The Spygate Saga

[EssEffCee]

2 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

But I wasn't making a point about fans. It was specifically about media personalities and publications. 

Fair enough. I don't pay a huge amount of attention to media so won't disagree with you mate.

I suspect though that there probably were people in the media calling those clubs cheats but it might not have been as visible to Saints fans as it obviously was when it's our club.

We are of course an easy target when it comes to the media.

 

Edited Wednesday at 09:35 by EssEffCee

[saintant]

31 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

All those clubs were called cheats by many people. Leicester in particular are constantly labelled as cheats on here.

I'm not saying I massively agree with the punishment or anything but I don't think anyone should get upset by the term 'cheat' as I don't see why that word isn't applicable to a club which deliberately broke rules.

None of them received anything close to the relentless vilification we did from press and pundits.

[23rdSaint]

1 minute ago, saintant said:

None of them received anything close to the relentless vilification we did from press and pundits.

Even David Prutton has the gall to come out and say we brought the game into disrepute. I like the guy but pot and kettle...

[EssEffCee]

16 minutes ago, saintant said:

None of them received anything close to the relentless vilification we did from press and pundits.

Like say I don't pay much attention to media so not arguing that point.

Edited Wednesday at 10:16 by EssEffCee

[Holmes_and_Watson]

19 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

Even David Prutton has the gall to come out and say we brought the game into disrepute. I like the guy but pot and kettle...

Did he start his conclusion with "When push comes to shove..."?

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

Why are you still arguing about ancient history ?

The new season starts in a few days, we start on -4 points. That cannot be changed, we just have to get on with it. Hopefully by the end of Septamber we will be in the playoff positions and this will no longer be relevant, other than us being the pantomime villians for the season as "Spygate" gets mentioned in every match commentary - at least it hopefully kills off talk of the 9-0s.

( And here's to dealing out 2 thrashings to grizzleboro ).

We won't thrash the victims. I would expect two very tense and combative games there. I'd be happy with 4 points from them right now.

[beatlesaint]

I see some fkin half wit on 5 Live who is a manager, fuck knows who he is, is saying Tonda should have been sacked blah blah blah.

The levels of hypocrisy and the fact the media are still dripping on about it like it’s the worst thing that’s ever happened in football really boils my piss.

Why is nobody stating that the fine Chelsea got for transfer activity is far far worse given the results of that form of cheating had repercussions for years to come 🤦🏻

Edited Wednesday at 10:39 by beatlesaint

[Saint Pete]

1 hour ago, beatlesaint said:

I see some fkin half wit on 5 Live who is a manager, fuck knows who he is, is saying Tonda should have been sacked blah blah blah.

The levels of hypocrisy and the fact the media are still dripping on about it like it’s the worst thing that’s ever happened in football really boils my piss.

Why is nobody stating that the fine Chelsea got for transfer activity is far far worse given the results of that form of cheating had repercussions for years to come 🤦🏻

Because they are Chelsea and we are Southampton. A different rulebook and moral code applies, didn't you know? 

[Whitey Grandad]

2 hours ago, 23rdSaint said:

Even David Prutton has the gall to come out and say we brought the game into disrepute. I like the guy but pot and kettle...

He should know what that means.

[Weston Super Saint]

6 hours ago, trousers said:

Which tallies with the expectation of most on here at the time, if memory serves me correctly. I don't recall many of the 'wise after the event' brigade predicting that we'd be thrown out of the tournament before the EFL dished out their punishment, which is odd given it's now 'obviously the only punishment that the EFL could've realistically given'...

A number of people were quoting the Swindon example and saying it would happen to us.  I'll hold my hands up as that definitely wasn't me.  I expected nothing to come of it, but how wrong was I!  I know my thoughts were blinkered and I guess it was more in hope than expectation.

In the cold light of day, throwing us out of the competition is realistically the only punishment we could have been given as the precedent had already been set.  I don't like it, I'm not over the moon about it, but it's happened and I accept it.

[Fabrice29]

21 hours ago, trousers said:

Dang... Scuppered due to thinking out loud on a football forum yet again...

Saintsweb Intelligentsia 1 Trousers 0

Think we were looking to reasonably debate it like you said but instead of doing that you’ve bailed out quickly 😂

[trousers]

On 13/08/2026 at 07:46, Fabrice29 said:

Think we were looking to reasonably debate it like you said but instead of doing that you’ve bailed out quickly 😂

Are you my wife?

