The Spygate Saga - 6 Week ban suspended for Eckert

[Badger]

13 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

There is no way that having an ex-Middlesbrough player and another lawyer who'd advised Middlesbrough in the past on an EFL disciplinary panel that decided to replace Southampton with Middlesbrough in the play-off final could be seen as impartial and neither was shortening the appeal period to ensure it terminated before the play-off final took place, which did not give enough time for Southampton's legal team to investigate the Middlesbrough connections of the panel members.  There was also a lot of false and misleading information fed to the media, which prejudiced the case.

Perhaps now is the time to turn the spotlight on Middlesbrough's role in all of this, including, for example, who came up with the suggestion of "bullying" and  "use of high level surveillance equipment" and leaked it to the media?

This is one reason you really have to question our response to it, and legal advice we brought in. Why didn’t we create over the possible fact members of the panel might be conflicted before the event ? No good bleating about it afterwards and trying to recover lost ground.

Badly handled it seems. 

13 minutes ago, obelisk said:

I cannot help but compare the FA panel to that cobbled together by the EFL.

The FA panel took their time to consider the evidence and ignored calls from the accusers for them to have the accused executed.

The EFL panel had the appearance of not being independent, it was heavily influenced by the accusers and declined to consider the defence or even mitigation. It was rushed and then quickly produced the draconian measures that its employers demanded. 

I wouldn't be surprised if Dragan wasn't considering taking some sort of revenge on the EFL clowns.

Seems we were badly advised and tactically naive in our approach. 

Parsons has taken much of the blame for a muppetry approach, but shame Dragan didn’t send in the big guns from the outset. 

(IMHO as someone used to say) 

[Patrick Bateman]

25 minutes ago, Paul Chuckle said:

These 2 are absolutely fuming about the outcome. No idea who they are but they are not happy.

There are so many of these types all over the internet - no idea who they are, plenty of clickbait around, pft, who cares.

The only podcast I bother with is our own Total Saints which is decent.

[Fabrice29]

28 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

With hindsight, it would be interesting to know what would have happened if we HADN'T agreed to the accelerated timeline of events. We were surely within our rights to say no, we want to follow the proper process which would have meant the playoff final went ahead with us in. What would the EFL had done then if we'd been promoted? Sent Hull up anyway? I don't think so.

Think Eckert would receive a harsher punishment in that instance. It's pretty clear from the report that the EFL punishment and Eckerts contrition are the two main factors for reduction and suspension. 

Think the idea that todays ruling is a bad reflection the EFL ruling is a wrong one in that sense. FA had two things the EFL didn't, a previous punishment and the time to interview Eckert a few months on whilst he's reflected, shown remorse and worked on his understanding.

[Oldandtired]

13 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

Think Eckert would receive a harsher punishment in that instance. It's pretty clear from the report that the EFL punishment and Eckerts contrition are the two main factors for reduction and suspension. 

Think the idea that todays ruling is a bad reflection the EFL ruling is a wrong one in that sense. FA had two things the EFL didn't, a previous punishment and the time to interview Eckert a few months on whilst he's reflected, shown remorse and worked on his understanding.

That's certainly one way of looking at it, however to my mind there seems to be no way of squaring the EFL Middlesborough connection circle... how could Eckert have got a totally impartial hearing at the EFL with that in place?

[Fabrice29]

8 minutes ago, Oldandtired said:

That's certainly one way of looking at it, however to my mind there seems to be no way of squaring the EFL Middlesborough connection circle... how could Eckert have got a totally impartial hearing at the EFL with that in place?

It's not just a way of looking at it, it's what the FA have said. 

Not sure there is any evidence of bias in the EFL stuff is there? Other than fans convinced that because it went Boro's way and not ours then it must be a conspiracy theory. As has been pointed out on here before, us being bang to rights is probably more of a factor that someone having a connection to Boro. The report today hasn't exonerated us or Eckert remember, it's confirmed pretty much all relevant detail required, we broke the rules and a sporting sanction is appropriate.

