The Spygate Saga

[AlexLaw76]

For all the moaning about Tonda potentially getting a ban a few weeks before the season starts...well, we could have sacked him the moment we were out of the playoffs.

This may go down as another wrong decision by SR

[OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint]

7 hours ago, tdmickey3 said:

Yeah but, everyone loved Bielsa

The FA are waiting to see who comes up with the best suggestion for the punishment in the media

Which is exactly why our PR department needs to be working overtime making sure that Tonda is not made a scapegoat. He sent people out on scouting missions, not spying, which was a minor transgression. There's a danger this will snowball again - like when the original story was deliberately leaked out, it went from a jokey story to crime of the century - we need to take control.

There's a lot of competition but does anyone else dislike Boro more than any other club? Their management orchestrated the whole story.

[Turkish]

28 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

There are rules.

There are also rules like "bringing the game into disrepute" which covers unique/different/atypical situations. That kind of catch-all behaviour rules are written in every employment contract for every employee in the country. Basically don't be a twat and we judge what that is if we think you've done it.

No business or institution anywhere has an Encyclopedia Brittanica of every conceivable punishable offence all written out.

Why don’t they? It isn’t clear. How can people be expected to know what to do unless there is clear guidelines for every possible offence. 

Edited 11 hours ago by Turkish

[CanadaSaint]

26 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

aaaaand we're back round to "its not in the rulebook so it can't be against the rules" horseshit.

I didn't say it's not against the rules. I was talking about where the FA's focus might be, given that the actual spying has already been punished by an entity that specifically references it in its rulebook. My personal opinion is that they might be more focused on the bullying related to the spying, rather than the spying itself. Especially as they know that their intervention in this matter will be precedent-setting across football, including the "big boys".

I think this might be why we appointed Salt after his central part in the shitshow.

[LiberalCommunist]

I'd rather have a suspended Tonda than a Will Sill (nothing personal, could have been any number of names inserted) on the sidelines for the start of the season. 

Standing by him was the right thing to do. And time will prove that. 

This thread will go on to be the most bumped/bookmarked thread in SW's history. 

[Challenger]

24 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

For all the moaning about Tonda potentially getting a ban a few weeks before the season starts...well, we could have sacked him the moment we were out of the playoffs.

This may go down as another wrong decision by SR

Can't be, Dragan said in his apology vid that wrong decisions were a thing of the past.

[CB Fry]

8 minutes ago, CanadaSaint said:

I didn't say it's not against the rules. I was talking about where the FA's focus might be, given that the actual spying has already been punished by an entity that specifically references it in its rulebook. My personal opinion is that they might be more focused on the bullying related to the spying, rather than the spying itself. Especially as they know that their intervention in this matter will be precedent-setting across football, including the "big boys".

I think this might be why we appointed Salt after his central part in the shitshow.

Precedent setting in that other clubs will tighten things up so that they don't ever get caught spying, you mean? Sounds like a good thing.

If you think suddenly there is going to a raft of spying charges against Premier League teams because of some "precedent" being set then you are going to be very disappointed. 

I think we have to accept that only our idiot club are stupid enough to get caught.

Anyway, the FA charges will mainly about the spying but I would think it will cover the culture around the coaching team as well, through the lens of Tonda being the head of that.

[bpsaint]

I’d like to think that our owners have made provisions in case Tonda does get a lengthy ban, and we have someone lined up to come in on a temporary basis, or permanent if it’s necessary.

Then I remember our owners are Soort Republic.

[CanadaSaint]

6 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

Precedent setting in that other clubs will tighten things up so that they don't ever get caught spying, you mean? Sounds like a good thing.

If you think suddenly there is going to a raft of spying charges against Premier League teams because of some "precedent" being set then you are going to be very disappointed. 

I think we have to accept that only our idiot club are stupid enough to get caught.

Anyway, the FA charges will mainly about the spying but I would think it will cover the culture around the coaching team as well, through the lens of Tonda being the head of that.

CB, you often make good points on here but, just as often, you go full-on "straw man" to support your own personal and stridently expressed theory. Just as I didn't say "it's not against the rules", I didn't suggest "there is going to (be) a raft of spying charges against Premier League teams because of some 'precedent' being set."

My point was that the FA - who are notoriously reluctant to hold the big clubs to account for even blatant transgressions - might want to tread very carefully before wielding a meat cleaver on this one, for fear of having to take similar action against really big clubs with really smart lawyers. Or even smaller clubs with really smart lawyers.

I'm fine with seeing things differently to you - without misrepresenting what you said in an attempt make my viewpoint seem more credible. They're just opinions.

[EssEffCee]

8 hours ago, CanadaSaint said:

I didn't say it's not against the rules. I was talking about where the FA's focus might be, given that the actual spying has already been punished by an entity that specifically references it in its rulebook. My personal opinion is that they might be more focused on the bullying related to the spying, rather than the spying itself. Especially as they know that their intervention in this matter will be precedent-setting across football, including the "big boys".

I think this might be why we appointed Salt after his central part in the shitshow.

You don't need a personal opinion on something where the facts are out there and easily found. The FA have literally said it relates to the spying.

[Weston Super Saint]

27 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

You don't need a personal opinion on something where the facts are out there and easily found. The FA have literally said it relates to the spying.

Quote

Southampton FC’s Tonda Eckert has been charged with three breaches of FA Rule E3.1 in relation to misconduct between December 2025 and May 2026.
 
It’s alleged that the head coach acted in an improper manner and/or brought the game into disrepute by directing and/or authorising the observation of training sessions of Oxford United FC, Ipswich Town FC and Middlesbrough FC ahead of fixtures between these clubs and Southampton FC in December 2025, April 2026 and May 2026 respectively. 
 
Tonda Eckert has until Tuesday 28 July 2026 to provide his responses.

https://www.thefa.com/news/2026/jul/22/tonda-eckert-charged-220726

[CB Fry]

8 hours ago, CanadaSaint said:

My point was that the FA - who are notoriously reluctant to hold the big clubs to account for even blatant transgressions - might want to tread very carefully before wielding a meat cleaver on this one, for fear of having to take similar action against really big clubs with really smart lawyers. Or even smaller clubs with really smart lawyers.

I'm not going to lie I have absolutely no idea what this is supposed to mean. 

You think the FA need "tread carefully" on charging us with spying because it could set a "precedent". But you also don't think any other clubs are about to be caught/charged with spying either. 

So what "precedent" is being created if you are not expecting any other club to face similar charges any time soon? 

I am worried that all you are saying is the millionth version of "why are we being punished when Manchester City aren't being punished".

To which the answer is: we wouldn't be being punished if we didn't do the spying. Whatever is or isn't happening with other "big clubs" with "smart lawyers" on completely different cases is not particularly relevant here.

[EssEffCee]

11 hours ago, OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint said:

There's a lot of competition but does anyone else dislike Boro more than any other club? Their management orchestrated the whole story.

Ummmm no?

I don't particularly dislike Boro at all, just another club to me. I definitely don't dislike them more than the charity thieving inbreds down the road. 

Some people have lost the plot over this just as much as some Boro fans did early on when talking about getting the police involved and us being expelled from the EFL.

I find it odd that people even dislike them but different opinions and all that. Disliking them more than the skates though I genuinely find incredible.