The Spygate Saga

[trousers]

35 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

my word. No wonder Boro fans having a look on this place think we are insane.

Unhinged. It's "unhinged" FFS. Get it right bro...

[trousers]

36 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

my word. No wonder Boro fans having a look on this place think we are insane.

 

[Saint Fan CaM]

Wouldn’t it be interesting to find out that Taylor instigated the spying initially and then used his intel when operating for Boro? Probably not true, but stranger things as they say…

[gio1saints]

16 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Sadly my friend, it's more likely than not that the FA will use this chance to go in two footed on saints (and therefore look like they are doing something to protect the game), because they won't tackle serious offenders (due to corruption or cowardice). Smaller and less connected clubs have always been easy pickings in the UK, and saints have never been that well liked by the establishment. I have been one of the most vocal for tonda to stay, but even I expect deep down for us to get bent over... And with that, I fully expect the FA to drag it out as long as possible and blow up our summer / pre season plans. Wouldn't be that  surprised if they go after spors, or even try to install an external over sight committee of our scouting/analytics departments to boot.

Blood is in the water, saints look weak and vulnerable, people will take us for all they can in any aspect of the footballing world. It's on the club to be robust and stand up to that, and so far there have been precious few signs of that happening (at least that we can publically see).

(I'm a cheerful soul aren't I 🤣🫣)

You are probably right - BUT - I seem to recall the FA are currently undertaking investigations into extensive FFP cheating.
 

By League Champions, FA Cup Winners, League Cup Winners , even Workd Club Champions. 

 

The EPL Teams under investigation have gained x higher places worth tens and ultimately hundreds of millions of pounds in extra prize money sponsorship endorsement shirt sales etc from it.
 

IF a precedent of enormous instant sanction is or has been created by this Saints verdict and the FA “ follows through two footed “ as you say on Saints then do you not think that EPL teams that finished behind / below or runners up or knocked out by the “ cheats - if it’s proven) might feel this means that the FA are going to be consistent in this get tough approach and argue that what these other clubs did was unfair, against spirit of the game, bringing its integrity into dispute etc - that it  was in fact CHEATING - and ONLY the harshest sanctions SHOULD BE IMPOSED?

 

The FA might fall into that trap if they go two footed on Saints. At present they have wiggle room. Not if they smash Saints though. Man City in Northern Premier League next season Chelsea in the Southern, big derby with Woking fc! 

[Midfield_General]

1 hour ago, obelisk said:

Proof of a minor breach of a silly rule that didn't define a punishment. We got thrown out because "Gibbo" has friends in high places at the EFL, Saints went for a daft plea bargain and the "independent" panel had a conflict of interests that resulted in a punishment far outside any precedent or reasonableness.

If you'd been following this at all then you'd know all that.

Jesus christ  🤦‍♂️

Please could you share your views on chemtrails?

Edited 4 hours ago by Midfield_General

[Saint Fan CaM]

1 minute ago, gio1saints said:

You are probably right - BUT - I seem to recall the FA are currently undertaking investigations into extensive FFP cheating.
 

By League Champions, FA Cup Winners, League Cup Winners , even Workd Club Champions. 

 

The EPL Teams under investigation have gained x higher places worth tens and ultimately hundreds of millions of pounds in extra prize money sponsorship endorsement shirt sales etc from it.
 

IF a precedent of enormous instant sanction is or has been created by this Saints verdict and the FA “ follows through two footed “ as you say on Saints then do you not think that EPL teams that finished behind / below or runners up or knocked out by the “ cheats - if it’s proven) might feel this means that the FA are going to be consistent in this get tough approach and argue that what these other clubs did was unfair, against spirit of the game, bringing its integrity into dispute etc - that it  was in fact CHEATING - and ONLY the harshest sanctions SHOULD BE IMPOSED?

 

The FA might fall into that trap if they go two footed on Saints. At present they have wiggle room. Not if they smash Saints though. Man City in Northern Premier League next season Chelsea in the Southern, big derby with Woking fc! 

I don’t think the FA have the time or money to take these clubs to the cleaners, despite the undoubted need. What I’m hoping is that if the FA go “two-footed” into Saints we are readying the very best legal representation to go nuclear on both the FA and particularly the EFL/Boro. We’ve taken a huge disproportionate punishment already - any further sanctions could have irreparable consequences for the club. I find it hard to fathom how any true Saints fan can honestly be in favour of this.

