#Spygate

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

36 minutes ago, trousers said:

Love you too... mwah 😘

That's kind Trousers.

[LegalEagle]

1 hour ago, SW11_Saint said:

So good you said it twice? 

Yep - caught the Ayling stutter

[EssEffCee]

33 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

That is very interesting because that gives the EFL a get out. The EFL have to be seen to punishing us whilst ensured the wronged party, Boro receive some recompense. If we do not compensate them then that means us being expelled.

The problem for the EFL is that they allowed not just the first leg but also the second leg to be played when the spying had already been exposed. Why suspend the final because of a possible decision to expel us and not suspend at the very least the second leg? This is not in the 'spirit' of how supporters should be treated.

 

Not sure they have to ensure Boro have get some recompense at all.

They have to punish us but that doesn't mean they also have to reward Boro. Effectively it's nothing to do with them anymore.

[st john moor]

1 hour ago, Saint_clark said:

Yes, but we tried to. 

Again the EFL are taking it seriously whether we think it is or not. I'm expecting a fine in the millions and a 4 to 6 point deduction. 

I agree saint... it is like bashing your head off a wall trying to get through to some people. It is the intent. The fact that the intern is a saints employee, and was there on Boro soil within the 72 hrs observing.

 

Intent, observing, wether it be him watching, recording, streaming or stood with a pen and paper and a pigeon on his shoulder he should not have been there. It is a mess. Hopefully resolved tomorrow with a favourable outcome.

[Hussar Saint]

1 hour ago, Saint_clark said:

Agree to disagree. Like it or not, the EFL are taking this very seriously.

You’re loving this aren’t you?

fucking weirdo! 

[benjii]

8 minutes ago, st john moor said:

. The fact that the intern is a saints employee 

Is that a fact?

[Cuddles]

1 minute ago, benjii said:

Is that a fact?

He might not be any more... 😂

[Saint_clark]

11 minutes ago, Hussar Saint said:

You’re loving this aren’t you?

fucking weirdo! 

Not in the slightest, I'm sick of it. Not sure why you think that, sorry I'm not falling in line with the common view of the echo chamber.

[benjii]

2 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

He might not be any more... 😂

He might not have been 9 days ago!

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

13 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

Not sure they have to ensure Boro have get some recompense at all.

They have to punish us but that doesn't mean they also have to reward Boro. Effectively it's nothing to do with them anymore.

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

[Harry_SFC]

Just now, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

If anything it was probably the opposite. Their manager claimed he had to change their system because of it. And they battered us! (Without scoring)

[suewhistle]

1 minute ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

They have to get something out of this....

Self righteous indignation?

[Cuddles]

2 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

That's not how it works. But they might try separate legal action afterwards, which would keep this thread going for some time yet 👀

[obelisk]

I've been away having a spot of dinner. Are we starting to accept that the rumour of £5m (or thereabouts) and points is true or is that just more bullshit?

If so I still think it's way out of proportion when compared to other more serious offences.

[Appy]

6 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

They absolutely don’t, that’s not how punishments work in football. 

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

1 minute ago, Cuddles said:

That's not how it works. But they might try separate legal action afterwards, which would keep this thread going for some time yet 👀

I think it does. If you have a wronged party surely the EFL have to be seen to ensure we are punished and they have some kind of recompense. 

Hopefully we will have an announcement from the EFL saying "the panel have considered the case and although they have concluded that there was very little advantage from the breach of rules Southampton will pay Middlesbrough football club a sum of....and the final goes ahead on Saturday....

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

4 minutes ago, Appy said:

They absolutely don’t, that’s not how punishments work in football. 

The EFL will feel accountable to the Boro fans. 

[Toadhall Saint]

Anyone know if SFC have a compliance dept or a head of compliance?

[Appy]

1 minute ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

The EFL will feel accountable to the Boro fans. 

Lucky the EFL aren’t making the decisions then. 

[Toadhall Saint]

4 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think it does. If you have a wronged party surely the EFL have to be seen to ensure we are punished and they have some kind of recompense. 

Hopefully we will have an announcement from the EFL saying "the panel have considered the case and although they have concluded that there was very little advantage from the breach of rules Southampton will pay Middlesbrough football club a sum of....and the final goes ahead on Saturday....

Has that ever happened before?

Edited 1 hour ago by Toadhall Saint

[Saint NL]

8 minutes ago, obelisk said:

I've been away having a spot of dinner. Are we starting to accept that the rumour of £5m (or thereabouts) and points is true or is that just more bullshit?

If so I still think it's way out of proportion when compared to other more serious offences.

It depends.

