#Spygate

[Golactico]

I dont  think we'll get thrown out, but if we did - imagine you are a Saints player who sweated blood to overturn our poor start and get us to the play-off final. You then find that purely down to your employer's negligence, your opportunity for significantly improving your personal wealth is taken away. Does said player have a legal case against the club for loss of earnings? Many players will have pay increases written into their contracts in the event of promotion to the Prem - I'd imagine that a lawyer could construct a good argument for breach of contract. 

[disconnect]

If you get kicked out for such a minor thing, the next thing that’ll happen is the next time Boro (or another team) get in the ref’s face to get someone sent off, or dive for a penalty, or deliberately injure an opposing player (ie anything that actually affects the game being played) surely the league will need to forfeit the game! The potential punishment for someone on their phone is just ridiculously too severe for something that most level headed people can just see as someone being silly, that it’d create such a precedent that’d mean cases are being brought up every week.

Essentially Boro have already got what they wanted - disrupting us and firing up their squad, but as that didn’t work, they’re really pushing it to these crazy levels. Nearly all neutrals I’ve spoken to now think the whole thing is ridiculous and we’re just left with Boro fed media and a few basic “celebs” / ex pros spouting off cos they want their voice to be heard for some reason.

[LegalEagle]

7 minutes ago, Golactico said:

I dont  think we'll get thrown out, but if we did - imagine you are a Saints player who sweated blood to overturn our poor start and get us to the play-off final. You then find that purely down to your employer's negligence, your opportunity for significantly improving your personal wealth is taken away. Does said player have a legal case against the club for loss of earnings? Many players will have pay increases written into their contracts in the event of promotion to the Prem - I'd imagine that a lawyer could construct a good argument for breach of contract. 

Negligence (and breach of contract) would be the route to go as a player. The club has a duty of care to the player, they will have breached that duty, the breach caused the loss (and it was foreseeable) and they have suffered a loss as a result. Certainly potential for a claim.

[tttdcs]

1 hour ago, Toadhall Saint said:

I just think the whole thing is a bit strange.

- timing just before our first leg play off 

- allegedly all clubs do it

- ex Boro/saints analyst 

- the actual picture of Will Salt

- not sure if there are any more junior roles than an intern role

- the feeding of info to journalists

- the expectation that they would get a seat at the hearing where they can produce further evidence in regard to us doing this all the time. 
 

etc etc

other than it being a bit shabby of us it really doesn’t smell right.

not sure about any of it but the photo of Will Salt, why stand there at the tree allowing someone to walk up to you and take a photo of you spying? 

(From the direction of the training pitches?)

 

Edited 11 hours ago by tttdcs

[John B]

1 hour ago, benjii said:

The more I think about it, the apparent instant emergence of a whistleblower with links to Middlesbrough is quite odd.

Wouldn't surprise me if he somehow induced our chap to be there.

"Yeah, mate, it's open land. People stand there and watch all the time.  They aren't bothered. You can park at the golf club and walk round. Let's catch up for a beer after."

 

Why would SFC not be confident of beating boro over two legs so they send some irk to take some illegal pictures beats me 

 

[Hussar Saint]

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/middlesbrough-championship-play-off-injury-33960460

Oh no, looks like they’ve lost ‘Tommy lad’ for the play off final!! 🤪🤡 

[Reggie Dunlop]

6 minutes ago, tttdcs said:

not sure about any of it but the photo of Will Salt, why stand there at the tree allowing someone to walk up to you and take a photo of you spying? 

(From the direction of the training pitches?)

 

I thought that, he must of seen someone looking over!!

 

Also, turn the bloody phone round and he could have stood further behind the tree!!

[Arjen Robben]

22 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

I know this "whistleblower set a trap" notion is conspiracy theory territory, and that kind of thinking inevitably attracts the wrath of the forum thought police but, to me, the alternative reality - that we willing sent a junior analyst to stand in plain sight to video a training session knowing that it was breaking the 72 hour rule and knowing that it could lead to us being thrown out of the competition - seems even more bizarre than some of the 'conspiracy theories' to me.... Are we really stupid and naive enough to have done that...?

If it is a simple case of us knowingly breaking the rules, at Tonda's level or above, then we deserve to be chucked out of the competition. 

All I'll say is that the emergence of a whistleblower that just happened to work for both clubs in recent times seems a tad convenient (from Middlesbrough's perspective) to me... 

