The Spygate Saga

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

4 hours ago, Whitey Grandad said:

The  "punishment" was undefined.  Until Gibson defined it for the EFL.

It kind of is still undefined still. Although there is a precedent now.

But the EFL needs to codify all sorts of misdemeanours so that there is no ambiguity or doubt left as to what punishment happens in situations x / y and z.

Edited yesterday at 20:21 by JohnnyShearer2.0

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 hours 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? 

And definitely not Huw Edwards or anyone who does similar things, as @sadoldgit specifically pointed those out as not being a crime of the century.

[EssEffCee]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

You mentioned cup competitions. You were not specific.

I didn't think I needed to be when we were specifically discussing the EFL and your assertion they'd dug a hole for themselves. I thought it was pretty obvious I was discussing sanctions the EFL would implement in their competitions.

Why would I dispute a point about the EFL by talking about a competition they don't run?

[EssEffCee]

2 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

It doesn’t matter if the training is tactical or not. The rule is about observing training within 72 hours. They brought the rule in because of what Bielsa did and had to be seen to be doing something.

I know it doesn't. My point is Arsenal publicising a single training session doesn't mean they'd be happy for the world to see all of their training sessions.

Yes they brought it in after Biesla as EFL clubs thought it was a big enough issue to have its own. If they didn't it wouldn't have come in.

[pingpong]

35 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

I know it doesn't. My point is Arsenal publicising a single training session doesn't mean they'd be happy for the world to see all of their training sessions.

Yes they brought it in after Biesla as EFL clubs thought it was a big enough issue to have its own. If they didn't it wouldn't have come in.

Well then why not make it a rule that teams cant scout at all in person.  Being able to scout 73 hours ahead of a game creates an artificial window, just for EFL clubs.

The info we are accused of getting - who is training - is available in that arsenal video.

[danjosaint]

4 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Well then why not make it a rule that teams cant scout at all in person.  Being able to scout 73 hours ahead of a game creates an artificial window, just for EFL clubs.

The info we are accused of getting - who is training - is available in that arsenal video.

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, danjosaint said:

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

There is not in the lower leagues. Most of the Championship is in huge debt also.

[The Kraken]

3 minutes ago, danjosaint said:

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

As said, the EFL look after all clubs in the league so they have to make rules that work for all of those that can’t completely secure their premises.

Plus, what do you about away teams and them practising a day or so before a game? One of the games we were found out in was Ipswich, a home game for us, Ipswich trained at Eastleigh. Do the EFL enforce that on National League clubs too? Unworkable.

[The Kraken]

it also kind of ignores the quite obvious factor. If there is a harsh rule in place that punishes watching games within 72 hours, it kind of alleviates the need to put up massive fencing everywhere. Clubs should be savvy enough to not do it.

[EssEffCee]

21 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Well then why not make it a rule that teams cant scout at all in person.  Being able to scout 73 hours ahead of a game creates an artificial window, just for EFL clubs.

The info we are accused of getting - who is training - is available in that arsenal video.

Well a majority of EFL clubs were clearly happy with the 72 hour window when it came in.

Edited yesterday at 18:30 by EssEffCee

[EssEffCee]

14 minutes ago, danjosaint said:

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

Who's paying for it for the likes of Crawley Town and Gillingham?

[bugenhagen]

25 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Well then why not make it a rule that teams cant scout at all in person.  Being able to scout 73 hours ahead of a game creates an artificial window, just for EFL clubs.

The info we are accused of getting - who is training - is available in that arsenal video.

The difference is that they know it is being watched/available. If they had anything to hide, or something special to drill - they wouldn't have streamed it, or they would have done that another day.

In my mind, Arsenal streaming the last training has nothing to do with spygate, and any comparison is meaningless.

[saintant]

5 hours 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.

 

This does indeed show how little if anything can be gleaned and Salt was not watching on a screen he was at a distance using a phone camera. It's a joke and to put Boro through in place of us for that is ludicrous and an embarrassment to the EFL.

[Football Special]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

There is not in the lower leagues. Most of the Championship is in huge debt also.

Just put up some fences over 6ft or have restricted access. If a member of the public can see you training than you can't expect much privacy 

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, Football Special said:

Just put up some fences over 6ft or have restricted access. If a member of the public can see you training than you can't expect much privacy 

They don't have to, the EFL have rules in place, which cost nothing

[VectisSaint]

3 hours ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

It kind of is still undefined still. Although there is a precedent now.

