects on football - the need for instant punishment and re-refereeing of the game - has resonances in the confected uproar around Spygate. Subsitute the ref at the monitor for the EFL meeting today and the stadium crowd for the baying mob on social media and pundits judging guilty before being proved innocent. It's all so shit and the beautiful game it ain't.

Personally I hope we get anything other than being chucked out of the final, and suspect that might be the case. And once the verdict has been given, the whole carnival can move on. Not that it will to the lawyer-protected Man Citys or Chelseas of this world, who pop a gag on everything connected to the media ever (or until Pep judges it's time to move on, else his managerial talents be tainted).

Edited 1 hour ago by DT

[skintsaint]

4 minutes ago, OurClau5 said:

that Saints have probably spied on atleast one other club, albeit outside of the 72 hour window.

no shit sherlock, im sure all teams scout each other out 😅

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

3 minutes ago, OurClau5 said:

Im privvy to some info because of my line of work. I can say with some confidence (although not 100% which I think will be a sticking point when this all comes to ahead today) that Saints have probably spied on atleast one other club, albeit outside of the 72 hour window. . 

 

If that's the case, then quite frankly, nobody should give a shit. I know I certainly don't, and I'm generally a pretty good egg.

If it was a concern, 72 hours shouldn't be mention the rules.

 

[There when Franny scored]

20 minutes ago, egg said:

I disagree. The arbitration clause is binding - it's trite law. 

I’m confused.

The BBC article said there was no right of appeal to CAS.

The EFL press release did mention “consideration of any appeal process if required”. 
 

So if we have a contract with the EFL that has an arbitration clause what is the nature of that dispute resolution provision? 
 

Presumably this is akin to a multi-tiered dispute resolution process and the tribunal currently appointed are equivalent to the expert determination phase? 

Arbitrations require a process, most importantly a process to appoint the tribunal, which we haven’t had? 
 

So we could apply for interim measure in support of the arbitral process such as an injunction to prevent the play off final taking place as long as no arbitral award had been issued. I agree that once an award has been issued, an English court is not going to give interim measures preventing the enforcement of a valid arbitration award in these circumstances. 
 

Does anyone have a copy of the agreement signed with the EFL? 
 

Also, normally there is an appeal available or there isn’t. One of the parties to the dispute, I.e. the EFL can’t decide if there’s going to be one, that doesn’t make sense. 
 

Can anyone explain this? 

[Gloucester Saint]

2 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

Basically this whole week has just been this:

 

If only Middlesbrough were zero % emission.

They’ve produced enough pollution this week, even without what spews out of Billingham, to blow a polo mint sized hole in the ozone layer.

[saintant]

The photo of Salt continues to baffle me. I'm sure Boro staff often spot people in and close to that place by the tree. Would they not just send someone to check them out and politely move them on. Surely they don't photograph everyone.

The photo of Salt looks as though it could only have been done with a zoom lens. So why did they seemingly decide the photo was needed before talking to him. Smacks of them knowing he would be there and who he was so possibly some sort of set up on their part.

[Saint Garrett]

I think because ultimately its Saints vs the EFL either can appeal based on the independants decision.  Realistically I think only us will appeal.

[Football Special]

51 minutes ago, LGTL said:

I agree that Blackmore is being a moron. There are times when club, fans, local media all have to fucking stick together, and this is one of those times. 

You have the entirety of the national media against us thanks to Gibbo and his influences. You then have Saints rightly saying nothing. The last thing we need is our local journo sticking the boot in even more. He can be a right twat at times. 

Blackbore has always been like that, not a fan of his. Middlesbrough have tried to turn this into a Propaganda war he should be able to see that 

[trousers]

9 minutes ago, OurClau5 said:

Im privvy to some info because of my line of work. I can say with some confidence (although not 100% which I think will be a sticking point when this all comes to ahead today) that Saints have probably spied on atleast one other club, albeit outside of the 72 hour window

Cheers for the insight... Does your line of work just give you an insight into what Saints might have done in the past in this regard, or would it cover other clubs as well?

P.s. key bit in bold there...

Edited 1 hour ago by trousers

[Zorba]

7 minutes ago, OurClau5 said:

Im privvy to some info because of my line of work.

I’ll go first… Are you a spy?

[Smirking_Saint]

Everyone spies outside of the 72 hour window, I expect everyone tries inside it too

Its a non story

[SotonianWill]

24 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

If you wear a coat in the winter, you're a Southerner. That's how I work it out. 😆

They’re very odd, northerners. Someone who my relative works with, a northerner now adopted into the South, refuses to wear a coat / jacket in cold weather as he’s “from the north”.

