#Spygate

[Maggie May]

Sorry to sound like a broken record but my internal evaluation on the entire situation continues to focus on the grey areas surrounding the 72 hour ban. 

Apologies if I’ve misread but the stories surrounding Middlesbrough claiming they have evidence of Southampton spying on other clubs never seem to mention if this is outside the 72 hour period.  If “spying” is allowed, and we’ve done it but adhered to the rules, then why the giant outcry? 

All speculation and my own views but this must be more widespread across the football world.  The fact there isn’t a blanket ban on spying and has caveats instead will absolutely see clubs try and push it as far as they can. I bet Boro do it in some capacity.  This is why, in my opinion, we’re not seeing other clubs come out against us. It’s too easy to become implicated.  I fail to see the act of “spying” on other teams to gain an advantage is some genius, novel idea thought up by our analysts. It has to have been learned.

[Sunnyside Saint]

7 hours ago, Ken Tone said:

I suspect the Boro response to you would be to say that they should be awarded the first game as a 3-0 win, thereby winning the tie overall as a 4-2 aggregate..... resulting in us being effectively chucked out. And that would set a 3-0 precedent for future ordinary league games. 

However that would also be a potential legal minefield because if we'd known before the second leg that we were 3-0 down, we'd have played differently in the second, taking risks and going hell for leather to score 4. Awarding it as a 3-0 win *after* the second leg disadvantages us unreasonaby. So we could use that in an appeal.

All round the EFL have really cocked things up by setting a rule without setting a standard punishment for breaking it.

They could order the second leg be replayed

[LegalEagle]

5 minutes ago, Maggie May said:

Sorry to sound like a broken record but my internal evaluation on the entire situation continues to focus on the grey areas surrounding the 72 hour ban. 

Apologies if I’ve misread but the stories surrounding Middlesbrough claiming they have evidence of Southampton spying on other clubs never seem to mention if this is outside the 72 hour period.  If “spying” is allowed, and we’ve done it but adhered to the rules, then why the giant outcry? 

All speculation and my own views but this must be more widespread across the football world.  The fact there isn’t a blanket ban on spying and has caveats instead will absolutely see clubs try and push it as far as they can. I bet Boro do it in some capacity.  This is why, in my opinion, we’re not seeing other clubs come out against us. It’s too easy to become implicated.  I fail to see the act of “spying” on other teams to gain an advantage is some genius, novel idea thought up by our analysts. It has to have been learned.

Unless other clubs have time stamped CCTV footage showing spying in the 72 hour window then my bet is that anything from any other club is conjecture and hearsay. Not worried about this. Other clubs might have suspicions but that will count for nothing here.

[64saint]

1 hour ago, Nolan said:

there currently is not any public evidence that Tonda was involved here.

Unless there is why on earth should he have a touchline ban?

Problem with that is,even if Tonda didn't know the kid had gone up there when presented with all the information that the kid had filmed surley it would have crossed his mind ....how did we get hold of this !!!

[Dr. Kucho]

Lots of “ifs, maybes and could be’s” doing the round. But after reading several articles about this spygate on various websites and listening to some podcasts I know at least one fact. 

The Daily Mail is a newspaper made by cunts for cunts. 

Have a lovely evening everyone and let’s hope this is resolved quickly.

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

1 minute ago, Sunnyside Saint said:

They could order the second leg be replayed

There's barely time for the final to be rearranged, let alone the semi as well.

[St Chalet]

4 hours ago, Cumbria Saint said:

My prediction?

 

Saints expelled - playoff different from league.

Middlesborough lost fair and square (no advantage gained by Saints) so they are out too.

Hull promoted without playing the final.

 

From EFL perspective bad deeds are penalised and their reputation for "fairness" not besmirched.

They lose the revenue from their big match but think that is worth it.

 

Saints and Middlesborough make legal challenges but by the time it's sorted Hull are playing in the Premier league. We both get some monetary compensation.

 

Of all the possible things that will never happen. Please give me odds on this. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

6 minutes ago, Maggie May said:

Sorry to sound like a broken record but my internal evaluation on the entire situation continues to focus on the grey areas surrounding the 72 hour ban. 

Apologies if I’ve misread but the stories surrounding Middlesbrough claiming they have evidence of Southampton spying on other clubs never seem to mention if this is outside the 72 hour period.  If “spying” is allowed, and we’ve done it but adhered to the rules, then why the giant outcry? 

 

Why do people keep pushing this pony. 

 

Teams work on their shape and formation for the upcoming games in the last 3 days before the game. There’s absolutely no point in “spying” on a team outside of this window as it won’t help you. FFS, 72 hours isn’t some figure plucked out of thin air. Basically it is against the rules to watch a team prepare for a fixture you’re involved in. There is no “grey area”. 

[Appy]

5 minutes ago, Sunnyside Saint said:

They could order the second leg be replayed

Not sure where, the pitch has already been dug up at St Mary’s I believe, with concerts coming up, 

[Maggie May]

1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Why do people keep pushing this pony. 

 

Teams work on their shape and formation for the upcoming games in the last 3 days before the game. There’s absolutely no point in “spying” on a team outside of this window as it won’t help you. FFS, 72 hours isn’t some figure plucked out of thin air. Basically it is against the rules to watch a team prepare for a fixture you’re involved in. There is no “grey area”. 

Sorry Steve.