But the EFL needs to codified all sorts od misdemeanours so that there is no ambiguity or doubt left as to what punishment happens in situations x / y and z.

They don't need to codify punishments for all misdemeanours. They have a catchall that says they can apply sanctions that they see fit. There were already precedents, not just Swindon in the EFL Trophy (excluded and a small fine for something that was completely inconsequential) but also Swindon in 1990? when they were excluded from the playoffs after they had won the thing, New York they were also demoted 2 divisions (one on appeal), yes their crime was very serious but did not really warrant the Draconian punishment they received, and the appeal seemed to support that notion. 

This whole idea that the EFL should spell out for the hard of thinking what sanction can be applied for each transgression is utter nonsense. Not forgetting we faced two charges (forget the Ipswich and Oxford charges, they were dealt with differently, i.e. points deductions because they were League games), so how would that work if each charge had a different sanction. There is only one realistic course of action in a knockout scenario, expulsion. Whether that costs a team £2k or £200m is irrelevant. If a match had not been played they could have awarded a walkover, but the outcome is the same.

[JohnnyShearer2.0]

Not sure it is utter nonsense. Would it not make sense to frame transgressions and then codify punishments so that its clear to all of what the consequences are.

 

[aintforever]

4 hours ago, danjosaint said:

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

But even if clubs make their facilities more private there are ways of spying so it’s right that there is a rule.

[StrangelyBrown]

13 hours ago, Football Special said:

Just put up some fences over 6ft or have restricted access. If a member of the public can see you training than you can't expect much privacy 

Completely agree. What is to stop a Saints fan from watching and recording the Middlesbrough training sessions next season before our game and putting the recording in the public domain so the club can't help but see it.... absolutely nothing.

Build a fence and this becomes a moot point. We're not exactly talking mega bucks to put up a fence. 

[obelisk]

1 hour ago, StrangelyBrown said:

Completely agree. What is to stop a Saints fan from watching and recording the Middlesbrough training sessions next season before our game and putting the recording in the public domain so the club can't help but see it.... absolutely nothing.

Build a fence and this becomes a moot point. We're not exactly talking mega bucks to put up a fence. 

Maybe someone should think of organising a fan coach outing to the fine facilities available at Rockcliffe Park just prior to Saints fixture at Middlesbrough next season. The scenery there is surely worth recording and Youtube viewers would no doubt be delighted to join in. 😎

[Football Special]

16 minutes ago, obelisk said:

Maybe someone should think of organising a fan coach outing to the fine facilities available at Rockcliffe Park just prior to Saints fixture at Middlesbrough next season. The scenery there is surely worth recording and Youtube viewers would no doubt be delighted to join in. 😎

Not a bad idea for a youngster out there , make a YouTube channel and livestream championship clubs training sessions where they can be viewed easily 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, Football Special said:

Not a bad idea for a youngster out there , make a YouTube channel and livestream championship clubs training sessions where they can be viewed easily 

I think I read something in the EFL rules about observing training 'directly or indirectly'

[obelisk]

3 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I think I read something in the EFL rules about observing training 'directly or indirectly'

The way the EFL's going with its various silly rules and random draconian sanctions for those deemed to be guilty of some transgression it'll soon be possible to win a league title without winning any games of football at all. 😉

[gurru991]

18 hours ago, danjosaint said:

Just bin off the 72hr rule like everywhere else and put in in the clubs court to make there facilities more private, theres enough money in the game to do so 

Unfortunately there is not enough money in the game at Championship & lower levels. The majority of Championship clubs are losing money. It's cheaper & easier to make a rule that eliminates the need for a lower league clubs to spend millions of pounds on fencing.

 

[Weston Super Saint]

11 minutes ago, gurru991 said:

Unfortunately there is not enough money in the game at Championship & lower levels. The majority of Championship clubs are losing money. It's cheaper & easier to make a rule that eliminates the need for a lower league clubs to spend millions of pounds on fencing.

 

Even easier to scrap the rule altogether then no money needs to be spent on fences, lawyers, tribunals, appeals etc etc...

[saintant]

Not sure I get the Boro fans hate on us. We beat them fair and square over two legs but, because of our own stupidity, our place in the final was taken away and given to them. High time they started showing a bit of gratitude even though they did screw up their second chance.

