#Spygate

[coalman]

Just now, St Chalet said:

It would be just like us to get to the final and fuck it up.

Assuming that Hull are going to be pushovers would be foolish. They've beaten us this season and are really good at hitting teams on the break which is our kryptonite. On top of that they've ignored the noise and been completely focused on the final whereas we've been caught up in the media shit storm. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, saintant said:

I guess they balance out Deeney, Huckerby and Austin 🙂

Maybe submit that to the panel as evidence. There's no way we can be found guilty if these absolute fuckwits are saying we are. 

[Whitey Grandad]

I've come across the reviews of the golf club in question:

 

[Toussaint]

43 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

So if we look at some of the ITK posters on here I think we can make a reasonable assumption about where we are.

1) someone has clearly spied on Middlesbrough from Southampton and broken the rule. I think we can also assume that this isn't the first time this has happened based o na few posts from here and presumably a statement from an ex employee. Not good. 

2) It is likely that some of the coaching team will have been aware of this and very unlikely Imo that nobody other than the analyst knew about it. Also not good. 

The key then becomes in this hearing can Middlesbrough's evidence prove with 100% certainty that not only has this happened before but that what has happened is systemic. Do they have evidence in the form of instructions from higher ups or tonda or spors perhaps instructing someone. Do they have footage from other clubs of this occurring. Imo this is unlikely. Will the club statement say that this was a problem with the analysts and that the other coaching staff were not aware? Or that we did send people previously but that it wasn't in the 72 hour window? Personally I think Middlesbrough are going to have a tough time to convince a panel that we did this repeatedly with the approval of the coaching staff and that we instructed the analyst to break the rules by spying in the period when it isn't allowed. 

In summary I think on the balance of probabilities we did spy on other clubs - or at least some within the analyst part of the club did, I think it's possible that some more senior people within the coaching setup knew it was going on but I think both of these things are going to be rather difficult for Middlesbrough to prove definitively. A statement from an ex employee isn't going to cut it unless they have some sort of smoking gun communication. 

I suspect if we are at it so is everyone else, so this could be a too much of a "circular firing squad" to grow legs.

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

They will be able to prove that the offence occurred. Will the balance of probabilities test apply to the aggravating factor or if being systemic without a smoking gun? Assuming we sack the analysts involved and deny that other members of the coaching staff had prior knowledge and Middleborough do not have proof of that beyond the statement of an ex analyst, I wonder if they would still go for it and look to boot us out. Unlikely in my view. 

Whatever facts they're being asked to determine (I assume just the one incident re Boro, but we don't know), they'll likely look at any evidence and then have to apply the simple test of whether, on balance, the allegation(s) is/are made out.

My understanding is that EFL tribunals are mostly adversarial (so refereeing a scrap and making a decision as per court) but with an inquisitorial function to get the information needed to get to the right decision. 

Given the potential ramifications of this, I think we'll have to toe a very fine line between fight and contrition, but if anyone on our side has breached the rules, it'll be necessary to demonstrate that we've addressed that. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Toussaint said:

I suspect if we are at it so is everyone else, so this could be a too much of a "circular firing squad" to grow legs.

Yes but not sure how relevant that is here. It's not like it really mitigate any charge 

[Whitey Grandad]

18 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

They are aggravating factors. Proper evidence that suggests this is systemic and a campaign of cheating to gain an advantage is obviously more serious and deserves a harsher penalty. 

Such evidence would have to prove that it was within the 72 hours limit.

[Toussaint]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Yes but not sure how relevant that is here. It's not like it really mitigate any charge 

From the getting other clubs on board perspective, the "class action" angle they seem to be pushing.

[Tanlee]

Alex Crook is the most obvious irritating journalist about, his so called scoops would be common knowledge to your local trolley  collector at tesco! 

[trousers]

25 minutes ago, Pamplemousse said:

This is from Hull Supporters' Trust:

The Hull City Official Supporters' Club also issued a statement in which they expressed concern at how the play-off final could be moved at short notice.

