The Spygate Saga

[Fabrice29]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Bit of a shit show from saints. Releasing the statement and then pulling it gives rise to rampant speculation. 

Got laughed at on here for suggesting our comms on this whole thing has been awful previously. Hope we send out Lambert and MLT to defend us again tomorrow.

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Fabrice29

[leeham_69]

28 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. 

True but we had an incompetent interim manager for a few months at the start of last season too.

[trousers]

34 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

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.

 

34 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

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

Won't the FA be judging him against their own rules, rather than the rules of another authority? 

[gio1saints]

Whatever the fine is it will be peanuts compared to what fee Saints will get when Tonda gets headhunted by a big epl or goes back to Germany to manage Bayern or similar. 
 

That’s is what the owner is banking on. 

[hypochondriac]

Anyone want to stick their neck out and predict punishment? I'm going with substantial fine and ban from all football related activities for three months. Reduced to two on appeal.

[hippo]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Anyone want to stick their neck out and predict punishment? I'm going with substantial fine and ban from all football related activities for three months. Reduced to two on appeal.

No ban, big fine. 

[obelisk]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Anyone want to stick their neck out and predict punishment? I'm going with substantial fine and ban from all football related activities for three months. Reduced to two on appeal.

Two matches rather than two months would be more appropriate for such a trivial offence.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, obelisk said:

Two matches rather than two months would be more appropriate for such a trivial offence.

I think that the punishment I predicted would be wildly inappropriate but I thought that about kicking us out of the playoffs too.

[gio1saints]

I think : £200k fine and 5match touchline ban.

Reasons :

There’s no direct equivalent precedent and there is no menu list of sanctions.  Lots of cases of touchline bans but nothing exactly like this - which importantly included our incredibly costly disqualification from the play off final. It’s not directly relevant that we were disqualified from the most valuable match in world football - but it’s a big punishment sFC have already sucked up - and the world and surely the tribunal will know it. 
 

Aggravated by : (1) bullying allegation - unproven but it may come under the list of things that they state can aggravate ( meaning makes it worse and attracts a higher penalty).
 

(2) Lying to tribunal ( I believe proven - could be wrong!) this will certainly aggravate the penalty.

(3) Repetition : admitted doing it not once but three times. 

Mitigated by : (1) Saints Confessing up and quick hands up cooperative approach. (2) No previous convictions for Tonda in UK. (3) Saints previous good reputation as a club. (4) - my suspicion that they know the case has big holes in it that a big protracted and costly legal appeal battle might exploit if they go too far - so they may look for a Goldilocks penalty - not too low not too high to preclude that. 

[EssEffCee]

27 minutes ago, trousers said:

 

Won't the FA be judging him against their own rules, rather than the rules of another authority? 

They are judging him on their own rules, specifically the one about bringing the game into disrepute. Breaking the rules of a competition effectively sanctioned by the FA is quite clearly bringing the game into disrepute.

Never understood why people convinced themselves that just because the FA don't have a specific spying rule that they couldn't charge him.

They've confirmed that it's for the spying now anyway.

[Teamsaint1]

3 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

They are judging him on their own rules, specifically the one about bringing the game into disrepute. Breaking the rules of a competition effectively sanctioned by the FA is quite clearly bringing the game into disrepute.

Never understood why people convinced themselves that just because the FA don't have a specific spying rule that they couldn't charge him.

They've confirmed that it's for the spying now anyway.

Have we not had the punishment for that ?

Edited 8 hours ago by Teamsaint1

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Teamsaint1 said:

Have we not had the punishment for that ?

We have but Tonda hasn't personally for his role in it.

[S-Clarke]

5 minutes ago, Teamsaint1 said:

Have we not had the punishment for that ?

The EFL couldn't charge the manager directly, only the FA

The FA are the authority with the power to charge the managers/coaches of English clubs. But if they ban him from football, then it's basically another football club punishment too on the back of the 2 we already had.

Edited 8 hours ago by S-Clarke

[Saint_Jonny]

Front page news on the BBC now. What a farce. 

[Pamplemousse]

Three breaches so probably 3 separate punishments, my guess is a 2 game touchline ban for each game so 6 games plus a hefty fine. Perhaps one or two games suspended if there is a repeat breach in the future.

If the FA think what happened is worse than abusing match officials or racist/sexist abuse then it undermines their entire campaign for equality in the game.

[S-Clarke]

1 minute ago, Saint_Jonny said:

Front page news on the BBC now. What a farce. 

Looks like the Boro Media and their press luvvies are still in full flow on this.

In the grand scheme of things, this is so irrelevant. I have no idea what we've done to deserve this level of attention because a kid stood behind a tree.