P.s. if I ever end up getting too involved in the typical drawn out futile 'debates' on here, you have my permission to shoot me...

Edited 13 hours ago by trousers

[trousers]

Apologies if already posted

 

 

[Nordic Saint]

On 12/08/2026 at 11:38, beatlesaint said:

I see some fkin half wit on 5 Live who is a manager, fuck knows who he is, is saying Tonda should have been sacked blah blah blah.

The levels of hypocrisy and the fact the media are still dripping on about it like it’s the worst thing that’s ever happened in football really boils my piss.

Why is nobody stating that the fine Chelsea got for transfer activity is far far worse given the results of that form of cheating had repercussions for years to come 🤦🏻

It was Gareth Southgate's best mate, Andy Woodman. He's manager of Bromley and used to be a goalkeeping coach. He's from that 'old school' group of English managers, like Sam Allardyce, only much more unfit and obese.

[23rdSaint]

The Athletic | Tonda Eckert received death threats during spygate scandal. For him and Southampton, the saga rumbles on
by Jacob Tanswell

--

Sixty-four days after Southampton were chucked out of the Championship play-off final, their head coach Tonda Eckert was charged with bringing the game into disrepute by the Football Association.

The charge centres on ‘spygate’, one of British football’s biggest, most controversial stories in some time. Southampton admitted to spying on other clubs, including Middlesbrough, who they had defeated in the play-off semi-final. Middlesbrough took their place at Wembley, only to lose to Hull City.

They had also spied on Oxford United and Ipswich Town. As well as expulsion from the play-offs, Southampton were handed a four-point deduction which applies to the upcoming Championship season.

The punishments did not end there. On July 22, and following its own investigation, the FA determined Eckert had breached rule E3.1, which mandates that “all participants act in the best interests of the game at all times”.

Precedent for this came seven years ago, when Leeds United, then a Championship side, were fined £200,000 by the English Football League after manager Marcelo Bielsa confessed to sending staff to spy on Derby County. Back then, there was no formal process to follow for spying, with the EFL’s fine due to breaching ‘good faith regulations’.

Bielsa, though, did not incur any personal sanctions, even if he did agree to pay the fine on behalf of his club. As part of Leeds’ contrition, they agreed to support new regulations which made it clear, as their statement put it, that “clubs would be expressly prohibited from viewing opposition training in the 72 hours immediately prior to a fixture, unless invited to do so”.

The staggered nature of Southampton’s punishments has contributed to a curious situation.

Their 2025-26 season came to a crashing, galling halt on May 19 when the EFL expelled them and yet, as summer preparations were well underway ahead of the new campaign, a charge arrived at Eckert’s door.

He is leading them into what is expected to be a hostile Championship season, which begins on Sunday away to Watford, without knowing whether he will be their head coach for much longer.

Uncertainty is the undercurrent of Southampton’s preparations. The most severe potential sentence is Eckert being banned from all football activity for a prolonged period, in which case he will surely have no choice but to step down.

The 33-year-old German spent the summer back home in Berlin with his wife and became a father.

After the initial hearing was delayed due to the Eckerts becoming parents, he travelled to London at the start of July, a week before his players were due to return for pre-season, and was interviewed by the FA. The process lasted two days and involved Eckert being interviewed for several hours, going into detail about what happened and giving his version of events. 

Sources close to the situation, speaking on the condition of anonymity, described the hearing as going well and appearing professional. The proceedings included an FA integrity manager, who allowed Eckert to share his thoughts and lay out what led to Southampton spying on opposing teams and the reasons and context behind his decisions.

Those close to Eckert say he appreciated the opportunity to share his side, having felt the initial EFL hearing, when they were deciding Southampton’s fate, was more focused on the facts of the matter and not the reasons behind it.

The matter of spygate raised questions culturally.

Eckert told those close to him that, previously when working in Germany, “training observation” was par for the course. Perhaps naively, he overlooked whether it was viewed the same way in England.

Having only been appointed head coach in December, stepping up following the sacking of Will Still from the role of under-21s boss he’d started last July, Eckert had not sat in the EFL meeting before the start of the season in which managers are informed of rule changes and the minutiae of certain rules. Eckert attended this season’s meeting on July 22 and read the EFL handbook over the summer.

More specifically, he wanted to understand the changes in culture. Why does English football view spying as a heinous crime while other countries openly admit to using drones to study upcoming opponents?

Eckert reached out to Gareth Southgate. The pair had a long conversation, with the Southampton coach asking for background on why the rules were implemented and the key perception differences of observing an opponent’s training session.