Salt was on the phone to Big Phil who was hiding out in the nearby undergrowth ready to poison dart Hackney if it looked like he was going to start . 

[bpsaint]

26 minutes ago, Golactico said:

I dont  think we'll get thrown out, but if we did - imagine you are a Saints player who sweated blood to overturn our poor start and get us to the play-off final. You then find that purely down to your employer's negligence, your opportunity for significantly improving your personal wealth is taken away. Does said player have a legal case against the club for loss of earnings? Many players will have pay increases written into their contracts in the event of promotion to the Prem - I'd imagine that a lawyer could construct a good argument for breach of contract. 

Players would be fuming. Imagine busting a gut all season for it to end like that.

Transfer requests galore probably.

[trousers]

15 minutes ago, John B said:

Why would SFC not be confident of beating boro over two legs so they send some irk to take some illegal pictures beats me 

 

Yep, exactly. 

Imagine if one of us nutjob conspiracy theorists had come on here before 'Spygate' came to light and said: "You know what, I reckon what Tonda should do to help us win the play offs is send an analyst up to Middlesbrough's training ground within 72 hours of the game and record their training session in plain sight on his iPhone. We might get chucked out if he gets caught (which is quite likely) but it's a risk worth taking", we'd have been laughed out of town for coming up with such a ridiculous idea... 

Something doesn't add up, that's for sure...

Edited 10 hours ago by trousers

[LegalEagle]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

Yep, exactly. 

Imagine if one of us nutjob conspiracy theorists had come on here before 'Spygate' came to light and said: "You know what, I reckon what Tonda should do to help us win the play offs is send an analyst up to Middlesbrough's training ground within 72 hours of the game and record their training session in plain sight on his iPhone. We might get chucked out of he gets caught but it's a risk worth taking", we'd have been laughed out of town for coming up with such a ridiculous idea... 

Something doesn't add up, that's for sure...

And is that why Tonda was so desperate to say something? Because it is not quite as it appears?

[dsrdorset]

6 minutes ago, trousers said:

Yep, exactly. 

Imagine if one of us nutjob conspiracy theorists had come on here before 'Spygate' came to light and said: "You know what, I reckon what Tonda should do to help us win the play offs is send an analyst up to Middlesbrough's training ground within 72 hours of the game and record their training session in plain sight on his iPhone. We might get chucked out if he gets caught (which is quite likely) but it's a risk worth taking", we'd have been laughed out of town for coming up with such a ridiculous idea... 

Something doesn't add up, that's for sure...

I have been saying this from the start. It really just doesn't add up one bit...

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, LegalEagle said:

And is that why Tonda was so desperate to say something? Because it is not quite as it appears?

One would like to think so 👍🏻

[Divergent]

18 minutes ago, Hussar Saint said:

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/middlesbrough-championship-play-off-injury-33960460

Oh no, looks like they’ve lost ‘Tommy lad’ for the play off final!! 🤪🤡 

Maybe Ross Stewart could replace him in the Scotland squad? 

[egg]

41 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Jake Taylor (bitter ex-employee who was let go from Southampton) entices analyst intern Will Salt to the north east.

”Yeah it’ll be fine mate, we’ll have a drink later”.

Not entirely implausible.

I'd go no higher than theoretically possible, but I don't think it's realistic

But... assuming that theory is correct, where does it take us?

An SFC person still went along, still and observed training within 72 hours. You'd imagine that he didn't do that for shits and giggles, and intended to use what what he observed to assist SFC.

If you're entrapped but do wrong, you've still done wrong. 

[Patrick Bateman]

24 minutes ago, Hussar Saint said:

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/middlesbrough-championship-play-off-injury-33960460

Oh no, looks like they’ve lost ‘Tommy lad’ for the play off final!! 🤪🤡 

Am I living in some kind of weird parallel universe? 

[Katalinic]

I'd love the conspiracy theories to be true, not least because the lashings of humble pie from the media, ex-pro's and twats like Corden would be delicious. Sadly, the simplest and most obvious explanations are usually the right ones.

[trousers]

14 minutes ago, egg said:

I'd go no higher than theoretically possible, but I don't think it's realistic

But... assuming that theory is correct, where does it take us?

An SFC person still went along, still and observed training within 72 hours. You'd imagine that he didn't do that for shits and giggles, and intended to use what what he observed to assist SFC.

If you're entrapped but do wrong, you've still done wrong. 