It feels like we're in some sort of weird parody.

[rallyboy]

Perhaps we've headed off the bullying aspect by employing the victim - he's happy, the club has offered correct support, so good luck with him as your main prosecution witness.

As for bringing the game into disrepute, the general public don't give a shit, it was funny to most, no one outside Middlesbrough cares and they're only pretending to care for personal gain, that they fucked up in a hilarious way.

Six game ban suspended and a fine? - anything worse at this ridiculously late stage, see you in court. 

And Gibson can fuck right off, and when he gets there, he can fuck off from there too.

[whelk]

Just send him on an anti-spying awareness course where at the end he has to write down three things he pledges to do differently. And the some FA fucker can check in with him in 3 months to see how it’s going.

[trousers]

51 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Anyone want to stick their neck out and predict punishment? I'm going with substantial fine and ban from all football related activities for three months. Reduced to two on appeal.

 

42 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I think that the punishment I predicted would be wildly inappropriate but I thought that about kicking us out of the playoffs too.

I'm with Hypo on this... Pretty much no-one thought the EFL would go as far as chucking us out of the play-offs... It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the FA came out with a similar disproportionately sized bombshell... 

So, yep, I don't think a 3 month ban is as unlikely as some might like to think...

Edited 7 hours ago by trousers

[Britannia]

What does a three month ban entail?

Usually they sit upstairs and communicate with an assistant who is named the matchday coach.

[obelisk]

All this over something that everyone was originally treating as a bit of a joke when the bloke behind the tree first came to light.

I suppose the FA blazers had to have their world cup gin & tonic trebles and jollies during the summer rather than getting their arses into gear over this trivial nonsense. What's more "improper"?

If it's anything more than a token suspended ban I'd hope that Saints drag the FA through the courts for years to come.

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, Britannia said:

What does a three month ban entail?

Usually they sit upstairs and communicate with an assistant who is named the matchday coach.

I would anticipate such a ban would  encompass all footballing activities at the club, not just match days?

[hypochondriac]

Interesting tweet 

[aintforever]

What punishment did Bielsa receive from the FA?

Assuming the FA's rules were the same back then, if so he committed exactly the same offence and that would set a clear precedent.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

What punishment did Bielsa receive from the FA?

Assuming the FA's rules were the same back then, if so he committed exactly the same offence and that would set a clear precedent.

I believe that the point of the lawyer in the tweet above. 

[hippo]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

What punishment did Bielsa receive from the FA?

Assuming the FA's rules were the same back then, if so he committed exactly the same offence and that would set a clear precedent.

Formal warning, no charges.

 

Pisstake. 

[CSA96]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

What punishment did Bielsa receive from the FA?

Assuming the FA's rules were the same back then, if so he committed exactly the same offence and that would set a clear precedent.

£200k and a written warning

[tdmickey3]

Just now, CSA96 said:

£200k and a written warning

And media admiration and a fair play award

[egg]

That they've charged him isn't a suprise, but the timing is a disgrace. Impossible to predict the penalty, but I'd imagine it'll be a ban. If it was to be a slap on the wrists,  they'd have done that a while back, but they wouldn't have wanted part of a ban to burn out before the players are back. This feels like a bit of a stitch up in the making. 

[hypochondriac]

I assume they know we aren't likely to contest the charges so hsould have the punishment announced for next Tuesday.

[saint michael]

I don’t know I just can’t help feeling the FA will hit him hard because they can and because it’s easy to flex against smaller club to set new precedence. I wonder what our plan B will be if they do and he gets longer ban. 

[RedArmy]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Anyone want to stick their neck out and predict punishment? I'm going with substantial fine and ban from all football related activities for three months. Reduced to two on appeal.

Big fine (750k-1M) and 3 month ban suspended for 2 years. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

As it's not an aggravated breach, I reckon it'll be limited to a 1 to 3 match ban and fine. Assuming that would cover all three charges and they won't be penalised on each individually.

It's the same rule breach as the one they charged Tuchel and Conte for their handshake incident in 2022. Tuchel got a 1-match touchline ban and £35k fine for that.

[Sir Ralph]

The FA have lost their head over this. 18 month ban I suspect

[Maggie May]

My only hope is that the FA have given Saints some crumbs of assurances it won't be an immediate ban.  If he's suspended before or close to the start of the season, with all the preparation and (potential) signings made under Tonda, it will screw up the club.  In whose interests will that be?  Ban Tonda then you completely screw up a football club. 