[obelisk]

1 minute ago, Midfield_General said:

Jesus christ  🤦‍♂️

He had a pretty severe punishment for something minor too. 

[CB Fry]

56 minutes ago, obelisk said:

"Gibbo" and his fans will be looking at this place and laughing at the surrendering self-immolation displayed by some. Presumably you'll be applauding the sporting chaps at 'Boro when they turn up at St Mary's next season before expecting Saints to throw the game as a measure of their ongoing guilt.

As I said, get a grip. 

What the fuck are you talking about?

[obelisk]

1 minute ago, CB Fry said:

What the fuck are you talking about?

Thought it was obvious myself but let me try an analogy.

Suppose it was the last minute in the Boro v Saints 1st leg with the scores at 0-0. A goal-bound shot comes in and a Saints defender punches it away off the line. The ref doesn't see it and the offence goes unpunished. Does that cheating have more or less obvious influence on the outcome of the game than a bloke standing by a tree less than 72 hours before a game? Would the EFL step in to reverse the result? If the head coach denies seeing what was obvious to camera evidence would the FA charge him or ban him?

Would fans be publicly beating themselves with whips and declaring that the whole team be banished from the league? Or would we all just get a grip and get on with our lives?

[CB Fry]

17 minutes ago, obelisk said:

Thought it was obvious myself but let me try an analogy.

Suppose it was the last minute in the Boro v Saints 1st leg with the scores at 0-0. A goal-bound shot comes in and a Saints defender punches it away off the line. The ref doesn't see it and the offence goes unpunished. Does that cheating have more or less obvious influence on the outcome of the game than a bloke standing by a tree less than 72 hours before a game? Would the EFL step in to reverse the result? If the head coach denies seeing what was obvious to camera evidence would the FA charge him or ban him?

Would fans be publicly beating themselves with whips and declaring that the whole team be banished from the league? Or would we all just get a grip and get on with our lives?

What the fuck are you talking about?

[obelisk]

Just now, CB Fry said:

What the fuck are you talking about?

I'm pondering on what form of alleged cheating is worth more of a punishment than another, or any punishment at all. I then consider whether Saints punishment might be a bit harsh but I'm sorry if you can't keep up. I'll gather up my sackcloth.

[Sevvy]

I came back on the bus to hedge end train station after the Hampshire hawks game last night, some drunken Skates on there giving a bit of abuse about the cheating, but we had the last laugh they were told thier train was cancelled, 😅  5 blokes all standing around wondering how they were going to get home,

Edited 2 hours ago by Sevvy

[Wade Garrett]

6 minutes ago, Sevvy said:

I came back on the bus to hedge end train station after the Hampshire hawks game last night, some drunken Skates on there giving a bit of abuse about the cheating, but we had the last laugh they were told thier train was cancelled, 😅  5 blokes all standing around wondering how they were going to get home,

Did you toe the cunts in?😉

Edited 2 hours ago by Wade Garrett

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, Midfield_General said:

Jesus christ  🤦‍♂️

Please could you share your views on chemtrails?

Do you not smell a rat?

 

 

Or have all those chemtrails ruined your sense of smell? 😉

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, obelisk said:

I'm pondering on what form of alleged cheating is worth more of a punishment than another, or any punishment at all. I then consider whether Saints punishment might be a bit harsh but I'm sorry if you can't keep up. I'll gather up my sackcloth.

I'm looking forward to the moment certain Saints fans stop acting like a bunch of whining bitches, and man the fuck up.

You'll get there x

Edited 2 hours ago by CB Fry

[sadoldgit]

3 hours ago, EssEffCee said:

Why have the EFL dug themselves a very deep hole? 

Because they have set a precedent in giving a massive sentence for a minor breach of the rules.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

Because they have set a precedent in giving a massive sentence for a minor breach of the rules.

what, being kicked out of a knock out competition for cheating?

Where is their rulebook does it state what we did is 'minor'?

[sadoldgit]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

what, being kicked out of a knock out competition for cheating?

Where is their rulebook does it state what we did is 'minor'?

A bloke standing by a tree nearly seeing something. Where in the rule book does that say it was the crime of the century?

