Jump to content

The Spygate Saga

St Chalet

By St Chalet
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gloucester Saint

Gloucester Saint

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/southampton-told-why-middlesbrough-still-resent-spying-incident/

Wow, talk about projection!

Saints fans entitled?!

 

Fucking weirdos and a liar as well.

Do I care about Southampton? No. Do I like them? Dislikes and then whines on about why.

Skate levels of obsession. At least the skates and us have a proper rivalry. You can tell when a club hasn’t and why Leeds, Sunderland and Newcastle aren’t bothered about them. 

Noddy, nothing club in a wasteland of an area with a highly dubious mayor. Three clear chances at promotion, and blew every single one. 

Portsmouth are our rivals. We don’t give a shit about you and whether you all vaporise when Billingham explodes one day.  
 

Edited by Gloucester Saint
  • Like 1
JohnnyShearer2.0

JohnnyShearer2.0

Posted
Posted

It is odd.

Don't get me wrong, across our fanbase I am sure that the majority accepted what we did was wrong (regardless of it's impact on the outcome of games), got caught and punished.

Whether we agree or disagree with the severity of the punishment and process is another discussion. With varying degrees of opinions.

bpsaint

bpsaint

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Nothing 'leaked' by the club anywhere..

No news is good news, right?

Let’s hope so. As long as it’s not a 6 month ban with Lallana taking over duties.

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted

E3.1

 A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner

which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent

conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

LordHester

LordHester

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, westmidlandsaint said:

The article has been taken down now but did not read 'the club acknowledges the FA's charges today but will continue to support Tonda' ?

Bizarre. Guess someone's pressed 'publish' a bit early, but there's clearly some news in the offing.

Saint_clark

Saint_clark

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

E3.1

 A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner

which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent

conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

Looking at the sanctions guidelines, the punishment is most likely to be a one match touchline ban and a fine (due to it being an admitted charge).

 

Before anyone panics themselves by seeing the potential punishments for aggravated breaches, the criteria for it being aggravated is;

"An aggravated breach of FA Rule E3 occurs when an individual uses improper, abusive, or insulting language or behavior that includes a reference to a protected characteristic. These characteristics include race, ethnic origin, nationality, color, religion, belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation, or disability"

Edited by Saint_clark
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Saint_clark said:

Looking at the sanctions guidelines, the punishment is most likely to be a one match touchline ban and a fine (due to it being an admitted charge).

where are these guidelines?

obelisk

obelisk

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

E3.1

 A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner

which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent

conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

"Improper". 😄

That could cover pretty much anything. Depends on they eye of the beholder.

tdmickey3

tdmickey3

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

E3.1

 A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner

which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent

conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

Lol, Referees receive that every game, multiple times

 

trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, CSA96 said:

Screenshot 2026-07-22 at 10.11.34.png

So it's the "bullying" aspect that they're charging him for then, rather than the spying itself, per se?

Would explain why the FA are treating this differently to the Bielsa case, I guess...?

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, trousers said:

So it's the "bullying" aspect that they're charging him for then, rather than the spying itself, per se?

Would explain why the FA are treating this differently to the Bielsa case, I guess...?

and potentially planning to gain a sporting advantage. 

tdmickey3

tdmickey3

Posted
Posted
Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

And it is in their gift to issue sanctions (cards)

So Tonda gets a red card.

It will be a ban of some sort as they are dragging it out to cause the club the most "damage"

If it was a fine and suspended sentence it would have been applied by now

OR 

Tonda could get the fair play award like Bielsa 😉

  • Haha 1
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

and potentially planning to gain a sporting advantage. 

Bielsa did that but wasn't charged for that aspect....

  • Like 2
CSA96

CSA96

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Obviously we don't know but a breach of that rule doesn't seem like a massive ban to me. Could be wrong of course!

That was my first feeling but it's also a very intentionally broad and vague rule which leaves a full range of punishments on the table as options as the FA sees fit for the severity of the breach

  • Like 1
EssEffCee

EssEffCee

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, trousers said:

So it's the "bullying" aspect that they're charging him for then, rather than the spying itself, per se?

Would explain why the FA are treating this differently to the Bielsa case, I guess...?

Not sure how you've concluded that? Breaking a competition rule the club signed up to could easily be construed as bringing the game into disrepute.

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, trousers said:

Bielsa did that but wasn't charged for that aspect....

because there was no rule to break in 2019...There is now and Tonda has admitted his part in breaking it.

EssEffCee

EssEffCee

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Obviously we don't know but a breach of that rule doesn't seem like a massive ban to me. Could be wrong of course!

It's intentionally vague so could be anything really.

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
Just now, CSA96 said:

That was my first feeling but it's also a very intentionally broad and vague rule which leaves a full range of punishments on the table as options as the FA sees fit for the severity of the breach

As you were then. I assume we will go big legally if we feel it is too harsh. Do they want that headache? Hopefully cooler heads prevail and there is some sort of compromise which is at worse a couple of months. 

Saint86

Saint86

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 20/07/2026 at 11:43, JohnnyShearer2.0 said:

https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/southampton-told-why-middlesbrough-still-resent-spying-incident/

Wow, talk about projection!

Saints fans entitled?!

 

The backpedaling generally from Boro is fairly amusing to see.

They knew about salt in advance, had their media team there ready and waiting with high powered lenses to snap a young lad (who was down the other end of the training ground on his mobile), managed to magically identify him (a junior intern from a club 500miles away) and have evidence of him spying at Oxford 5months earlier (all within hours) for them to report it to the EFL that sane afternoon...

The club were stupid and broke the rules, but there is no denying that Boro basically just engineered the entire thing for an advantage in the playoffs and with a long shot of getting a bye to the playoff final... I.e., cheated.