[Lee On Solent Saint]

I think they'll go in hard on Tonda. Wouldn't surprise me if he gets a total six momth ot year ban. For whatever reason, we don't appear to be a well liked club within the corridors of power. The FA want to set an example, never mind all the shit the top six untouchables get away with.

[trousers]

22 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Interesting tweet 

At last, someone else who 'gets it' and agrees with me! (I think) 🙂

Edited 7 hours ago by trousers

[Mozz]

13 minutes ago, CSA96 said:

£200k and a written warning

Just to note that this was two different sanctions to two different elements.

The £200k was the sanction from the EFL to the club.

The written warning (to club, Bielsa and an analyst) was from the FA.

[badgerx16]

I just think we are being persecuted so that the footballing authorities can be seen to be doing something - whilst sweeping far worse, but much more uncomfortable and inconvenient stuff, under the carpet.

[bpsaint]

7 minutes ago, Maggie May said:

My only hope is that the FA have given Saints some crumbs of assurances it won't be an immediate ban.  If he's suspended before or close to the start of the season, with all the preparation and (potential) signings made under Tonda, it will screw up the club.  In whose interests will that be?  Ban Tonda then you completely screw up a football club. 

This crossed my mind too, whether somebody from the FA had given the club some kind of nod as to whether Tonda is likely to be out of the picture for a while. It’ll be an insult if he’s given a hefty ban with 2 and a half weeks till the season starts and we start the season on the back foot.

Wouldn’t want to predict a punishment as that didn’t work out very well for most of us with the EFL/playoff result.

Cant imagine the FA will think too highly of dressing a bloke up in Eastleigh gear to go and spy on Ipswich down the road though.

[EssEffCee]

26 minutes ago, CSA96 said:

£200k and a written warning

The 200k was a club fine and not for Bielsa (though he did end up paying it).

[macca155]

I think it will be more substantial than people think. The FA will want to make an example of Saints.

The club cheated, there is no way of mitigating that. As a result the club was severely punished. Now they are going after the individuals concerned. I can't see how it won't be an equally severe punishment.

It's utterly vindictive in my opinion, but Tonda put himself in this position, and gave the authorities the opportunity to punish him.

It's going to hurt, but we knew this was coming. Just have to deal with it.

I assume the club have a plan .....

[sockeye]

1 minute ago, macca155 said:

I assume the club have a plan .....

Hijack the Pep-Italy deal.

[Weston Saint]

He has already admitted in public he sanctioned the spying on all three occasions so I anticipate his response to FA will be to accept the charge and rely on mitigation. Among that might be loss of potential earnings and early admission of the events. 

I have no idea what the FA will decide but a fine looks the most likely. The offence did not occur in the Stadium or on Matchday. A ban will damage the club, which has already suffered financially.  

[Lighthouse]

41 minutes ago, aintforever said:

What punishment did Bielsa receive from the FA?

Assuming the FA's rules were the same back then, if so he committed exactly the same offence and that would set a clear precedent.

We were never, ever, ever going to get the same punishment as Leeds and Bielsa, people really need to drop this line of arguing. It was made abundantly clear after that incident(s) that this would not be tolerate again in the future and that the punishment for doing so would be worse.

 

Rules and their punishments change all the time, you can’t just keep going about precedent.

[Turkish]

Phil is just going to pay the fine, right?

[egg]

Just now, Turkish said:

Phil is just going to pay the fine, right?

Indeed. Sadly that naivety and arrogance ran through our approach to process, and cost us. Hopefully we won't see a repeat. 

[hypochondriac]

24 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

We were never, ever, ever going to get the same punishment as Leeds and Bielsa, people really need to drop this line of arguing. It was made abundantly clear after that incident(s) that this would not be tolerate again in the future and that the punishment for doing so would be worse.

 

Rules and their punishments change all the time, you can’t just keep going about precedent.

Whilst t I agree with you , I think the point with the FA is that they haven tgot a new rule and so I struggle to see why Bielsa wasn't charged by them as seemingly the rules haven't changes for their organisation since his case.

[Ken Tone]

There's bans and bans. He might be banned for a number of matches or a number of weeks/months.

And very importantly, he might be banned from all football activities making it impossible to be manager - or it might just be a touchline ban meaning he could still manage and watch/coach from the stands. 

[RedArmy]

17 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Whilst t I agree with you , I think the point with the FA is that they haven tgot a new rule and so I struggle to see why Bielsa wasn't charged by them as seemingly the rules haven't changes for their organisation since his case.

I’m not really sure why the FA need to have brought in a new rule off the back of Bielsa? Especially when the EFL rule is not universal across football in England. 
 

Bringing the game into disrepute is a cover-all rule and does the job just fine from their point of view.