[Midfield_General]

22 hours 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? 

Do you know who else didn’t get kicked out? Leeds.

And do you know which University Shipman went to? Leeds. 

Can’t believe some people can’t see the connection here. Gibson’s fingerprints are all over it.

Open your eyes and see the conspiracy, Sheeple. Makes you think. 

 

[gurru991]

27 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Even easier to scrap the rule altogether then no money needs to be spent on fences, lawyers, tribunals, appeals etc etc...

No need for lawyers, tribunals or appeals if clubs follow the rules but if clubs want to vote to remove the rule that's fine too.

The money to be made by gaining promotion is so massive that clubs will always be looking an edge.

[EssEffCee]

37 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Even easier to scrap the rule altogether then no money needs to be spent on fences, lawyers, tribunals, appeals etc etc...

If clubs want rid then it'll go, if they don't it'll stay.

Not sure why this incident will changed the mind of clubs who wanted it in the first place though.

[sadoldgit]

20 hours ago, bugenhagen said:

The difference is that they know it is being watched/available. If they had anything to hide, or something special to drill - they wouldn't have streamed it, or they would have done that another day.

In my mind, Arsenal streaming the last training has nothing to do with spygate, and any comparison is meaningless.

No it has nothing to do with Spygate, other than demonstrating that a spying mission the day before a match might be just as pointless as one more than 72 hours before a match and therefore no big deal.

[sadoldgit]

21 hours ago, EssEffCee said:

I know it doesn't. My point is Arsenal publicising a single training session doesn't mean they'd be happy for the world to see all of their training sessions.

Yes they brought it in after Biesla as EFL clubs thought it was a big enough issue to have its own. If they didn't it wouldn't have come in.

And yet if they did it would not be against the EPL rules.

[saintant]

45 minutes ago, gurru991 said:

No need for lawyers, tribunals or appeals if clubs follow the rules but if clubs want to vote to remove the rule that's fine too.

The money to be made by gaining promotion is so massive that clubs will always be looking an edge.

Much less of an edge than ignoring the ffp rules and winning promotion I'd say 🙂 Far less cheating involved too and we received a far harsher penalty than anything dished out to Leicester.

[sadoldgit]

There has been a lot of talk about how EPL training grounds are hidden behind high walls etc., but there is absolutely nothing that says you can’t fly a drone or even an hot air balloon  over the training grounds.

[gurru991]

1 hour ago, saintant said:

Much less of an edge than ignoring the ffp rules and winning promotion I'd say 🙂 Far less cheating involved too and we received a far harsher penalty than anything dished out to Leicester.

 I like the response that "Leicester cheated more than us"... a bit childish !!!

   Both clubs cheated & both got caught . The obvious lesson to be learned is to be better at cheating & not get caught .

We ended up with a Six point deduction & relegation to League One. 

PS .. this is my 3rd post today so no response upcoming ....

[Midfield_General]

16 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

There has been a lot of talk about how EPL training grounds are hidden behind high walls etc., but there is absolutely nothing that says you can’t fly a drone or even an hot air balloon  over the training grounds.

Not really acting with utmost good faith towards other clubs at all times if you’re hovering a hot air balloon over their training ground is it.

The rules, the point of the rules and the principles behind them are so basic and obvious to understand. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

2 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Not really acting with utmost good faith towards other clubs at all times if you’re hovering a hot air balloon over their training ground is it.

The rules, the point of the rules and the principles behind them are so basic and obvious to understand. 

And there you have the reason @sadoldgit struggles with it.

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

There has been a lot of talk about how EPL training grounds are hidden behind high walls etc., but there is absolutely nothing that says you can’t fly a drone or even an hot air balloon  over the training grounds.

The rules don't mention getting interns to wear eight foot platform boots and to walk around the perimeter fence like a demented Noddy Holder, using the mirrored top hat as a makeshift satellite communication hub back to basecamp.

The rules don't mention sitting interns on one end of a giant catapult and then dropping a grand piano at the other end to slingshot them straight into the opposition's pre-match morning briefing.

The rules don't mention getting an short, large headed baby faced intern to put on in a romper suit in order to switch places with the manager's child, using tantrum and wailing to persuade the unsuspecting mother to pay an impromptu visit to the training ground "to see Daddy", then once inside the childs buggy is used as a trojan horse to wheel directly into the analysts room.

