The Spygate Saga

[Saint NL]

So who are Analyst 1 and Analyst 3? I think that will answer a lot of questions.

[James]

Just now, Saint86 said:

Yeah, very telling that they've now released the evidence and there still isn't any hard evidence of Eckert either instructing the scouting or of him bullying staff members.

Realistically there was never going to be. I think the Club are right to be aggrieved at the severity of some of the statements made by the Panel. They say they uncovered evidence of “top down conspiracy” or whatever words they used but, in reality, there is no written evidence for anything of the sort.

[Saint86]

8 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Interesting.

"What is harder to accept is that similar scrutiny does not appear to have been applied to the composition of the disciplinary panel itself, given the apparent historic and indirect connections of two panel members to Middlesbrough."

And people said that was just a weird conspiracy theory.

 

"The club is also concerned by the weight placed on assertions that junior staff were pressurised into involvement, when some of the most serious allegations appear not to have been supported by direct evidence. "

Sounds like they're building a case that the hearing wasn't completely legit imo

Reads like the club have just browsed the spygate thread on here and rehashed a few points into a statement... They haven't done that right?

[Saint86]

1 minute ago, Saint NL said:

So who are Analyst 1 and Analyst 3? I think that will answer a lot of questions.

Salt and Taylor, surely?

[Willo of Whiteley]

36 minutes ago, Dman said:

Well, this would suggest its not. 

What’s to be gained? 
you could say money but it’ll be nothing once legal fees are paid for.

Just seems a waste of time.

[SouSaint]

What a crock of shite statement from the club. 

[trousers]

5 minutes ago, hippo said:

I assume this is just a statement countering the release of the report

Yep, pretty clear to me and that this statement would have been tee'd up ages ago and timed to be released at the same time as the full EFL statement 

Edited 4 hours ago by trousers

[James]

6 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Yeah, very telling that they've now released the evidence and there still isn't any hard evidence of Eckert either instructing the scouting or of him bullying staff members.

Didn’t stop the EFL from implying it though with their statement which is disappointing. 

[CB Fry]

Weird statement to me but reads to me like Tonda is staying.

 

[Saint_clark]

The long winded legal jargon of the Oxford United section which concludes with "21. Southampton lost the fixture to Oxford 1-2" is hilarious.

[Saint NL]

5 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Weird statement to me but reads to me like Tonda is staying.

 

Certainly looks that way

[Saint NL]

Reddit not taking the news well 😂

[Window Cleaner]

16 minutes ago, The Hoff said:

https://images.gc.eflservices.co.uk/4863abd0-5dc8-11f1-9347-83110955f550.pdf

Wooh, Ekert does not come out of all that at all well.

[hypochondriac]

At this point maybe just say nothing at all, keep Tonda and go up as champion next season. Do the talking on the pitch, I reckon anything they try to say now will just be mega embarrassing.

[MB]

Sounds to me like Tonda is staying and they are a building a legal case against the EFL which ties in with the earlier link about us working with Man City’s lawyers

[MB]

All well and good but too little too late, cheers Phil

[BallBoy]

Really difficult to see where this is going. I claim no legal expertise but that is clearly a defensive legal statement to deal with any further fallout. I am going to guess that the club want keep Tonda and this is preparing the way.

I would like Tonda to stay because he is an exceptional coach but he will need to be as fireproof as possible. A tall order.

I have just been watching cup highlights to cheer myself up. Fantastic! The sadness is that what could have been one of our greatest seasons has now turned to dust because of our own  stupidity. 

[Saint_clark]

3 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

Wooh, Ekert does not come out of all that at all well.

Yeah, utterly ridiculous defence of "well the videos were poor quality so I couldn't get much benefit out of them". Fucking hell. 

 

Also, the operations manager (Spors I guess that refers to?) is bang to rights - he booked the flights and hotel for Will Salt and would absolutely be expected to know the rules.

[CSA96]

17 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Salt and Taylor, surely?

Nah, Salt is Junior Analyst Intern. The judge's notes on the hearing say:

Analysis Team which includes individuals to whom I shall refer as “Analyst 1”, “Analyst 2” “Analyst 3” and “the Junior Analyst Intern”

[The Wyvern]

2 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Yeah, utterly ridiculous defence of "well the videos were poor quality so I couldn't get much benefit out of them". Fucking hell. 

 

Also, the operations manager (Spors I guess that refers to?) is bang to rights - he booked the flights and hotel for Will Salt and would absolutely be expected to know the rules.

Don’t think Spors would be doing the hotels and flight bookings? 

[The Wyvern]

That said, I’m sure they all knew. All guilty of being bloody sloppy throughout this farce and some serious lessons now learnt.

[CSA96]

5 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Yeah, utterly ridiculous defence of "well the videos were poor quality so I couldn't get much benefit out of them". Fucking hell. 

 

Also, the operations manager (Spors I guess that refers to?) is bang to rights - he booked the flights and hotel for Will Salt and would absolutely be expected to know the rules.