Edited 8 hours ago by Fabrice29

[Willo of Whiteley]

49 minutes ago, Paul Chuckle said:

These 2 are absolutely fuming about the outcome. No idea who they are but they are not happy.

Two of the biggest bellends in terms of podcasting.

I remember when we beat Leeds at Wembley, they were absolutely devastated. 😂

[Fabrice29]

1 minute ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Two of the biggest bellends in terms of podcasting.

I remember when we beat Leeds at Wembley, they were absolutely devastated. 😂

You know one of those two didn't do the podcast at that time, right?

[Willo of Whiteley]

Just now, Fabrice29 said:

You know one of those two didn't do the podcast at that time, right?

The original two.

Wasnt aware they’d split, if they have.

Havent listened since that day. Whoever the two muppets were were on the verge of tears 😂

[trousers]

😂

[Fabrice29]

MLT such a wally isn’t he 😂

[trousers]

😂

[Patrick Bateman]

15 minutes ago, trousers said:

😂

Joe M ... another tedious twat. Get in the bin with the ball bag from the Sun.

[Britannia]

Jobi McAnuff is a miserable sod isn’t he.

[saintant]

Just now, Britannia said:

Jobi McAnuff is a miserable sod isn’t he.

You'd think, having been in the game, he'd be fully aware this stuff was going on and has always gone on at most other clubs. It's common knowledge within the game so time he stopped denying it. 

[Britannia]

34 minutes ago, saintant said:

You'd think, having been in the game, he'd be fully aware this stuff was going on and has always gone on at most other clubs. It's common knowledge within the game so time he stopped denying it. 

I've just listened to his interview from this evening.

Adam mentions that it's common knowledge this happens.  Jobi refutes it.  He refuses to acknowledge that it happens because it doesn't fit within his ideology.  He prevaricates a bit but doesn't acknowledge it.  Grandstanding doesn't make the problem go away. 

I strongly disagree with cheating, dishonesty and poor sportsmanship and wish it didn't happen.

Edited 7 hours ago by Britannia

[Cuddles]

On 04/10/2026 at 12:38, Cuddles said:

Why's everyone being so negative? It will be fine. Probably a suspended ban or something.

Fuck me. I even got the fine bit right 😉

[HKsaint]

The decisions may encourage managers to take risks at the expense of their clubs. If no one discovers, he enjoys the benefits. If discovered, the club will be severely punished, and he may get sacked, suspended sentence, and then he can find another job. 
I believe that Tonda is ignorant about the rule, but how about the club? Should they be familiar with all the rules and have some measures to avoid breaching the rules by any staff? I am afraid there could be some internal management problems within the club.

[Paul Chuckle]

6 hours ago, trousers said:

😂

Just looked him up, lovely impartial comment from a Skate. All these comments like 'most hated club' are what people like him wish. I've met fans of so many other clubs when I've travelled the UK with work and they might have a bit of a joke about Spygate but none of them 'hate us' or even actually care, most think we've actually been treated badly. 

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

The panel made a sensible decision. I'd take the suspended ban. Hopefully now the he and the squad can concentrate on the football, starting Sunday.

Not surprised that the FA wanted to ban him outright, what a joke.

[AlexLaw76]

Football Journalism and its quest to be seen as “proper” is fucking so contrived.

it is like they demand Tonda like to do a national press conference and plead for forgiveness , whilst being pelted with rotten fruit, in order to demonstrate the desired levels of “contrition” 

Edited 1 hour ago by AlexLaw76

[Harry_SFC]

6 hours ago, Britannia said:

I've just listened to his interview from this evening.

Adam mentions that it's common knowledge this happens.  Jobi refutes it.  He refuses to acknowledge that it happens because it doesn't fit within his ideology.  He prevaricates a bit but doesn't acknowledge it.  Grandstanding doesn't make the problem go away. 

I strongly disagree with cheating, dishonesty and poor sportsmanship and wish it didn't happen.

Tony Pulis recently came out and said he did it, we know Bielsa did it. It's common over Europe and probably the rest of the world.

The main rule is not in place if you observe another team outside of 72 hours before the game.

It's not as big a deal as he's making out at all. 