 

Apparently it just results in him being ill a lot of the time. 

[stfrancisofbenali]

13 hours ago, trousers said:

 

Middlesbrough not involved in the process...?

Boro not in the final hearing (EFL V Saints) but they have presented their case and evidence.

[trousers]

8 minutes ago, OurClau5 said:

Im privvy to some info because of my line of work. I can say with some confidence (although not 100% which I think will be a sticking point when this all comes to ahead today) that Saints have probably spied on atleast one other club, albeit outside of the 72 hour window. I wont ever disclose that info fully mind, but leads me to believe if I know of one, there are more than likely a couple of others and the whistleblower has some truth. And as a result I think some form of sporting sanction will be imposed as a deterrent. 

However, something I am willing to disclose, should the time be right, is a v long list of journos, some close to this story, that take info given to them in confidence by the club and sell them to betting companies. Important injury news, formation changes etc etc. Im quite amazed that some involved in this story have gone so hard on how outrageous it is to spy and leak info, when they are getting paid by some of the big syndicates to do exactly that. 

 

[Football Special]

1 minute ago, saintant said:

The photo of Salt continues to baffle me. I'm sure Boro staff often spot people in and close to that place by the tree. Would they not just send someone to check them out and politely move them on. Surely they don't photograph everyone.

The photo of Salt looks as though it could only have been done with a zoom lens. So why did they seemingly decide the photo was needed before talking to him. Smacks of them knowing he would be there and who he was so possibly some sort of set up on their part.

Agreed, look at the speed they had this wrapped up and delivered to EFL, I think they knew already he would be there 

[Turkish]

3 minutes ago, saintant said:

The photo of Salt continues to baffle me. I'm sure Boro staff often spot people in and close to that place by the tree. Would they not just send someone to check them out and politely move them on. Surely they don't photograph everyone.

The photo of Salt looks as though it could only have been done with a zoom lens. So why did they seemingly decide the photo was needed before talking to him. Smacks of them knowing he would be there and who he was so possibly some sort of set up on their part.

agree, sounds like a bit of a set up. Like i said earlier the picture is taken from the other side of the grounds from where the security guys were. Would be very interesting if it comes out that it was all a set up. Obviously they will say that we shouldn't have done it but also poor innocent wronged Middlesborough are actually devious cunts.

Edited 1 hour ago by Turkish

[OurClau5]

2 minutes ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

If that's the case, then quite frankly, nobody should give a shit. I know I certainly don't, and I'm generally a pretty good egg.

If it was a concern, 72 hours shouldn't be mention the rules.

 

I think part of the issue is probably the underhand nature of it in general. Or atleast in the case I know of. But I myself, and I know of a lot of other clubs that have done it, send people to hotels before games to check who is signing in etc, to find out whether players are fit or not. Spying in some form, goes on all the time. Just usually less blatant than an iphone behind a tree. Not sure that can be used as a defence mind!

[Football Special]

2 minutes ago, stfrancisofbenali said:

Boro not in the final hearing (EFL V Saints) but they have presented their case and evidence.

Its not "their case" ffs. They can report to the EFL and make a complaint to them. Its then EFLs case to take action on. 

[Smirking_Saint]

3 minutes ago, saintant said:

The photo of Salt continues to baffle me. I'm sure Boro staff often spot people in and close to that place by the tree. Would they not just send someone to check them out and politely move them on. Surely they don't photograph everyone.

The photo of Salt looks as though it could only have been done with a zoom lens. So why did they seemingly decide the photo was needed before talking to him. Smacks of them knowing he would be there and who he was so possibly some sort of set up on their part.

As much as Id love it to be, I find it completely implausible that this is a set up, if it is it’s absolutely batshit

IMO, he was there, probably as instructed by the analysts, and thats it

We’ll be fined or points deducted next time we’re in the championship and thats it

[Wiggles31]

Whatever precedent the EFL sets, all clubs, including Saints will be looking for evidence of spying this season. So if it’s a points deduction and a fine, and we then go and find evidence of another club spying on us within the 72 hour window - then surely the same applies to them. Hence the cluster fuck this is for the EFL. 

[Whitey Grandad]

Just now, skintsaint said:

no shit sherlock, im sure all teams scout each other out 😅

Of course they do. It's impossible and impractical to prevent it. The Premier League don't. Anyone who describes it as 'spying' is an amateur journalist at best. 