Agree, but wouldn't the punishment in that circumstances be significantly less than if we had willingly sent him up there with explicit instructions to spy on a training session knowing that it would be in breach of the rules?

Edited 10 hours ago by trousers

[Matthew Le God]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

I'd go no higher than theoretically possible, but I don't think it's realistic

But... assuming that theory is correct, where does it take us?

An SFC person still went along, still and observed training within 72 hours. You'd imagine that he didn't do that for shits and giggles, and intended to use what what he observed to assist SFC.

If you're entrapped but do wrong, you've still done wrong. 

But if that is what happened it wouldn't be club wide conspiracy, so punishment would have to be proportional to it.

Edited 10 hours ago by Matthew Le God

[trousers]

5 minutes ago, Katalinic said:

I'd love the conspiracy theories to be true, not least because the lashings of humble pie from the media, ex-pro's and twats like Corden would be delicious. Sadly, the simplest and most obvious explanations are usually the right ones.

I would usually agree, if the "simple and most obvious" explanation wasn't just as bizarre than some of the conspiracy theories... 

Edited 10 hours ago by trousers

[saint michael]

I wonder what the independent committee will be given as guidance for this. 
 

there is a lot of mention of the consequences of possible outcomes to the EFL by their findings. So if they are truly independent and have no interest in the effect of their decision on football and the EFL they could go nuclear. I’m assuming the people who sit will have experience of sport. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

39 minutes ago, LegalEagle said:

The club has a duty of care to the player, they will have breached that duty,

The breached that when they put Baz in nets & got Will Still managing them. Nearly ruined entire careers. 

[The very right reverend]

Who was the person who took the photograph of the "spy"?

What camera was that taken with?

Are there any other photos?

[Whitey Grandad]

1 minute ago, The very right reverend said:

Who was the person who took the photograph of the "spy"?

What camera was that taken with?

Are there any other photos?

And why is his face half hidden? Was there a flaw in the Mission Impossible style latex mask?

All questions and no answers. 

[trousers]

18 minutes ago, The very right reverend said:

Who was the person who took the photograph of the "spy"?

What camera was that taken with?

Are there any other photos?

In the original Daily Mail (yes, I know...) report, we're led to believe that the Middlesbrough staff who caught him insisted that he delete the footage off his phone, which seems a somewhat bizarre request... Surely Middlesbrough would want to preserve all evidence, not destroy it...? 

Again, just part of the "something's not quite adding up here" puzzle...

Edited 10 hours ago by trousers

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

59 minutes ago, LegalEagle said:

Not implausible at all and if it is anywhere near the truth young Salt will spill the beans. Salt is the only one who knows fully what went on here and I’m assuming he has given a statement to the EFL. That could cut two ways of course……..

I think you are right. What Salt says to the panel will determine our fate - that and if we do it every week.

[egg]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

Agree, but wouldn't the punishment in that circumstances be significantly less than if we had willingly sent him up there with instructions to spy on a training session knowing that it would be in breach of the rules?

Let's indulge the conspiracy theory and assume he went because he's an idiot and his mate told him it'd be a good idea. If he's a saints man, and observed training, it's a breach - I read the rule as a strict liability offence, but others with a legal mind may take a different view. 

We then look at what either happened with the information, or his intention. Sure, he may have deleted it, but it can't be unseen, and it could have been passed on and used. If that information found it's way to us, or the evidence is that it was to be passed to us, that he went of his own accord and/or by enticement takes away a wider club led breach, but it's still a significant breach. 

The issue here is that none of us know the facts or evidence. The tribunal will be adversarial cum inquisitorial, meaning it'll referee a scrap between us and the EFL, but it'll also delve into the facts and evidence to get to the root of the issue. 

I'll say no more on the subject pending the decision - we're all going around in circles but with all sorts of diversions, and I don't want to cross swords with people who I'm on the same side as. 

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

The issue here is that none of us know the facts or evidence.

Indeed...

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

11 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

Am I living in some kind of weird parallel universe? 

Reading the last couple of pages, I seem to be. Fucking hell,some of the excuses are ridiculous, we’ve got as many, if not more chumps than Boro. Fucking hell, the bloke was going for a pint and just popped down to the training ground, it was all a cunning plan by Middlesbrough, it was a double agent. Dear God, the simplest explanation is the correct one 99% of the time. We sent someone to spy on them, (I don’t know why, probably to see if their star man featured in their shape drills). Looks like we sent a bit of a half wit, and the said half wit got caught. At least Bielsa had the balls to say what he’d done, how many times he did it, and what he hoped to gain from it. I prey to god that some of our legal team aren’t posters on here, because we’re fucked if they are….Wake up and smell the coffee. 