The rules don't mention paying off a rogue tradesman to plaster an intern directly into the cavity wall of the opposition manager's office. The intern is in his safe position of being entirely embedded into the wall except for two eyes and breathing hole. They are able to listen in on all manner of critical confidential conversations using eye brow morse code to report back to his home club.

The rules don't mention drafting an intern undercover into the catering division of the opposing club, and using a modified digitalised saveloy as a covert telescope, a 3G banana as a transmitting radio and a satellite controlled cream horn as a listening device. 

 

[Weston Super Saint]

1 minute ago, CB Fry said:

The rules don't mention getting interns to wear eight foot platform boots and to walk around the perimeter fence like a demented Noddy Holder, using the mirrored top hat as a makeshift satellite communication hub back to basecamp.

The rules don't mention sitting interns on one end of a giant catapult and then dropping a grand piano at the other end to slingshot them straight into the opposition's pre-match morning briefing.

The rules don't mention getting an short, large headed baby faced intern to put on in a romper suit in order to switch places with the manager's child, using tantrum and wailing to persuade the unsuspecting mother to pay an impromptu visit to the training ground "to see Daddy", then once inside the childs buggy is used as a trojan horse to wheel directly into the analysts room.

The rules don't mention paying off a rogue tradesman to plaster an intern directly into the cavity wall of the opposition manager's office. The intern is in his safe position of being entirely embedded into the wall except for two eyes and breathing hole. They are able to listen in on all manner of critical confidential conversations using eye brow morse code to report back to his home club.

The rules don't mention drafting an intern undercover into the catering division of the opposing club, and using a modified digitalised saveloy as a covert telescope, a 3G banana as a transmitting radio and a satellite controlled cream horn as a listening device. 

 

FFS. It's just lazy rule making from the EFL.

[LiberalCommunist]

We'd be easy winners of the most extreme punishment ever were it not for Senegal in this years AFCON. But now if you google that, they have re-written the severity of what happened. I mean AI just says Morocco won 3-0, with little explanation on some articles. Utterly appalling.

Never underestimate the corruption in football. It is rotten to the core. Could well see some outrage in the coming weeks with the World Cup. In fact, kinda hoping it goes tits up. Perhaps Iran can out stay their welcome and make life uncomfortable for the war mongers. The longer they stay, the more it highlights the utter shambles the USA has created. 

Icing on the cake, Man City charges withdrawn discreetly with insufficient evidence of wrong doing. Its coming. 

[qwertyell]

32 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

The rules don't mention getting interns to wear eight foot platform boots and to walk around the perimeter fence like a demented Noddy Holder, using the mirrored top hat as a makeshift satellite communication hub back to basecamp.

The rules don't mention sitting interns on one end of a giant catapult and then dropping a grand piano at the other end to slingshot them straight into the opposition's pre-match morning briefing.

The rules don't mention getting an short, large headed baby faced intern to put on in a romper suit in order to switch places with the manager's child, using tantrum and wailing to persuade the unsuspecting mother to pay an impromptu visit to the training ground "to see Daddy", then once inside the childs buggy is used as a trojan horse to wheel directly into the analysts room.

The rules don't mention paying off a rogue tradesman to plaster an intern directly into the cavity wall of the opposition manager's office. The intern is in his safe position of being entirely embedded into the wall except for two eyes and breathing hole. They are able to listen in on all manner of critical confidential conversations using eye brow morse code to report back to his home club.

The rules don't mention drafting an intern undercover into the catering division of the opposing club, and using a modified digitalised saveloy as a covert telescope, a 3G banana as a transmitting radio and a satellite controlled cream horn as a listening device. 

 

Someone at Saints is writing this down. Wrongly. 

[WinglessWonder]

7 hours ago, Football Special said:

Not a bad idea for a youngster out there , make a YouTube channel and livestream championship clubs training sessions where they can be viewed easily 

Out of interest I had a look on drone assist and there are no flight restrictions above the training ground, golf club, hotel etc. Just need to confirm whether the path is publically-accessible 🤔

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

 other than demonstrating that a spying mission the day before a match might be just as pointless as one more than 72 hours before a match and therefore no big deal.

FFS.. …Bielsa gave a press conference explaining what he did, why he did it and the advantages he hoped he’d get from it. 
 