Also you need to look up the word “systematically.” I don’t think doing something 3 times qualifies as being “systematic.”

It looks like you have swallowed Gibbo’s guff hook, line and sinker.

Edited 1 hour ago by sadoldgit

[EssEffCee]

4 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Because they have set a precedent in giving a massive sentence for a minor breach of the rules.

Which simplifies things for them and everyone else going forward. If you do it in a knockout competition you get kicked out, if a league game then 3 point deduction.

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

A bloke standing by a tree nearly seeing something. Where in the rule book does that say it was the crime of the century?

Also you need to look up the word “systematically.” I don’t think doing something 3 times qualifies as being “systematic.”

It looks like you have swallowed Gibbo’s guff hook, line and sinker.

Yeah, I have done exactly that.

There seems to be an immense amount of effort and cost that has gone into something completely and utterly 'minor'

Either way, what you (or anyone here thinks) of it being minor or not is  irrelevant. The club (eventually) admitted to cheating, on 3 occasions) and received sporting sanctions. I should imagine if it is proven we (and anyone else) cheated in the same way, they will also received sporting sanctions.

 

[sadoldgit]

1 minute ago, EssEffCee said:

Which simplifies things for them and everyone else going forward. If you do it in a knockout competition you get kicked out, if a league game then 3 point deduction.

Not if you do it in the FA Cup. The other rule broken was one of fair play which could apply in all instances of cheating and was probably the more serious given that we didn’t gain a significant advantage in all 3 matches mentioned. Stick fair play in after all future infringements and any team could be looking at expulsion.

The main point remains. The punishment did not fit the crime. Any crimes committed in future will raise the question of the possibility of expulsion.

[CB Fry]

7 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Where in the rule book does that say it was the crime of the century?

Maybe you could stop going on and on about it not being the "crime of the century" when no one anywhere has ever said, or even thought, that it is crime of the century.

No one. Ever. 

Edited 1 hour ago by CB Fry

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

Not if you do it in the FA Cup. The other rule broken was one of fair play which could apply in all instances of cheating and was probably the more serious given that we didn’t gain a significant advantage in all 3 matches mentioned. Stick fair play in after all future infringements and any team could be looking at expulsion.

The main point remains. The punishment did not fit the crime. Any crimes committed in future will raise the question of the possibility of expulsion.

The FA Cup is not an EFL competition. Come on, you know this, right?

[sadoldgit]

9 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Yeah, I have done exactly that.

There seems to be an immense amount of effort and cost that has gone into something completely and utterly 'minor'

Either way, what you (or anyone here thinks) of it being minor or not is  irrelevant. The club (eventually) admitted to cheating, on 3 occasions) and received sporting sanctions. I should imagine if it is proven we (and anyone else) cheated in the same way, they will also received sporting sanctions.

 

Yes you have, because most people see what has occurred as being a minor breach of a silly rule (remind me again how many times Leeds committed the same offence, a lot more than 3 wasn’t it?). The anger being expressed is because the punishment does not fit the crime. If you don’t understand that by now there is no helping you.

           ***
If the shoe had been on the other foot and Gibson had apologised to Parsons under the same set of circumstances, given what we now know a Parsons being a decent guy, do you honestly believe that Parsons wouldn’t have accepted the apology and leave the matter there?

As Tonda said, games are settled by what happens on the pitch. In this case, ours wasn’t.

Edited 1 hour ago by sadoldgit

[Saint Fan CaM]

3 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

Which simplifies things for them and everyone else going forward. If you do it in a knockout competition you get kicked out, if a league game then 3 point deduction.

You may be right, however not only was that differentiating punishment not clearly stated alongside the rule in the first case, but the EFL have not actually provided Saints or indeed the general public with that rationale to validate your claim. In other words, Gibson and Boro decided on the punishment PRIOR to the kangaroo court panel hearing with a media shitstorm release and hey presto that’s exactly what the bent EFL panel decided to deliver. 

AND not only were Saints kicked out of the competition but hey presto again, Boro for some weird rationale were given a bye into the final. Why? There was little justification for rewarding Boro and not the rest of the league if the process was truly independent and not biased. That outcome was not stated prior to any transgression either. The EFL including its Boro Chairman and it’s Boro biased panel members have a lot to answer for.