[Paul_B]

I'm hoping the only reason this is taking so long is that the panel are still deciding how many leagues to relegate Boro for being such cunts. The Riverside should be locked up and left to rot. They can play their national league games at Rockliffe Park. At least they might still get a few spectators, even if it is just dog walkers or "Saints analysts".

[Patrick Bateman]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

And why is his face half hidden? Was there a flaw in the Mission Impossible style latex mask?

All questions and no answers. 

It's obviously made up, I mean they did well with the silly hair that all the kids seem to have covering their forehead, but they got the jeans wrong, therefore chosen by someone older with no fashion sense. I suspect therefore that means the person is from the North East. 

[trousers]

1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Reading the last couple of pages, I seem to be. Fucking hell,some of the excuses are ridiculous, we’ve got as many, if not more chumps than Boro. Fucking hell, the bloke was going for a pint and just popped down to the training ground, it was all a cunning plan by Middlesbrough, it was a double agent. Dear God, the simplest explanation is the correct one 99% of the time. We sent someone to spy on them, (I don’t know why, probably to see if their star man featured in their shape drills). Looks like we sent a bit of a half wit, and the said half wit got caught. At least Bielsa had the balls to say what he’d done, how many times he did it, and what he hoped to gain from it. I prey to god that some of our legal team aren’t posters on here, because we’re fucked if they are….Wake up and smell the coffee. 

If we were indeed stupid enough to send someone up there, in the knowledge that we were wilfully breaking the rules, with the possibility of being thrown out of the tournament, with relatively little to gain for such a big risk, then I hope they throw the book at us big time. If we were that thick then we deserve all we get. 

[sadoldgit]

15 minutes ago, The very right reverend said:

Who was the person who took the photograph of the "spy"?

What camera was that taken with?

Are there any other photos?

A still frame from the CCTV footage?

[trousers]

6 minutes ago, Paul_B said:

I'm hoping the only reason this is taking so long is that the panel are still deciding how many leagues to relegate Boro for being such cunts. The Riverside should be locked up and left to rot. They can play their national league games at Rockliffe Park. At least they might still get a few spectators, even if it is just dog walkers or "Saints analysts".

If it's as clear cut as @Lord Duckhunter says it is, I'm surprised it's taking them more than a couple of hours to conclude the bleedin' obvious...

Edited 10 hours ago by trousers

[Turkish]

27 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

I know this "whistleblower set a trap" notion is conspiracy theory territory, and that kind of thinking inevitably attracts the wrath of the forum thought police but, to me, the alternative reality - that we willing sent a junior analyst to stand in plain sight to video a training session knowing that it was breaking the 72 hour rule and knowing that it could lead to us being thrown out of the competition - seems even more bizarre than some of the 'conspiracy theories' to me.... Are we really stupid and naive enough to have done that...?

If it is a simple case of us knowingly breaking the rules, at Tonda's level or above, then we deserve to be chucked out of the competition. 

All I'll say is that the emergence of a whistleblower that just happened to work for both clubs in recent times seems a tad convenient (from Middlesbrough's perspective) to me... 

exactly it’s not a conspiracy theory it’s another suggestion of what might have happened. There are a few things that don’t quite stack up for me. It could be with just blatantly broken the rules but it all seems so badly planned a young kid on a phone in a public area rather than some grand plan hatched by senior mangement 

 

 

 

[Fabrice29]

15 minutes ago, trousers said:

In the original Daily Mail (yes, I know...) report, we're led to believe that the Middlesbrough staff who caught him insisted that he delete the footage off his phone, which seems a somewhat bizarre request... Surely Middlesbrough would want to preserve all evidence, not destroy it...? 

Again, just part of the "something's not adding up here" puzzle...

Again, for the umpteenth time, it doesn’t matter what’s on the phone.

[sfc4prem]

2 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

Again, for the umpteenth time, it doesn’t matter what’s on the phone.

All that matters is that he was spying within the 72 hour embargo

[The very right reverend]

5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

A still frame from the CCTV footage?