One of you is spouting pony is it, you,  a radish who posts on a forum, or Bielsa a well respected manager of many years who was acknowledged as an innovative manger in his time. I know which one I think is probably right, what about you, do you think know more than Bielsa…..

 

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

And yet if they did it would not be against the EPL rules.

It would be, as it was when Leeds did it.
 

Do you really believe Arsenal could fly a drone over their premier league opponents training sessions, stream it back to Areta, and not face any sanction. Dear God. Think man…..

[sadoldgit]

3 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

Not really acting with utmost good faith towards other clubs at all times if you’re hovering a hot air balloon over their training ground is it.

The rules, the point of the rules and the principles behind them are so basic and obvious to understand. 

So obvious that the EFL have them yet nobody else does? The principle is that you don’t spy yet it is common place on the continent and the EFL say it is okay so long as you don’t do it within 72 hours of a match?

The game is the same the world over. Where is the consistency? There is none.

The point I and others are trying to make is that it is a stupid rule and that to throw a club out of a competition for breaching a stupid rule is completely disproportionate to the offence. 

I know a few posters struggle to understand it but it really isn’t that hard. I am sure even Noddy Holder in his mirrored hat could understand it.
 

[EssEffCee]

1 minute ago, sadoldgit said:

So obvious that the EFL have them yet nobody else does? The principle is that you don’t spy yet it is common place on the continent and the EFL say it is okay so long as you don’t do it within 72 hours of a match?

The game is the same the world over. Where is the consistency? There is none.

The point I and others are trying to make is that it is a stupid rule and that to throw a club out of a competition for breaching a stupid rule is completely disproportionate to the offence. 

I know a few posters struggle to understand it but it really isn’t that hard. I am sure even Noddy Holder in his mirrored hat could understand it.
 

The problem is the EFL clearly don't think it's a stupid rule and neither do the clubs who wanted it in the first place.

If it's a widespread belief that it's a stupid rule then it'll get binned this Summer...

[VectisSaint]

5 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

The problem is the EFL clearly don't think it's a stupid rule and neither do the clubs who wanted it in the first place.

If it's a widespread belief that it's a stupid rule then it'll get binned this Summer...

Whether or not it's a stupid rule, we didn't just get charged with the 72 hour spying rule, we were also charged with (paraphrasing) disrespecting opponents, the same rule as exists in the EPL. Even without the 72 hour rule we could/would have been charged if Boro felt we were taking the piss (which we were). We would probably have been thrown out just the same. We can go on and on about silly rules, unfair sanctions till the cows come home. In the end we were incredibly stupid, perhaps through naivity, but it was our fault. End of.

[Weston Super Saint]

38 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

So obvious that the EFL have them yet nobody else does? The principle is that you don’t spy yet it is common place on the continent and the EFL say it is okay so long as you don’t do it within 72 hours of a match?

The game is the same the world over. Where is the consistency? There is none.

The point I and others are trying to make is that it is a stupid rule and that to throw a club out of a competition for breaching a stupid rule is completely disproportionate to the offence. 

I know a few posters struggle to understand it but it really isn’t that hard. I am sure even Noddy Holder in his mirrored hat could understand it.
 

Driving faster than 70 on a motorway is a stupid rule which can lead some people to lose their livelihood. 

Stupid rules, whilst being subjective, are still rules. We agreed to abide by the rules, stupid or not, so you don't really have an argument.

We agreed to the rule, then we broke it. We've been punished. Get over it.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

4 hours ago, Midfield_General said:

Not really acting with utmost good faith towards other clubs at all times if you’re hovering a hot air balloon over their training ground is it.

The rules, the point of the rules and the principles behind them are so basic and obvious to understand. 

 

4 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

And there you have the reason @sadoldgit struggles with it.

 

56 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It would be, as it was when Leeds did it.
 

Do you really believe Arsenal could fly a drone over their premier league opponents training sessions, stream it back to Areta, and not face any sanction. Dear God. Think man…..

And there you have the reason @sadoldgit struggles with it.

 

[St. Ciervo]

2 hours ago, WinglessWonder said:

Out of interest I had a look on drone assist and there are no flight restrictions above the training ground, golf club, hotel etc. Just need to confirm whether the path is publically-accessible 🤔

Would be fun to start doing this before all games.. but especially vs. Boro. Good luck training with 10 drones flying above you  ..|..