If we go up, £5m isn't a huge fine. If we don't go up, it is. 

So in reality, we get punished twice if we don't go up, and if the cheating pays off and we get promoted then the punishment is hardly a bother.

Could there be a case for a two tier fine? One for promotion and one for not?

[johnnyboy]

Just a thought , our alleged spy was an intern , does an intern get paid ? If not then he’s not , in my mind , an employee, yes I’m clutching at straws !

[Nolan]

6 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think it does. If you have a wronged party surely the EFL have to be seen to ensure we are punished and they have some kind of recompense. 

Hopefully we will have an announcement from the EFL saying "the panel have considered the case and although they have concluded that there was very little advantage from the breach of rules Southampton will pay Middlesbrough football club a sum of....and the final goes ahead on Saturday....

wont happen, will open up a can of worms elsewhere. Would essentialy admit that Boro should have been part of the preceedings.

EFL and Saints are the two parties.

[James]

9 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think it does. If you have a wronged party surely the EFL have to be seen to ensure we are punished and they have some kind of recompense. 

Hopefully we will have an announcement from the EFL saying "the panel have considered the case and although they have concluded that there was very little advantage from the breach of rules Southampton will pay Middlesbrough football club a sum of....and the final goes ahead on Saturday....

It isn’t how it works at all. This is about the League imposing a sanction on us for (if proven) a breach of a rule. It isn’t about compensating Middlesbrough. 

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

5 minutes ago, Appy said:

Lucky the EFL aren’t making the decisions then. 

Surely the Independent Disciplinary Commission can only achieve resolution if the wronged party has some form of recompense and the party in the wrong is punished. 

[Appy]

Just now, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Surely the Independent Disciplinary Commission can only achieve resolution if the wronged party has some form of recompense and the party in the wrong is punished. 

I’m not going to keep telling you that’s not how it works, this’ll be it. 

[James]

1 minute ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Surely the Independent Disciplinary Commission can only achieve resolution if the wronged party has some form of recompense and the party in the wrong is punished. 

If that was true then every time a club breached the rules, all other league clubs would be compensated. It’s not how it works.

[Whitey Grandad]

24 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

Why?

[EssEffCee]

24 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

But they don't though. The 4 things to meet going round that the EFL have used before doesn't include it.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

5 minutes ago, Nolan said:

wont happen, will open up a can of worms elsewhere. Would essentialy admit that Boro should have been part of the preceedings.

EFL and Saints are the two parties.

Boro are the complainants. They are involved. That is why they have recruited everyone they can in the media to pretend that expelling us from the final is a fair and legitimate option. They have done a very good job  at this because what started as a grossly inflated punishment is now seen as a real possibility....

[Whitey Grandad]

16 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think it does. If you have a wronged party surely the EFL have to be seen to ensure we are punished and they have some kind of recompense. 

Hopefully we will have an announcement from the EFL saying "the panel have considered the case and although they have concluded that there was very little advantage from the breach of rules Southampton will pay Middlesbrough football club a sum of....and the final goes ahead on Saturday....

If they EFL rewards complainants then every club will be casting aspersions.

[Whitey Grandad]

6 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Surely the Independent Disciplinary Commission can only achieve resolution if the wronged party has some form of recompense and the party in the wrong is punished. 

No. Where in the rules does it say anything about resolution?

[James]

1 minute ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro are the complainants. They are involved. That is why they have recruited everyone they can in the media to pretend that expelling us from the final is a fair and legitimate option. They have done a very good job  at this because what started as a grossly inflated punishment is now seen as a real possibility....

They aren’t involved. The EFL rejected their request for them To be party to the proceedings. The reason they are using the media is precisely because they aren’t involved in the actual proceedings. They cannot appeal the decision, the EFL would need to. In order for Boro to get compensation from Saints they would need to sue us in civil court, which is what they did to Derby. 

[LegalEagle]

2 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro are the complainants. They are involved. That is why they have recruited everyone they can in the media to pretend that expelling us from the final is a fair and legitimate option. They have done a very good job  at this because what started as a grossly inflated punishment is now seen as a real possibility....

Wrong. Nothing has changed from a week ago. Just people’s perceptions.

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro are the complainants. They are involved. That is why they have recruited everyone they can in the media to pretend that expelling us from the final is a fair and legitimate option. They have done a very good job  at this because what started as a grossly inflated punishment is now seen as a real possibility....

Only if you read the rags and believe them. Their involvement ends at the complaint.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 minute ago, James said:

They aren’t involved. The EFL rejected their request for them To be party to the proceedings. The reason they are using the media is precisely because they aren’t involved in the actual proceedings. They cannot appeal the decision, the EFL would need to. In order for Boro to get compensation from Saints they would need to sue us in civil court, which is what they did to Derby. 