[WinglessWonder]

36 minutes ago, tdmickey3 said:

Or finally realised they were acting like silly school kids who have had their ball confiscated 

I'd love to know what percentage of the Boro fans are spoilt only-children who aren't used to being told no 🤔

[LegalEagle]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Kucho said:

Lots of “ifs, maybes and could be’s” doing the round. But after reading several articles about this spygate on various websites and listening to some podcasts I know at least one fact. 

The Daily Mail is a newspaper made by cunts for cunts. 

Have a lovely evening everyone and let’s hope this is resolved quickly.

Daily Mail always was filth. A rag trying to make out they were something more. If Middlesbrough had more than that one photo of Salt then the Mail would have published it. There is nothing more. The longer this goes on the more likely I think that we’re looking at fine and suspended points next time we’re in the EFL.

[saintant]

4 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Why do people keep pushing this pony. 

 

Teams work on their shape and formation for the upcoming games in the last 3 days before the game. There’s absolutely no point in “spying” on a team outside of this window as it won’t help you. FFS, 72 hours isn’t some figure plucked out of thin air. Basically it is against the rules to watch a team prepare for a fixture you’re involved in. There is no “grey area”. 

Not what the post contests if you read it properly so hardly pony. The point being made is that when reading that we've done this to other clubs there is never any mention if said spying was outside the 72 hour period.

[badgerx16]

12 minutes ago, 64saint said:

Problem with that is,even if Tonda didn't know the kid had gone up there when presented with all the information that the kid had filmed surley it would have crossed his mind ....how did we get hold of this !!!

How do we know there was any ? It was stated that he was asked to delete everything he had, which might have been 2 minutes of trying to get the focus correct whilst aiming his phone at an empty training pitch a hundred yards away.

[RedArmy]

16 minutes ago, Appy said:

Not sure where, the pitch has already been dug up at St Mary’s I believe, with concerts coming up, 

Yep. St Mary’s is now a building site. 

[Badger]

52 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

Bit of a slow news day today obviously boros propaganda dept is off for the weekend.

Or they’ve been planning something, and a new attack for maximum attention.

Eurovision tonight. Extra security drafted into Vienna just in case the usual performances by assorted oddities and trannies are interrupted by on stage protests. 
 

T-shirts and other banners “bollocks to Palestine - justice4boro”. 

[Badger]

8 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

How do we know there was any ? It was stated that he was asked to delete everything he had, which might have been 2 minutes of trying to get the focus correct whilst aiming his phone at an empty training pitch a hundred yards away.

I thought he deleted it once he was rumbled, ie getting rid of the evidence. 

[St Chalet]

1 hour ago, Barton Saint said:

This thread has now reached proportions of the infamous Rallboy dismantling of that shithole down the M27

Dear Bucket Rattlers!

[badgerx16]

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

I thought he deleted it once he was rumbled, ie getting rid of the evidence. 

"Sky Sports News understand Boro staff spotted a man taking pictures and videos of training and approached him. He was asked to delete them, provide his identity and his intentions for being there, at which point he is said to have fled to a nearby indoor part of the training complex."

 

The last part about the "indoor part of the training complex" is obviously bollox, as it is a publicly accessible Hotel, but perhaps the first part is factual.

Edited 50 minutes ago by badgerx16

[saintant]

Just now, Badger said:

I thought he deleted it once he was rumbled, ie getting rid of the evidence. 

Nobody knows for sure because of the many contradicting stories Boro have concocted. 

[Nolan]

21 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Why do people keep pushing this pony. 

 

Teams work on their shape and formation for the upcoming games in the last 3 days before the game. There’s absolutely no point in “spying” on a team outside of this window as it won’t help you. FFS, 72 hours isn’t some figure plucked out of thin air. Basically it is against the rules to watch a team prepare for a fixture you’re involved in. There is no “grey area”. 

If you have a 3pm kick off Saturday.

You're allowed to observe at 2.30pm on a Wednesday, but not at 3.00 pm on a Wednesday.

Saying 72hours is a badly written rule.

It would be better to say for the three calendar days before a match. 

[Badger]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

"Sky Sports News understand Boro staff spotted a man taking pictures and videos of training and approached him. He was asked to delete them, provide his identity and his intentions for being there, at which point he is said to have fled to a nearby indoor part of the training complex."

Okay, fair point. 

[Saint NL]

Hearts fans want the result of todays game scrapped because of a pitch invasion when 3-1 down in the 95th minute.

Those school sports day participation trophies have a lot to answer for 

 

 

[Pamplemousse]

11 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Hearts fans want the result of todays game scrapped because of a pitch invasion when 3-1 down in the 95th minute.

Those school sports day participation trophies have a lot to answer for 

 

 

They have a point tbh.

[Turkish]

21 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Hearts fans want the result of todays game scrapped because of a pitch invasion when 3-1 down in the 95th minute.

Those school sports day participation trophies have a lot to answer for 

 

 

Because of the pitch invasion is ridiculous but they have been on the wrong end of some very strange decisions of late. The penalty for me today could have gone either way, yes it hit his hand but it was from 5 yards away and the guy was sliding trying to block the cross, where are you meant to put your hand? The one midweek was farcical never a penalty in a millions years and that’s what won them the title. Apparently the ref who gave it has given 4 penalties to Celtic this season 3 of them in injury time. 

[Sir Ralph]

A consideration for the EFL is that if they ban us, clubs are going to start investigating rival clubs over lots of discrepancies to try to bring them down. Once you set a harsh precedent you can create yourself a problem.