The EFL has created a problem for itself by introducing a rule without specifying a sanction for transgression. Had we not been in the playoffs what action would Middlesbrough have taken?

[Patrick Bateman]

1 minute ago, OurClau5 said:

I think part of the issue is probably the underhand nature of it in general. Or atleast in the case I know of. But I myself, and I know of a lot of other clubs that have done it, send people to hotels before games to check who is signing in etc, to find out whether players are fit or not. Spying in some form, goes on all the time. Just usually less blatant than an iphone behind a tree. Not sure that can be used as a defence mind!

LOL - I wouldn't have even thought of doing that, but it's bloody obvious really 😂

[egg]

4 minutes ago, There when Franny scored said:

I’m confused.

The BBC article said there was no right of appeal to CAS.

The EFL press release did mention “consideration of any appeal process if required”. 
 

So if we have a contract with the EFL that has an arbitration clause what is the nature of that dispute resolution provision? 
 

Presumably this is akin to a multi-tiered dispute resolution process and the tribunal currently appointed are equivalent to the expert determination phase? 

Arbitrations require a process, most importantly a process to appoint the tribunal, which we haven’t had? 
 

So we could apply for interim measure in support of the arbitral process such as an injunction to prevent the play off final taking place as long as no arbitral award had been issued. I agree that once an award has been issued, an English court is not going to give interim measures preventing the enforcement of a valid arbitration award in these circumstances. 
 

Does anyone have a copy of the agreement signed with the EFL? 
 

Also, normally there is an appeal available or there isn’t. One of the parties to the dispute, I.e. the EFL can’t decide if there’s going to be one, that doesn’t make sense. 
 

Can anyone explain this? 

The BBC are correct, there's no right of appeal to CAS. The arbitration clause provides for the panel that are determining this charge, then any appeal. That's binding. 

The regulations are what matters. Link to them here:

https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/526ac020-67b3-11f0-9ba4-015464ec39cd.pdf

Sections 8 and 9 sets out the answer to your questions - pages 129 to 142. 

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Of course they do. It's impossible and impractical to prevent it. The Premier League don't. Anyone who describes it as 'spying' is an amateur journalist at best. 

The EFL has created a problem for itself by introducing a rule without specifying a sanction for transgression. Had we not been in the playoffs what action would Middlesbrough have taken?

They would have probably made exactly the same complaint about whichever other mugs had to play them in the semis.

And would have still lost over 2 legs. Because they're bottling, cry baby bell ends.

[trousers]

4 minutes ago, saintant said:

The photo of Salt continues to baffle me. I'm sure Boro staff often spot people in and close to that place by the tree. Would they not just send someone to check them out and politely move them on. Surely they don't photograph everyone.

The photo of Salt looks as though it could only have been done with a zoom lens. So why did they seemingly decide the photo was needed before talking to him. Smacks of them knowing he would be there and who he was so possibly some sort of set up on their part.

Yep... I appreciate it's conspiracy territory but, it does actually make all the dots join up, theoretically... 

As you say, we know that there are always plenty of Middlesbrough fans milling around the golf course / hotel area watching sessions from that very same vantage point... What aroused their suspicions this time compared to all other times... As you say, them having prior knowledge it that Salt was going to be there is perhaps the only way all the pieces of the jigsaw make sense...

If it was a trap then, yes, we were stupid to fall for it and should still be penalised, but there is definitely something that doesn't add up with all of this IMO...

[Turkish]

6 minutes ago, Smirking_Saint said:

As much as Id love it to be, I find it completely implausible that this is a set up, if it is it’s absolutely batshit

IMO, he was there, probably as instructed by the analysts, and thats it

We’ll be fined or points deducted next time we’re in the championship and thats it

Obviously a conspiracy theory but is it beyond the realms of possibiity that this happens

Disgruntled ex employee contacts Salt, a naive intern wanting to help his team. Tells him that there is a place you can see MIddlesborough training where no one will spot you not entering any private ground. Naively Salt thinks his old mate is helping him out. When actually he tips off 'Boro whats been planned then reports him to the club as a way of getting back at Saints. If you were going to stitch someone up you'd go for the most junior person wouldn't you, not anyone higher up who'd probably be more savy.

The picture is interesting for me, it's from the other side of the pitches from the security office where Sky said they guards came running from and was taken before that, someone knew he was there.

It sounds like something you used to get on Dream Team but truth is stranger than fiction these days. There are a few things that dont add up here.