And then (despite losing to saints over 2 legs and surely not being oblivious to all the above shenanigans), their entire fanbase was entitled enough to assume they had a right to take Hull's playoff spot... Thankfully they did an early Argentina and failed to register a shot on target.

Now, after all of that came to naught, they are trying to row back on it (hellberg) and their fans are trying to play it down and make it all about our fans. But the reality for them is, like it or not, they have got it coming from saints this year and they can't row their way out of it... Reap what you sow etc. 😂🤣

Edited by Saint86
  • Like 3
CSA96

CSA96

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

As you were then. I assume we will go big legally if we feel it is too harsh. Do they want that headache? Hopefully cooler heads prevail and there is some sort of compromise which is at worse a couple of months. 

I am assuming the club's repeated public support for Tonda - including in today's statement - is laying the table for a hefty legal appeal should the punishment be so substantial as to derail our season at what is now about two weeks notice to our first competitive game (vs Colchester)

I felt the same about Solak doing his media appearances in early June as well. The club is setting itself up to say it cooperated in good faith and was transparent about its intention to retain Eckert's services but then the FA took 2-3 months to communicate that they'd be bringing a punishment which renders that impossible/impractical  

Edited by CSA96
  • Like 3
Saint86

Saint86

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

As you were then. I assume we will go big legally if we feel it is too harsh. Do they want that headache? Hopefully cooler heads prevail and there is some sort of compromise which is at worse a couple of months. 

Eh? That's a significant ban and would likely derail the entire season. I would hope the club take legal action if he receives any kind of meaningful physical ban. 

Edited by Saint86
bpsaint

bpsaint

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

The backpedaling generally from Boro is fairly amusing to see.

They knew about salt in advance, had their media team there ready and waiting with high powered lenses to snap a young lad (who was down the other end of the training ground on his mobile), managed to magically identify him (a junior intern from a club 500miles away) and have evidence of him spying at Oxford 5months earlier (all within hours) for them to report it to the EFL that sane afternoon...

The club were stupid and broke the rules, but there is no denying that Boro basically just engineered the entire thing for an advantage in the playoffs and with a long shot of getting a bye to the playoff final... I.e., cheated.

And then (despite losing to saints over 2 legs and surely not being oblivious to all the above shenanigans), their entire fanbase was entitled enough to assume they had a right to take Hull's playoff spot... Thankfully they did an early Argentina and failed to register a shot on target.

Now, after all of that came to naught, they are trying to row back on it (hellberg) and their fans are trying to play it down and make it all about our fans. But the reality for them is, like it or not, they have got it coming from saints this year and they can't row their way out of it... Reap what you sow etc. 😂🤣

Simon Jordan mentioned on Talksport last week that when Boro first heard about it they thought it was quite funny and fairly minor, then when they realised they could use it to their advantage they fully went for it on the witch hunt. Assume that all came via his mate Steve Gibson. Maybe their fans are realising now what an overreaction the whole thing was.

  • Like 1
CSA96

CSA96

Posted
Posted (edited)

The heftiest 'non verbal abuse' breaches* of E3 appear to be:

Alan Pardew (Newcastle) - for headbutting Hull City midfielder David Meyler
- 3 game stadium ban
- 4 game touchline ban
- £60k fine

Paul Ince (Blackpool) - for violently pushing a fourth official
- 5 game stadium ban

Arsene Wenger (Arsenal) - for threatening behaviour against a fourth official 
- 12 game touchline ban
- reduced to a reprimand and fine on appeal after minimal physical contact

*there are numberous examples of substantial punishments for breaching E3 but all are tied to abuse and use of a protected characteristic under UK law (ex: Barnet manager Dean Brennan got a 9-game ban last season for abusing a female match official by basing the abuse on her gender)

Edited by CSA96
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, CSA96 said:

The heftiest 'non abuse' breaches* of E3 appear to be:

Alan Pardew (Newcastle) - for headbutting Hull City midfielder David Meyler
- 3 game stadium ban
- 4 game touchline ban
- £60k fine

Paul Ince (Blackpool) - for violently pushing a fourth official
- 5 game stadium ban

Arsene Wenger (Arsenal) - for threatening behaviour against a fourth official 
- 12 game touchline ban
- reduced to a reprimand and fine on appeal after minimal physical contact

*there are numberous examples of substantial punishments for breaching E3 but all are tied to abuse and use of a protected characteristic under UK law (ex: Barnet manager Dean Brennan got a 9-game ban last season for abusing a female match official by basing the abuse on her gender)

When you look at that it will be a huge shift to accept anything more than the above.
Going to be a few games banned, a few suspended and a hefty fine...

  • Like 2
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Eh? That's a significant ban and would likely derail the entire season. I would hope the club take legal action if he receives any kind of meaningful physical ban. 

I said at worst. Obviously I don't want him banned but I think they probably will do something. What happens if we appeal I have no idea. 

benjii

benjii

Posted
Posted

If it's more than a 3 game ban then the moral of the story is that you should headbut the opposition best player instead of scouting him.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, bpsaint said:

Simon Jordan mentioned on Talksport last week that when Boro first heard about it they thought it was quite funny and fairly minor, then when they realised they could use it to their advantage they fully went for it on the witch hunt. Assume that all came via his mate Steve Gibson. Maybe their fans are realising now what an overreaction the whole thing was.

Yep I heard that. We were stupid and naive but also we got absolute played by Middlesbrough and bent over by the Football league. 
 

be interesting to see what punishment Tonda gets as they do seem to be absolutely battering the small clubs whilst City and Chelsea can do what they want and still spend 100s of millions every year 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...