"This is a situation in which we have had no influence but in which we are, both as a football club and supporters, being penalised," they said.

"Any decision to move the date of the final will result in many of our supporters not only losing out financially, but then facing the prospect of being unable to attend the re-arranged fixture.

"Given that this is a situation which has largely resulted from the EFL's own error in failing to publish the sanctions for a breach of the rule regarding 'spying' on opposition teams, we feel this is manifestly unfair."

 

That last paragraph is interesting about the EFL not publishing sanctions for a breach of the rule. I wonder if that will be taken into account by the commission?

 

Once again, note the more adult / rational approach being taken by Hull City and their fans. They're right, the root cause of the chaos here is the EFL's inadequate rule book, not the (no doubt many) clubs that bend or break the rules...

Edited 1 hour ago by trousers

[Dman]

4 minutes ago, St Chalet said:

It would be just like us to get to the final and fuck it up.

Honestly, at this point I don't even care anymore. 

Just getting there is 2 fingers up to Boro and a win in my book. I've that much anger towards their bitterness I am willing to be that petty. 

[23rdSaint]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Such evidence would have to prove that it was within the 72 hours limit.

For reg 127 (observing another club's training). Think we would still be in breach of reg 3.4 (acting in good faith)

[Whitey Grandad]

15 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Exclusion is possible. It is an option that is on the table. That's been very well documented. What do you think all the hoo haa is about? 

It is however very very very unlikely. For exactly the reasons you say, plus the logistical knock-on. Which is why it won't happen. 

It's a technical possibility because any sanctions are unspecified but on what grounds? Preventing a club from taking part in a match is unprecedented. A retrospective points reduction is also open to challenge. 

[coalman]

Just now, Toussaint said:

From the getting other clubs on board perspective, the "class action" angle they seem to be pushing.

Unless I've missed something, I haven't seen any other club show interest in getting involved in that so far. A lot of rumours that this club or that club is supporting their case which turn out to be made up. Which indicates to me that other clubs don't see it as an issue or that it's a "there but for the grace of God go I" kind of situation.

[Whitey Grandad]

1 minute ago, 23rdSaint said:

For reg 127 (observing another club's training). Think we would still be in breach of reg 3.4 (acting in good faith)

We can safely ignore reg 3.4 since it is so wooly. Have Middlesbrough acted in the 'utmost good faith' towards us?

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, Whitey Grandad said:

We can safely ignore reg 3.4 since it is so wooly. Have Middlesbrough acted in the 'utmost good faith' towards us?

They’ll say they have but cannot control the freedom of the press 

[coalman]

Just now, Whitey Grandad said:

It's a technical possibility because any sanctions are unspecified but on what grounds? Preventing a club from taking part in a match is unprecedented. A retrospective points reduction is also open to challenge. 

If they do that then I think a lot of their previous and future judgements are going to be challenged and the EFL as a whole is going to turn into a litigation battlefield. Last thing the EFL wants is for more matches in the future to be fought in the courts rather than on the pitch. It's a veritable Pandora's Box for them whatever they decide.

One thing I would expect out of this is they're likely to put some guidance and rules in teams respecting the sanctity of the process and not trying to influence their disciplinary process in the court of public opinion in future.

[egg]

13 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Against their own independent panel that they appointed? 

That would be hilarious 

Who appointed them (we have a say) doesn't stop an appeal against verdict or penalty. If we avoid adverse findings, or get adverse findings but a penalty which the EFL feel is unduly lenient, they could theoretically appeal.

What's needed, assuming guilt, is a penalty which nobody is overjoyed with, but both sides can live with. That way, an appeal is off the table, and we can move on...no tribunal chair wants to be appealed. 

 

[23rdSaint]

1 minute ago, Whitey Grandad said:

We can safely ignore reg 3.4 since it is so wooly. Have Middlesbrough acted in the 'utmost good faith' towards us?