Edited 1 hour ago by Turkish

[23rdSaint]

🚨🤓 Southampton Spygate personal view:
1. Expect the breaches will be straightforward to establish (ie liability) and almost certainly admitted to try and get some sanction credit/discount
2. Expect aggravating factors such as other examples of Soton spying this year to be raised
3. Fundamental question of how serious a breach of rule 127 and good faith is will be key. We know good faith alone was £200k in the Leeds case. The new rule makes it worse and spying obviously seeks a sporting advantage - why else do it? So that does point to sporting sanction of some sort
4. Being thrown out of the Play Offs appears excessive especially given Southampton finished 7 points clear of 6th and 9 clear of 7th
5. A 3-0 in the first leg would have been an option again excessive retrospectively unless 2nd leg re-playable (not feasible)
6. More likely sanction is points deduction next season in the Championship as much as that won't help Middlesboro
7. Unlikely that the PL will take a points deduction recommendation from the EFL (no fixed rule) - doubt EFL will push for it, so would apply in first season back in Championship (when and if)
8. My best guess is SIX EFL points in first season in EFL and £500k-£1m fine
9. Boro compensation claim can be dealt with separately subject to any claim brought by Boro - difficult claim to establish due to causation issues

[saintant]

25 minutes ago, Dman said:

Can we park this utter nonsense that the EFL are going to carry out forensic investigations on our technology. 

Its utter nonsense that they couldn't do even if they wanted to. 

Not what I said though is it?

[Saint_lambden]

Edit: Already shared above  

Edited 1 hour ago by Saint_lambden

[hypochondriac]

I wonder if Salt will make a statement in the evidence himself. Maybe he will say its not systemic and he did it off his own back or one other person in the coaching team knew about it. I expect something like that would counter any statement from the ex boro employee. 

[SNSUN]

Whatever happens, the truth is that our owner is richer, younger and hunkier than theirs. Probably has more access to weapons too. 😁

I know which Granddad I'd want bouncing me on their knee... 

[OurClau5]

8 minutes ago, trousers said:

Cheers for the insight... Does your line of work just give you an insight into what Saints might have done in the past in this regard, or would it cover other clubs as well?

P.s. key bit in bold there...

I used to work for a couple of clubs, but I gamble for a living, hence the reason I know which journos are earning a little bit on the side... Dont know about Saints specifically, just this one incident. 

[Dman]

A question I'd almost certainly be highlighting as a mitigation point, if I was the club:

Are the EFL pushing for a disproportionate sanction here (we don't really know what they are pushing for at this stage)? If so has that been influence by:

1. The fact the EFL have a committee memeber who is also on the board of Middlesbrough. Therefore highlighting a significant conflict of interest. 

2. The media campaign clearly whipped up by Middlesbrough. Even the local MP applying pressure pubically during an ongoing investigation. 

[23rdSaint]

😂

[Turkish]

2 minutes ago, SNSUN said:

Whatever happens, the truth is that our owner is richer, younger and hunkier than theirs. Probably has more access to weapons too. 😁

I know which Granddad I'd want bouncing me on their knee... 

ever seen Steve Gibson and orginal Lex Luther in the same room?

 

[Saint_clark]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I wonder if Salt will make a statement in the evidence himself. Maybe he will say its not systemic and he did it off his own back or one other person in the coaching team knew about it. I expect something like that would counter any statement from the ex boro employee. 

Wouldn't really be in his interest to do that though. It may be true but in that case he's shown himself to not be a particularly honest person. If it's not true, he'd need a pretty good reason to jump on the grenade.

[trousers]

7 minutes ago, Turkish said:

agree, sounds like a bit of a set up. Like i said earlier the picture is taken from the other side of the grounds from where the security guys were. Would be very interesting if it comes out that it was all a set up. Obviously they will say that we shouldn't have done it but also poor innocent wronged Middlesborough are actually devious cunts.

It also doesn't add up that Salt wasn't apprehended... Just allowed to leave the complex through, one assumes, a security manned entrance / exit... If his movements were being monitored on CCTV, as we're led to believe, surely they had opportunity to apprehend him rather than let him "retreat to the changing rooms before just disappearing". 

Surely they'd have approached him and questioned him etc, rather than just letting him "flee the scene"? It's almost as if they only wanted to get a photo of him 'in the act' in order to set the dominos falling.... 

[Zorba]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

The regulations are what matters. Link to them here:

https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/526ac020-67b3-11f0-9ba4-015464ec39cd.pdf

I read that link as images.gc.elf services

The thought of Gemma Collins with Adam Armstrong sprang to mind. Uurrghhhh!