The same league rules that allow them to make a complaint are the same rules that say that they cannot be involved in the proceedings. 

[EssEffCee]

2 minutes ago, James said:

They aren’t involved. The EFL rejected their request for them To be party to the proceedings. The reason they are using the media is precisely because they aren’t involved in the actual proceedings. They cannot appeal the decision, the EFL would need to. In order for Boro to get compensation from Saints they would need to sue us in civil court, which is what they did to Derby. 

In fairness there's nothing stopping the panel from handing down a punishment which benefits Boro.

But they absolutely do not 'have' to.

[Matthew Le God]

8 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Surely the Independent Disciplinary Commission can only achieve resolution if the wronged party has some form of recompense and the party in the wrong is punished. 

Flynn Downes was retrospectively red carded vs Swansea. The 3 match ban did not benefit Swansea. Resolution with the wronged party was not a factor in that, nor is it in Spygate.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Just now, Whitey Grandad said:

Only if you read the rags and believe them. Their involvement ends at the complaint.

I think they have been very successful and changed the narrative from being a bit of a joke to one where it is would not be unreasonable to throw us out.

Take the smug Henry Winter who, when Bielsa was caught in 2019 and subsequently admitted that he spied regularly, seemed to imply that it was effectively part of the game. Yet when we did it, feigned outrage and seemed to indicate that we should be slung out.

[saintant]

40 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Boro were supposedly disadvantaged. They have to get something out of this....

Well that will kind of depend on how successful Gibbo and his hotshit lawyer get on when they come gunning for us for compo.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

8 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Flynn Downes was retrospectively red carded vs Swansea. The 3 match ban did not benefit Swansea. Resolution with the wronged party was not a factor in that, nor is it in Spygate.

Yes I get that but do you not think that Boro who potentially have been cheated of place in the final have to feel they have something out of any ruling?

[Appy]

1 minute ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Yes I get that but do you not think that Boro who potentially have been cheated of place in the final have to feel they have something out of any ruling?

Are your initials an alias for Steve Gibson?

[WritingOnTheWall]

18 minutes ago, James said:

If that was true then every time a club breached the rules, all other league clubs would be compensated. It’s not how it works.

Well, this what a points deduction is. Every other team in the league benefits.

But since this case happened during a knockout competition, a points deduction obviously isn't relevant. It's much more similar to the case of Swindon in the EFL trophy this year.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

11 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

In fairness there's nothing stopping the panel from handing down a punishment which benefits Boro.

But they absolutely do not 'have' to.

I think MLG makes a good point below in terms of suspensions. I still feel that so much is at stake that Boro have to feel some form of content with the ruling....

[Weston Super Saint]

2 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Yes I get that but do you not think that Boro who potentially have been cheated of place in the final have to feel they have something out of any ruling?

I'm convinced that they would absolutely love that, based on the bollocks they've released in the last week.

Doesn't matter though as the rules are written to preclude that from being a priority. 

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

1 minute ago, Appy said:

Are your initials an alias for Steve Gibson?

No but I don't blame him for going out to bat for his club and indeed all that he has done for Middlesbrough.

[Matthew Le God]

4 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

Yes I get that but do you not think that Boro who potentially have been cheated of place in the final have to feel they have something out of any ruling?

Their feelings are irrelevant. It is between Saints and the EFL and ruled on by the independent commission. There is no obligation to give Middlesbrough anything.

[Nolan]

3 minutes ago, Sergei Gotsmanov said:

I think MLG makes a good point below in terms of suspensions. I still feel that so much is at stake that Boro have to feel some form of content with the ruling....

this is Gibson we're talking about. Any compensation given would be seen as an admittance that they should have been involved and they will simply ask for more.
 

Edited 1 hour ago by Nolan

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

4 minutes ago, WritingOnTheWall said:

Well, this what a points deduction is. Every other team in the league benefits.

But since this case happened during a knockout competition, a points deduction obviously isn't relevant. It's much more similar to the case of Swindon in the EFL trophy this year.

I think that it is very different in the fact that the game had been played but in our case the EFL should have suspended the second leg if not the first leg if they wanted to sling us out.

[WritingOnTheWall]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Their feelings are irrelevant. It is between Saints and the EFL and ruled on by the independent commission. There is no obligation to give Middlesbrough anything.

You're completely right that this isn't about Middlesbrough. The top priority for the panel will be to preserve the integrity of the competition (the championship playoffs).