Oh, I agree. But they haven't been charged. And Leeds' multiple instances of spying were under 3.4. Not sure if within 72 hours mind, but if it wasn't, would that be the precedent? 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Stud mark of doom]

Let’s hope we haven’t been along to watch our Saturday opponents play any preceding Wednesday evening fixtures.

That would fall within the 72 hour cut off for perfectly fine/repugnance. 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Stud mark of doom

[LeBizzier69]

6 minutes ago, Dman said:

Honestly, at this point I don't even care anymore. 

Just getting there is 2 fingers up to Boro and a win in my book. I've that much anger towards their bitterness I am willing to be that petty. 

Actually, even with a 6 point deduction next season if we lose to Hull....with 3 to 8 now competing for play-offs i'd definitely back us to be in the mix again next season, depending on the squad etc.

[James G]

3 minutes ago, coalman said:

Unless I've missed something, I haven't seen any other club show interest in getting involved in that so far. A lot of rumours that this club or that club is supporting their case which turn out to be made up. Which indicates to me that other clubs don't see it as an issue or that it's a "there but for the grace of God go I" kind of situation.

I can't see other clubs getting involved 

Even when Leeds did it, and they spied on everyone and trespassed on private property. I'm sure it was against Derby they were caught, and Lampard, their manager at the time, said that he wouldn't call it cheating, but it does cross a line. Two days later, he laughed about it and said, it is what it is, we move on

Just a totally different reaction back then to something worse.

It's Boro's reaction to this which has shaped opinions and I don't think they're going to be happy with the outcome

I just can't see us getting thrown out because, if nothing else, the world cup starts very soon afterwards.

[Ed Rooney]

On 14/05/2026 at 03:18, SaintJackoInHurworth said:

I haven't been on SaintsWeb for ages, but felt it might be time for me to weigh in due to my particular insight into this story...

You see, as my username will tell you, I live in the village of Hurworth-on-Tees... which is significant because the Rockliffe training ground is not in Middlesbrough, but is actually in Hurworth-on-Tees. I live right opposite the Rockliffe grounds including Hotel, Golf Club, training ground, cricket club and woods.

I can tell you that there is a lot of rubbish being shared about the story and some of the pictures. Here is my take:

1. The Middlesbrough FC First Team training pitch is on the opposite side of the MFC training centre from the Rockliffe Hotel and golf club.

2. The picture of a boy stood behind a tree filming does not, as far as I can see, tally with anywhere around the first team training pitch.

3. The other picture of a tree beside a gate with training pitches in the background DOES appear to be taken from the gate near to the Rockliffe Golf clubhouse.

4. However, the pitches in the background of that picture are supplementary training pitches and, as stated above, that is not the First Team Training pitch. Those pitches are mainly used by the academy sides and women's sides for their training. However, it is possible that some training could have taken place there, but I'm not convinced any spy would have been able to see significant tactical input in that area.

5. If I were to spy on MFC's first team training, instead of trying to get to the first team training pitch from the golf course, I would walk along the public footpath around the perimeter of Rockliffe and slip through the woods where it is possible to spy on the training pitch. From there you could also stay out of sight of CCTV cameras.

6. I have downloaded an aerial view of Rockliffe using Google and based on my local knowledge I have edited the image to show:

• Where a lot of the rumours about the spying seem to be suggesting the spy was caught
• Where the first team training pitch is
• Where the other training and exhibition pitches are
• The footpaths around the training ground.
• The location of the clubhouse and training centre.
• The rough area where I think any decent spy would have positioned themselves to film training.

Here is the image:

Finally, here is a photo that I took on Friday of the gate near the golf clubhouse where the reports seem to be suggesting the spying took place (with the tree shown!):

You may also be interested with the following video that I took from the lawn of Rockliffe Hotel, which shoots over the top of the grassy roof of the clubhouse and scans around to the training centre: 

 

Thanks for the insight into the layout, sounds like if the first team were training where they usually do it would have been a spot difficult to see anything 

[Jimmy_D]

11 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

For reg 127 (observing another club's training). Think we would still be in breach of reg 3.4 (acting in good faith)

Even if spying on other clubs outside the 72 hours does fall under that, there's at least the Leeds case of spying for an entire season, which does act as precedent for that, which was a 200k fine.