I doubt it, the clarity is far too good, cctv systems run live obviously so the stills aren't photos aren't that good, or I've never seen them that good I should say, that looks like a high quality photo.

[trousers]

6 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

Again, for the umpteenth time, it doesn’t matter what’s on the phone.

Fair enough

[Sheaf Saint]

8 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

A still frame from the CCTV footage?

Looks to me like it was taken from around head height. CCTV cameras would normally be mounted higher than that for better coverage.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

The more I think about this the more the only option for the EFL is to throw us out. Any sanction imposed on us other than this will not have any value to the wronged club Middlesbrough.

What is appalling is that the EFL created a rule that did not explain the punishment if that rule is broken. We would then have known that we were going to be thrown out. 

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, Golactico said:

I dont  think we'll get thrown out, but if we did - imagine you are a Saints player who sweated blood to overturn our poor start and get us to the play-off final. You then find that purely down to your employer's negligence, your opportunity for significantly improving your personal wealth is taken away. Does said player have a legal case against the club for loss of earnings? Many players will have pay increases written into their contracts in the event of promotion to the Prem - I'd imagine that a lawyer could construct a good argument for breach of contract. 

Players cheat all of the time to gain advantage in games. Ayling nobbled Scienza. Should Leo sue him if we get thrown out of the final?  If, as had been said, everyone’s at it, then the players will accept that it is part of the game and we are the fortunate ones who have been caught on this occasion (assuming we are guilty as charged).

[PJ]

1 hour ago, LegalEagle said:

Negligence (and breach of contract) would be the route to go as a player. The club has a duty of care to the player, they will have breached that duty, the breach caused the loss (and it was foreseeable) and they have suffered a loss as a result. Certainly potential for a claim.

I've got no legal expertise whatsoever, but I think that might only be credible if we were thrown out after beating Hull. If we're thrown out before the final, then there is only the possibility, and not the certainty, that the club has prevented the players from the pay rises etc. 

[trousers]

3 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

The more I think about this the more the only option for the EFL is to throw us out.

Yep, that's what I'm leaning towards at the moment, but only if the nutjob 'conspiracy theories' are wide of the mark!

Edited 9 hours ago by trousers

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Looks to me like it was taken from around head height. CCTV cameras would normally be mounted higher than that for better coverage.

Perhaps “Gibbo” was too tight to pay for normal sized polls so mounted the cameras on broom handles instead?

😉

[sadoldgit]

8 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

The more I think about this the more the only option for the EFL is to throw us out. Any sanction imposed on us other than this will not have any value to the wronged club Middlesbrough.

What is appalling is that the EFL created a rule that did not explain the punishment if that rule is broken. We would then have known that we were going to be thrown out. 

Fortunately it is not the only option they have and it would set a worrying precedent given the possible ramifications.

The only thing that would have real value to Middlesbrough is them replacing us in the final and that would be ridiculous given that they lost over two matches. 

Edited 9 hours ago by sadoldgit
Typo

[Roger]

Listening to the journalists on Sunday supplement they all think we should get kicked out not looking good now. 

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

Fortunately it is not the only option they have and it would set a worrying precedent given the possible ramifications.

The only thing that would have real value to Middlesbrough is them replacing us in the final and that would be ridiculous given that they lost over two matches. 

How then should the FA right the wrong done to Boro? 

[saintant]

18 minutes ago, Turkish said:

exactly it’s not a conspiracy theory it’s another suggestion of what might have happened. There are a few things that don’t quite stack up for me. It could be with just blatantly broken the rules but it all seems so badly planned a young kid on a phone in a public area rather than some grand plan hatched by senior mangement 

 

 

 

Also, I think it's relevant to remember that Tonda has continually maintained that he is desperate to have a say on this. I don't know the guy personally but he doesn't strike me as someone who would say this if the info he wants to make public isn't significant. He would more likely just say he can't comment. 

[trousers]

As @Lord Duckhunter says, if it really is a simple case of us sending someone up to spy, in the knowledge we were breaking the rules, can we guess why Parsons came out with the following in his statement: 

"We understand the discussion and speculation that has followed over recent days, but we also believe it is important that the full context is established before conclusions are drawn."

If it was as clear cut a breach as people are saying it must be, then there's no "context" to establish, is there? 

To me, "establishing context" implies it isn't as straightforward as sending someone up there to break the rules, but I guess it might just be a case of: "well, he would say that, wouldn't he?"...?

Edited 9 hours ago by trousers