[warsash saint]

Every normal football fan, every normal pundit, every Saints fan EXCEPT Talksport pundits, Boro, P*mpey fans, AlexLaw76, CB Fry & Ducky know the punishment was ridiculous  !!

[sadoldgit]

10 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The FA Cup is not an EFL competition. Come on, you know this, right?

The poster said that if you do it in a knock out competition you get kicked out. The FA Cup is a knock out competition. 
If two EPL clubs play each other in the FA Cup and one “spies” on the other, do they get kicked out of the competition?

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, sadoldgit said:

The poster said that if you do it in a knock out competition you get kicked out. The FA Cup is a knock out competition. 
If two EPL clubs play each other in the FA Cup and one “spies” on the other, do they get kicked out of the competition?

in the EFL, which has been stated time and time again on this very thread.

we are talking about the EFL and their rules, not the FA, nor the premier league, not the German League, not the Champions League.

[Weston Super Saint]

19 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Yeah, I have done exactly that.

There seems to be an immense amount of effort and cost that has gone into something completely and utterly 'minor'

Either way, what you (or anyone here thinks) of it being minor or not is  irrelevant. The club (eventually) admitted to cheating, on 3 occasions) and received sporting sanctions. I should imagine if it is proven we (and anyone else) cheated in the same way, they will also received sporting sanctions.

 

No other club will receive sporting sanctions because they have CEO's who won't put their hand up and admit everything like a nun on her knees in front of the vicar.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, Weston Super Saint said:

No other club will receive sporting sanctions because they have CEO's who won't put their hand up and admit everything like a nun on her knees in front of the vicar.

And try to lie about it at the same time.

[EssEffCee]

21 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Not if you do it in the FA Cup. The other rule broken was one of fair play which could apply in all instances of cheating and was probably the more serious given that we didn’t gain a significant advantage in all 3 matches mentioned. Stick fair play in after all future infringements and any team could be looking at expulsion.

The main point remains. The punishment did not fit the crime. Any crimes committed in future will raise the question of the possibility of expulsion.

The FA Cup is nothing to do with the EFL though? We were talking about the EFL.

Edited 1 hour ago by EssEffCee

[EssEffCee]

14 minutes ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

You may be right, however not only was that differentiating punishment not clearly stated alongside the rule in the first case, but the EFL have not actually provided Saints or indeed the general public with that rationale to validate your claim. In other words, Gibson and Boro decided on the punishment PRIOR to the kangaroo court panel hearing with a media shitstorm release and hey presto that’s exactly what the bent EFL panel decided to deliver. 

AND not only were Saints kicked out of the competition but hey presto again, Boro for some weird rationale were given a bye into the final. Why? There was little justification for rewarding Boro and not the rest of the league if the process was truly independent and not biased. That outcome was not stated prior to any transgression either. The EFL including its Boro Chairman and it’s Boro biased panel members have a lot to answer for.

When clubs are kicked out of knockout competitions don't the team they beat always progress? 

Agree about the rule not coming with a punishment when written. Lots of football rules are like that unfortunately.

[AlexLaw76]

19 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

 

As Tonda said, games are settled by what happens on the pitch. In this case, ours wasn’t.

Yet, Tonda admitted to the information he authorised to obtain via methods determined to be cheating, does provide an advantage.

If it makes no difference, I am amazed he would be part of the something knowing it was unlawful to the EFL rulebook

[Cuddles]

22 minutes ago, warsash saint said:

Every normal football fan, every normal pundit, every Saints fan EXCEPT Talksport pundits, Boro, P*mpey fans, AlexLaw76, CB Fry & Ducky know the punishment was ridiculous  !!

Even some of the Talksport pundits (Merson, Jordan) think is ridiculous!

[Saint Fan CaM]

2 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

When clubs are kicked out of knockout competitions don't the team they beat always progress? 

Agree about the rule not coming with a punishment when written. Lots of football rules are like that unfortunately.

I’ve not seen any evidence that demonstrates that beaten teams always get an automatic bye into a final. Not only that but it might be argued that the semi’s were not a straight ahead knockout competition. Saints won in the second leg which was not influenced by the alleged ‘spying’, so how was that not disproportionate?