[scumbag]

That golf course is a par 72 as well...there has to be some good pun opportunities missed in those current reviews. Will give it some thought.

[trousers]

10 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

For reg 127 (observing another club's training). Think we would still be in breach of reg 3.4 (acting in good faith)

Indeed, although the precident for just breaching 3.4 alone is a fine. (Not that believe we haven't breached 127 in some shape or form)

[trousers]

12 minutes ago, coalman said:

Unless I've missed something, I haven't seen any other club show interest in getting involved in that so far. A lot of rumours that this club or that club is supporting their case which turn out to be made up. Which indicates to me that other clubs don't see it as an issue or that it's a "there but for the grace of God go I" kind of situation.

Indeed... I bet a lot of clubs are keeping very quiet for this very reason... 

[trousers]

7 minutes ago, Stud mark of doom said:

Let’s hope we haven’t been along to watch our Saturday opponents play any preceding Wednesday evening fixtures.

That would fall within the 72 hour cut off for perfectly fine/repugnance. 

 

Nice try.... The regulation specifically refers to 'training sessions' though...  (Yes, I know you were probably being tongue-in-cheek )

[trousers]

9 minutes ago, LeBizzier69 said:

Actually, even with a 6 point deduction next season if we lose to Hull....with 3 to 8 now competing for play-offs i'd definitely back us to be in the mix again next season, depending on the squad etc.

Indeed... It's nowhere near our self inflicted points penalties at the start of  this season... 🙂

[Gary R76]

2 hours 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. 

If we have done this to other clubs surely the EFL need to raise separate charges not tag onto the ongoing one , if case will require different evidence .

[warsash saint]

One thing I can't get my head around in this whole sorry saga, is that people actually listen to Talksport!!

[LGTL]

Saints will be all too aware that this game cannot be played past 30th May. That date is the absolute final date it can be played. In the (now extremely unlikely) event that were expelled from the competition, I want us to ensure any appeals process takes us past this date. Then watch the carnage unfold. 

Whatever happens, there’s zero chance Middlesbrough play in that final. Zero. Nada. That chance has long gone. 

[Bald Headed Jesus]

500k fine and 3 point deduction. Boro get their “sporting sanction”, bigger fine than Leeds now it is an official rule, less than the 6 points Leicester got for more egregious behaviour.

[Mt.B-Real]

I honestly think the EFL need to get a grip of this asap. We need to play nicely. I don't think there's much proof of anything happening but at the end of the day this is deeply unfair on Hull so if they are going to make an example of us they need to get on with it and we can all move on with our lives

[Tom57]

36 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Mandatory release for players to their respective countries is the 25th May. 
 

How they expect to postpone the game beyond that date is interesting to say the least. 

The champion's league final is on 30/5 and obviously Arsenal and PSG will hold on to their players until then. Could the EFL argue under the same premise or is it a case of UEFA just having enough power to tell FIFA to wait for a few more days?

[Bald Headed Jesus]

1 minute ago, Bald Headed Jesus said:

500k fine and 3 point deduction. Boro get their “sporting sanction”, bigger fine than Leeds now it is an official rule, less than the 6 points Leicester got for more egregious behaviour.

Other element would be any suspension deemed necessary for manager / management

[Leighsterrr]

42 minutes ago, St Chalet said:

It would be just like us to get to the final and fuck it up.

I've already had Coventry mates taunt me over this is what'll happen!

Edited 39 minutes ago by Leighsterrr
Typo

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, Bald Headed Jesus said:

Other element would be any suspension deemed necessary for manager / management

Is this an opinion or something more 

 

if an opinion, I agree. 

[SNSUN]

7 minutes ago, warsash saint said:

One thing I can't get my head around in this whole sorry saga, is that people actually listen to Talksport!!