[Tamesaint]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Football Journalism and its quest to be seen as “proper” is fucking so contrived.

it is like they demand Tonda like to do a national press conference and plead for Dungeness, whilst being pelted with rotten fruit, in order to demonstrate the desired levels of “contrition” 

Is it just Dungeness he has to appeal for or would another part of Kent suffice ??

[egg]

7 hours ago, Oldandtired said:

That's certainly one way of looking at it, however to my mind there seems to be no way of squaring the EFL Middlesborough connection circle... how could Eckert have got a totally impartial hearing at the EFL with that in place?

Winnie played for them once on loan. They lost 4 nil, he was dropped from the squad, and sent back to his club. I'm not sure that's a history which will make him want to help Boro. That said, he'd have been impartial -  not a great career move to be anything but. 

The Bannerjee connection is a wee bit more relevant. She advised them once and I think she should have declared that and recused herself. That said, I think she only advised them once, which suggests to me that it wasn't a commercial relationship which went terribly well. 

In short, sure there were brief historical connections and common sense says they shouldn't have been there to avoid this kind of discussion. To be fair to the club, they opposed their involvement. 

That all said, our biggest issue wasn't the panel composition, but our representation and approach. We didn't co-operate, we ponied up the kid to give evidence (he didn't show up at the FA hearing, fortunately) which didn't help, we used non sports specialist counsel (who was binned for the appeal - we got it very right this time) and most significantly, we approached it seeking a fine when a sporting sanction was bloody obvious (this time we were realistic). The only sporting sanction on the table was expulsion from the play offs, so I'm not sure what choice any panel had - it was literally that or nothing that would have hurt us. 

[Willo of Whiteley]

Just listened to the Football Daily from last night (Adam Blackmore and Jodie McAnuff).

I actually thought AB articulated Saints case very well. Also brought up points from within the documents about how Tonda has behaved during proceedings and how he didn’t intentionally send people out to spy (certainly on Ipswich) but was offered the chance to view some footage.

Naturally this doesn’t fit in with the narrative that some people feel, like JM, and no doubt there will be others out there that feel the same.

I admire the BBC impartiality to bring a Middlesbrough fan on for the last three minutes - who isn’t bitter towards Saints, apparently - but also thinks Tonda has got away with it.

AB came off very well and the other two just came off as sounding “it’s not fair”.

The only thing I’d love AB to have done is say “What more punishment do you want? How is it of benefit to anyone? What do you gain out of it personally seeing someone else fail for a mistake? How would you feel if it was your own manager?”

 

[TheAlehouseBrawlers]

7 hours ago, trousers said:

😂

"irrelevent club, in Timbuktoo, to most hated club, on portsea island and teeside (OK, if everyone ignores the previous charity robbers and taxpayer cheats...)"

[obelisk]

Mr Macanuff maybe should consider his position as a so-called Independent non-Exec Director on the FA Board if he wants to publicly pontificate on matters about which he knows nothing or even to knowingly tell blatant untruths.

[bpsaint]

8 hours ago, trousers said:

😂

Fat headed skate cunt. He’d know all about class wouldn’t he…

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/portsmouth-steep-new-low-pocketing-3359282.amp

[hypochondriac]

8 hours ago, Fabrice29 said:

It's not just a way of looking at it, it's what the FA have said. 

Not sure there is any evidence of bias in the EFL stuff is there? Other than fans convinced that because it went Boro's way and not ours then it must be a conspiracy theory. As has been pointed out on here before, us being bang to rights is probably more of a factor that someone having a connection to Boro. The report today hasn't exonerated us or Eckert remember, it's confirmed pretty much all relevant detail required, we broke the rules and a sporting sanction is appropriate.

The EFL said that there was basically no mitigation because Eckert was unconvincing and they didn't believe that he didn't know what he was doing was wrong. The FA commission by contrast did believe all of that, said that there wasn't systemic spying and that Eckert was an exceptional witness. That's quite a contrast and in my opinion the commission with the 1,000 page evidence pack from the EFL and months to come to a decision is probably more likely to be correct.