The operations manager will be a logistics person within the scouting/analysis team who books hotels, flights, trains, cars for a living, not the sporting director

[obelisk]

The punishment handed down looks even more draconian than it did previously if this is all they have. Why the hell didn't Saints fight it?

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

"It reveals how he discovered Southampton had been accused of spying while he was still on a train coming back from Middlesbrough".

If the spying happened within 72hours of the game, why did he bother traveling back. Surely it would have made more sense for him to stay until after the game.

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

"It reveals how he discovered Southampton had been accused of spying while he was still on a train coming back from Middlesbrough".

If the spying happened within 72hours of the game, why did he bother traveling back. Surely it would have made more sense for him to stay until after the game.

Aye...that doesn't make any sense at all... There again, none of this sorry saga makes much sense, so it's probably true!

Edited 4 hours ago by trousers

[Osvaldorama]

Absolute cluster fuck from us. They had barely any actual evidence. Was just a media fueled stitch up. lol. 
 

Also I’m not really sure what the point of that statement is? We seem to be both accepting it and also moaning. Weird to read. 
 

Just want next seasons football to start so we can forget all about this nonsense. It’s a fucking joke 

[sockeye]

Just now, Osvaldorama said:

Just want next seasons football to start so we can forget all about this nonsense. It’s a fucking joke 

Agreed. Announce Peretz and Hackney already Spors

[saintant]

1 hour ago, obelisk said:

Only because the minor infraction of a bloke standing by a tree doing some scouting in public has been pushed into the -gate sphere for some reason. Is it really worse than the cheating that goes on during an actual match?

No, it's not nearly as bad as the cheating that goes on in every game. The EFL make themselves look fools by not attempting to clear the cheating in games while punishing us for an offence that has far less bearing on a match.

[Saint_clark]

10 minutes ago, The Wyvern said:

Don’t think Spors would be doing the hotels and flight bookings? 

Who else would that title be referring to?

[trousers]

4 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Who else would that title be referring to?

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

12 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

Wooh, Ekert does not come out of all that at all well.

Neither does Parsons. The bit about the initial response is pretty damning. Stating the CEO had made urgent enquires which included Tonda and it “remains a mystery” how these answers were given incorrectly. Remains a mystery is basically a polite way of saying “fucking lied”. It went in to add because of that there was no mitigation on the Boro offence. 
 

They say they were “unimpressed “ with some witness’ claiming they didn’t know it was illegal, specifically mentioning Tonda. Again “unimpressed “ is a polite, “they’re bullshitting”. 
 

Whilst we may want to keep Tonda, they stated that FIFA thought the Leeds punishment too lenient. That’s a big Indicator that the FA will ban him imo…

 

[Willo of Whiteley]

Just to summarise:

It’s an absolute nothing statement.

Very much the same as before.

[Window Cleaner]

1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Neither does Parsons. The bit about the initial response is pretty damning. Stating the CEO had made urgent enquires which included Tonda and it “remains a mystery” how these answers were given incorrectly. Remains a mystery is basically a polite way of saying “fucking lied”. It went in to add because of that there was no mitigation on the Boro offence. 
 

They say they were “unimpressed “ with some witness’ claiming they didn’t know it was illegal, specifically mentioning Tonda. Again “unimpressed “ is a polite, “they’re bullshitting”. 
 

Whilst we may want to keep Tonda, they stated that FIFA thought the Leeds punishment too lenient. That’s a big Indicator that the FA will ban him imo…

I am not against keeping Eckert but from that text, the guy needs to man up and stop snivelling like a small child "not my fault"until it's proven to the contrary.
 

 

[Saint86]

31 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Reddit not taking the news well 😂

The biggest surprise i get with social media, is its repeated ability to surprise me with just how thick most of the population are.

Edited 4 hours ago by Saint86

[John B]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Neither does Parsons. The bit about the initial response is pretty damning. Stating the CEO had made urgent enquires which included Tonda and it “remains a mystery” how these answers were given incorrectly. Remains a mystery is basically a polite way of saying “fucking lied”. It went in to add because of that there was no mitigation on the Boro offence. 
 

They say they were “unimpressed “ with some witness’ claiming they didn’t know it was illegal, specifically mentioning Tonda. Again “unimpressed “ is a polite, “they’re bullshitting”. 
 

Whilst we may want to keep Tonda, they stated that FIFA thought the Leeds punishment too lenient. That’s a big Indicator that the FA will ban him imo…

 

All pretty damning is it not but most on here do not seem to realise what a mess the club is currently in

People I know who support other clubs just do not understand how stupid SFC have been because the information obtained does not seem that game changing

[Saint86]

30 minutes ago, MB said:

Sounds to me like Tonda is staying and they are a building a legal case against the EFL which ties in with the earlier link about us working with Man City’s lawyers

Any legal case against the EFL is not going to start with "we accept everything, and we acknowledge the panel's right to award the punishment".