I have it on in the background at home because the wife put the parental lock on our Sky TV to block Babestation. If I can't see tits I'll just have to listen to them instead.

[Bald Headed Jesus]

Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

Is this an opinion or something more 

 

if an opinion, I agree. 

Just an opinion! Not saying they necessarily deserve it, depends what comes out in the hearing

[CheshireSaint]

3 minutes ago, Bald Headed Jesus said:

Other element would be any suspension deemed necessary for manager / management

Would any points deduction only be applicable to the EFL though? If we were to win the final and get promotion, could that carry over? I have my doubts. Nor could a deduction be suspended until such time as we return to the EFL which may not happen for 20 odd years (im optimistic). Would a points deduction be applicable if we lost the final (fair enough) or be time limited to say 5 years should we return to the EFL within that time period. Either way, i'd take that if that were sentence.

[Bald Headed Jesus]

1 minute ago, CheshireSaint said:

Would any points deduction only be applicable to the EFL though? If we were to win the final and get promotion, could that carry over? I have my doubts. Nor could a deduction be suspended until such time as we return to the EFL which may not happen for 20 odd years (im optimistic). Would a points deduction be applicable if we lost the final (fair enough) or be time limited to say 5 years should we return to the EFL within that time period. Either way, i'd take that if that were sentence.

Apparently EFL can recommend it to Premier League and up to them if they implement it

[aintforever]

Just now, CheshireSaint said:

Would any points deduction only be applicable to the EFL though? If we were to win the final and get promotion, could that carry over? I have my doubts. Nor could a deduction be suspended until such time as we return to the EFL which may not happen for 20 odd years (im optimistic). Would a points deduction be applicable if we lost the final (fair enough) or be time limited to say 5 years should we return to the EFL within that time period. Either way, i'd take that if that were sentence.

I would expect any points deduction to happen next season regardless of what league we are in. As I understand it, after the Leicester City episode both leagues have agreed to work closer together. It would still be at the discretion of the PL though.

[skintsaint]

1 minute ago, Bald Headed Jesus said:

Apparently EFL can recommend it to Premier League and up to them if they implement it

Be interesting if they did as there is no rule against this in the PL.

[Saint NL]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cx2138g26dqo

 

The horse has left the stable

[CSA96]

1 minute ago, skintsaint said:

Be interesting if they did as there is no rule against this in the PL.

Yes and the reciprocal agreement between PL/EFL was born out of the fact that they kept running into issues around implementing financial management penalties, rather than specific competition rules

[Micky]

4 hours 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. 

We cocked up ffs, hands up, but the punishment has to be commensurate to the crime.  An independent commission must not be lead by what a baying mob supposedly sees, they must consider only the evidence. 

[Toadhall Saint]

35 minutes ago, Stud mark of doom said:

Let’s hope we haven’t been along to watch our Saturday opponents play any preceding Wednesday evening fixtures.

That would fall within the 72 hour cut off for perfectly fine/repugnance. 

 

That is a very good point. It makes the 72 hour bit even more stupid.

[SNSUN]

3 minutes ago, Bald Headed Jesus said:

Apparently EFL can recommend it to Premier League and up to them if they implement it

I maintain that a points deduction, whatever it may be, over a 46 game season against inferior opposition in the Championship is not the same punishment as a points deduction over a 38 game season against superior opposition in the Premier League and I hope the club would appeal that. If we were deducted say 3-6 points in the Championship, we'd be able to make that back easily* over a 46 game season and still be in a position to challenge for promotion potentially. If we are deducted 3-6 points in the Premier League we'd probably be looking at certain relegation, even if we did pull off a season like Leeds or Sunderland are having.

*I say easily, and then there's Sheffield Wednesday.

[Jack]

41 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

They’ll say they have but cannot control the freedom of the press 

I’d say it could be argued and proven that they leaked a load of bullshit AND private information to the press in order to pressure the EFL and disrupt their process for dealing with this matter.