As has been repeated many times, you have to view the punishment awarded in the context of how it’s was decided - by a Boro/media influenced panel with 2/3 panel members holding a biased vote. I’m astounded more has not been made of how and why these two panel members were not disqualified from the panel. As has been said, even if they claim they were not biased, they were by implication and in law that’s enough.

[EssEffCee]

1 minute ago, Saint Fan CaM said:

I’ve not seen any evidence that demonstrates that beaten teams always get an automatic bye into a final. Not only that but it might be argued that the semi’s were not a straight ahead knockout competition. Saints won in the second leg which was not influenced by the alleged ‘spying’, so how was that not disproportionate?

As has been repeated many times, you have to view the punishment awarded in the context of how it’s was decided - by a Boro/media influenced panel with 2/3 panel members holding a biased vote. I’m astounded more has not been made of how and why these two panel members were not disqualified from the panel. As has been said, even if they claim they were not biased, they were by implication and in law that’s enough.

I'm not going to pretend I've gone and looked at every instance because I haven't and have no inclination too. My memory suggests though that it's a pretty standard way of doing things when a team is kicked out and I'm struggling to recall a situation where that hasn't happened.

Re the 2 leg stuff they really should have done is postpone the second leg to give time to deal with it, that way they would have options on sporting sanctions for the first leg which didn't affect the second, giving us the opportunity to make it up in that game.

As the bias stuff I highly doubt that the mush who played a single game for them in the 90s was biased. I agree though that you'd think they'd want to avoid even the suggestion and Saints should have challenged it, if only to delay things.

[pingpong]

It does rub it in though when you can view yesterday's arsenal training session on YouTube. Yes it's not EFL but it obviously doesn't provide much of a sporting advantage if the current premier League champions are happy to show their final training session ahead of the biggest game of their season to the entire world.

The fact that we could do it one week, against man city, and not the next  against Boro, is also a bit annoying.  The idea that it is cheating is a bit much I think, it's breaking the rules, nothing more, and with much less sporting advantage than the likes of the rules that Leicester, west brom, bournemouth, man city, Newcastle have all broken.

 

[EssEffCee]

12 minutes ago, pingpong said:

It does rub it in though when you can view yesterday's arsenal training session on YouTube. Yes it's not EFL but it obviously doesn't provide much of a sporting advantage if the current premier League champions are happy to show their final training session ahead of the biggest game of their season to the entire world.

The fact that we could do it one week, against man city, and not the next  against Boro, is also a bit annoying.  The idea that it is cheating is a bit much I think, it's breaking the rules, nothing more, and with much less sporting advantage than the likes of the rules that Leicester, west brom, bournemouth, man city, Newcastle have all broken.

 

I don't get the comparison to the Arsenal thing at all tbh. If you're doing an open session you're evidently not working on anything tactical. Otherwise why not stream every training session?

It is weird that it's not a rule elsewhere but enough EFL clubs wanted for it to be brought in so they obviously felt that was an advantage to be gained.

Edited 49 minutes ago by EssEffCee

[Kenilworthy1959]

55 minutes ago, warsash saint said:

Every normal football fan, every normal pundit, every Saints fan EXCEPT Talksport pundits, Boro, P*mpey fans, AlexLaw76, CB Fry & Ducky know the punishment was ridiculous  !!

I get to speak to a lot of fans of other clubs through work. Not one of them believes the punishment was fair. As a member of the public I could have been walking around outside Boro's training ground at any time and taking photographs yet no offence would have been committed. But the same thing done by a Saints employee results in the harshest of penalties. That is how mad it is

 

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, CB Fry said:

Maybe you could stop going on and on about it not being the "crime of the century" when no one anywhere has ever said, or even thought, that it is crime of the century.

No one. Ever. 

Yeah but if you think about it he’s right. What we’ve done is NOTHING compared to what Hitler did. Or Pollpot or even Peter Sutcliffe or Harold Shipman. Did they ever get kicked out of the play offs? 

Edited 20 minutes ago by Turkish

[RedArmy]

20 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Yeah but if you think about it he’s right. What we’ve done is NOTHING compared to what Hitler did. Or Pollpot or even Peter Sutcliffe or Harold Shipman. Did they ever get kicked out of the play offs? 

Shipman was 215 undefeated too. Scandalous.