If anything, i would read it as us trying to mitigate any further damage, draw a line under it, keep Tonda and the coaching/analyst teams in place, and discourage the FA from bringing in external oversight of first team coaching/scouting departments.

I.e., we could make this very messy for the EFL, lets all just move on.

Edited 4 hours ago by Saint86

[Sheaf Saint]

29 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

Wooh, Ekert does not come out of all that at all well.

No, he doesn't.

He admitted he authorised the missions and then played dumb and pretended he didn't know it was against the rules.

I can't see any way he can escape a ban by the FA in light of all this.

[saintant]

I think I read in the Appeals statement that Eckert expressed annoyance that the analyst had not done the Boro spying on the Wednesday which would have been outside the 72 hours. Did Salt go up on the wrong day despite instructions to go on Wednesday? If so why? Still lots of anomalies in this.

[Saint86]

21 minutes ago, obelisk said:

The punishment handed down looks even more draconian than it did previously if this is all they have. Why the hell didn't Saints fight it?

Because our CEO had already admitted to everything.

[gurru991]

1 minute ago, John B said:

All pretty damning is it not but most on here do not seem to realise what a mess the club is currently in

People I know who support other clubs just do not understand how stupid SFC have been because the information obtained does not seem that game changing

Speaking as a Leicester supporter, your mess doesn't seem too bad.

[Window Cleaner]

2 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

The biggest surprise i get with social media, is its repeated ability to surprise me with just how thick most of the population are.

Réflection on the school system of today. I saw a third year university course the other day, well not really a university, what I'd call a tech college, but it was on stuff we did in the Upper 5th.

School shouldn't be optional. 8.30 until 4.30, 5 days a week 

[disconnect]

BBC article is winding it up to be as damning as possible, but it sounds like these analyst lads "the manager loved it (geez)" sound like right tools, rather than any sort of major workplace bullying which the media seem to want it to be saying, to keep the story going.

I imagine these same lads were smashing back pints and calling each other legends after these trips, not going home and worrying if they'd done the world's worst crime. 

[whelk]

56 minutes ago, Saint NL said:

Reddit not taking the news well 😂

There’s even more cunts on Reddit than here

[Cuddles]

20 minutes ago, gurru991 said:

Speaking as a Leicester supporter, your mess doesn't seem too bad.

Thanks for cheering me up 😆

Best wishes for next season 👍

[Cuddles]

23 minutes ago, saintant said:

I think I read in the Appeals statement that Eckert expressed annoyance that the analyst had not done the Boro spying on the Wednesday which would have been outside the 72 hours. Did Salt go up on the wrong day despite instructions to go on Wednesday? If so why? Still lots of anomalies in this.

It says in the full report that they couldn't get a flight that day.

[Cuddles]

25 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

No, he doesn't.

He admitted he authorised the missions and then played dumb and pretended he didn't know it was against the rules.

I can't see any way he can escape a ban by the FA in light of all this.

It's an EFL specific rule though, so whether the FA would further punish us is debatable.

[saintant]

1 minute ago, Cuddles said:

It says in the full report that they couldn't get a flight that day.

Should have got a train then instead of getting us into all this shit.

[S-Clarke]

I read the appeal write up, and there's nothing new in there really. I was waiting for the 'text' releases to see the true horror, but I've come away thinking...is that really all this is? So it's not the crime of the century then?

To sum it all up - firstly, why the fuck is Parsons still employed by us? Assuming he was the person who submitted the initial response to the EFL, and then went to tap Steve Gibson on the shoulder, then he should be out on his ear - as that response floored us before it even started. The apology from our lawyers to that initial response made me squirm, if you're trying to smooth over relations at that point you've already lost.

Secondly, why was Middlesbrough's HoF part of this? Am I reading right that he submitted evidence directly, or was part of the initial hearing? The EFL 'invited' him to submit evidence makes me somewhat curious to, as didn't they reject Boro's plea to be heard directly on the hearing? The whole sporting advantage argument is nonsense from both sides though, if you 'spied', the entire point of it is to gain some form of advantage - so us using that as some sort of defence was pathetic.

So we're as we were really. We were stupid trying it, we cocked up on our initial response trying to defend it, Boro and their lawyers jumped on our naivety and kicked us whilst we were down. Boro absolutley made the most of it and ensured they almost got the biggest benefit from it all, but thankfully footballing gods evened that bit out. It does still smell fishy to me though.

[Window Cleaner]

Just now, saintant said:

Should have got a train then instead of getting us into all this shit.

Would still have been in the 72 hours 

Anyway he was supposed to"gather information" for 2 days.

[CSA96]

I have felt like Saints are laying the groundwork for keeping Eckert so long as there was no proof of any actual bullying and/or a substantial FA ban. Obviously no way of knowing what will happen with the FA as they're hard to predict, but having read those 39 pages I don't think there's any evidence of TE bullying the interns within the scope of the report which would warrant a dismissal

Edited 3 hours ago by CSA96