Sceptics will argue he did not require a former England manager to explain the rules, especially when surrounded at Southampton by a mostly English backroom team. Once Eckert authorised a staff member to spy on an opposition, someone more ingrained in the British game should have warned of the potential ramifications.

Admittedly, spying is more difficult to do in the Premier League, with training grounds gated and fenced. It is easier in the lower leagues and at some Championship clubs, due to better public access.

For example, Eckert was informed before December’s trip to Oxford of a public road next to the club’s training ground, which is used by dog walkers. As for Middlesbrough, they train next to a golf course.

Incriminating WhatsApp messages from Eckert to the club’s analysts were revealed during the hearing to decide Southampton’s fate. The Athletic reported at the time that sources with knowledge of proceedings said these were particularly damaging to the south coast club’s case.

Two of the analysts gave evidence, expressing remorse for their actions but saying they were pushed into going on the spying trips.

Privately, those close to Eckert bristle against that perception of him.

Eckert does not have the phone number of William Salt, the performance analyst intern who was caught filming Middlesbrough in training. According to those close to him, he has never sent or received a message from Salt. This is because of the chain of command at Southampton, which started at Eckert at the top and filtered down to Salt.

In preparation for the first leg of their play-off semi-final away at the Riverside Stadium, Eckert watched every game of Middlesbrough’s from January onwards. Early that week, with the game on the Saturday, Eckert and his coaching staff had a meeting which lasted over eight hours. At one stage, the question of midfielder Hayden Hackney’s fitness came up.

Hackney had recently won Championship player of the season. His presence or absence from the home team was going to form a critical part of preparations.

When Eckert was told Middlesbrough trained adjacent to a golf course, he sanctioned a staff member, without specifying who, to be sent up to the north-east to try to find out if Hackney was training. The conversation then moved on, leaving this matter up to the club’s analysts. Initially it was not supposed to be Salt who travelled but a more senior staff member. However, they could not go for other reasons.

Middlesbrough caught Salt spying on the Thursday, less than two days from the tie’s first leg. As it was within the 72-hour period before the match, Southampton had breached the rules.

Southampton’s response was to admit their guilt, also disclosing training videos from the Wednesday’s session to the EFL and all information from the technical meetings.

Salt is now a full-time employee at the club.

Ironically, that first leg finished in a goalless draw, with Southampton riding their luck in the first half. Eckert told those close to him it was among their worst displays under his watch. Clearly, the early rumblings of spygate, yet to be felt fully, had some effect as Southampton struggled to get into Middlesbrough territory.

Gradually, the story’s impact started to affect Eckert, with every passing day heightening the scrutiny. 

According to a source close to the Southampton coach, he received death threats via LinkedIn. He was not allowed to drive himself anywhere, with the club offering additional protection, with security picking him up and dropping him off.

Eckert had to negotiate an EFL hearing and verdict, the second leg against Middlesbrough — which Southampton won 2-1 on May 12 — plus media speculation and coverage that had now reached the front page of national newspapers.

The Athletic reported some players were considering legal action. There were squad members who had taken 40 per cent pay cuts post-relegation from the Premier League a year earlier and were due to have that reinstated if promoted. Bonuses for wider staff, though, did not just centre on returning to the top flight.

A week later, on Tuesday, May 19, Southampton were ejected from the play-off final by the EFL’s independent disciplinary commission.

The next morning, Eckert requested that the players attend the training ground. The atmosphere was frosty. He asked them to control their emotions until the outcome of Southampton’s appeal against the initial verdict.

Once Southampton’s appeal had been rejected and their fate was definite the next day, the players came together again. Southampton’s ownership group led a meeting without Eckert, and sounded out dressing-room opinions. The response was that he should continue as coach.

The German wanted time to think, however. His wife, heavily pregnant, was back in Germany. He returned to Berlin shortly after. A few weeks later, Eckert decided that he retained the energy and desire to strive for promotion again. It was not thought players’ potential legal cases would materialise, with the coach believing morale had been dented but not broken.

Regardless, failure to achieve promotion last season did not help in a financial climate where Southampton were pulling back support for their women’s team and reducing the number of academy employees.

With the mood having been so disrupted, this off-season centred on restoring the mood.

Southampton have not experienced defeat in the league since January, so Eckert’s work was not focused on tactical evolution, but on trying to ensure that everyone at the club could move on. This remained a complex task against the backdrop of the FA’s ongoing investigation. 

Eckert invited his coaching staff over to Berlin for three days in June. They talked about how to regather trust and spirit. Smaller details included beginning pre-season later than most Championship teams, giving more time for everyone to take stock. When players and staff did return, Eckert wanted anyone who wished to speak to him and his coaches to do so, airing any frustrations and mapping out a way they could move forward.

The early signs, according to players and Eckert speaking publicly, are that they have been successful, particularly strengthened during a four-game pre-season tour in Germany. How robust those relationships are will be tested given the ire that will invariably be directed towards Southampton and Eckert once the Championship season begins this weekend.

How Southampton perform in their early games is imperative and would go a long way in building back trust with their fanbase.

All of this hinges on the FA’s charge.

Even with a four-point deduction, the club are aiming for promotion again. Scrutiny will be on Eckert from the outset, amplified by this ongoing question which casts further uncertainty over his position.

As Southampton try to move on, the shadow of spygate still looms large.
 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7488696/2026/08/14/tonda-eckert-southampton-spygate-spying-championship-season/?source=user_shared_article&smid=ta-ios-share

Edited 13 hours ago by 23rdSaint
Formatting

[beatlesaint]

That’s an excellent article.

This chain of command business has always nagged away at me. The perception that Tonda goes directly to a junior telling him to go and stand by a tree in Middlesbrough takes some believing. The real blame for all this should maybe be laid at the door of the analysts manager. Ok Tonda initiated it but there were a few down the food chain before it got to Salt that knew it was against the rules.

Someone at the Solent Forum kind of bought this up by saying about Tonda being hung out to dry. Parsons denied it obviously but there has certainly been an element of it, or maybe the clubs lack of action in defending the claim.

Edited 14 hours ago by beatlesaint

[Mozz]

26 minutes ago, beatlesaint said:

That’s an excellent article.

This chain of command business has always nagged away at me. The perception that Tonda goes directly to a junior telling him to go and stand by a tree in Middlesbrough takes some believing. The real blame for all this should maybe be laid at the door of the analysts manager. Ok Tonda initiated it but there were a few down the food chain before it got to Salt that knew it was against the rules.

I wonder if this is a positive for Tonda's charge.

Given the broad nature of the 'disrepute' rule, and that it's against him as an individual (not the club as a whole). "naively ordered an EFL competition rule be broken" feels a lot less severe than the "ordered a rule be broken and then acted deplorably in bullying junior staff to ensure his orders were executed" narrative that was pushed after the EFL decision reasons were published.

[trousers]

2 hours ago, 23rdSaint said:

The Athletic | Tonda Eckert received death threats during spygate scandal. For him and Southampton, the saga rumbles on
by Jacob Tanswell

Southampton head coach Tonda Eckert stands in front of a white background, wearing a grey zip-up top
Sixty-four days after Southampton were chucked out of the Championship play-off final, their head coach Tonda Eckert was charged with bringing the game into disrepute by the Football Association.

The charge centres on ‘spygate’, one of British football’s biggest, most controversial stories in some time. Southampton admitted to spying on other clubs, including Middlesbrough, who they had defeated in the play-off semi-final. Middlesbrough took their place at Wembley, only to lose to Hull City.

They had also spied on Oxford United and Ipswich Town. As well as expulsion from the play-offs, Southampton were handed a four-point deduction which applies to the upcoming Championship season.

The punishments did not end there. On July 22, and following its own investigation, the FA determined Eckert had breached rule E3.1, which mandates that “all participants act in the best interests of the game at all times”.

Precedent for this came seven years ago, when Leeds United, then a Championship side, were fined £200,000 by the English Football League after manager Marcelo Bielsa confessed to sending staff to spy on Derby County. Back then, there was no formal process to follow for spying, with the EFL’s fine due to breaching ‘good faith regulations’.

Bielsa, though, did not incur any personal sanctions, even if he did agree to pay the fine on behalf of his club. As part of Leeds’ contrition, they agreed to support new regulations which made it clear, as their statement put it, that “clubs would be expressly prohibited from viewing opposition training in the 72 hours immediately prior to a fixture, unless invited to do so”.

The staggered nature of Southampton’s punishments has contributed to a curious situation.

Their 2025-26 season came to a crashing, galling halt on May 19 when the EFL expelled them and yet, as summer preparations were well underway ahead of the new campaign, a charge arrived at Eckert’s door.

He is leading them into what is expected to be a hostile Championship season, which begins on Sunday away to Watford, without knowing whether he will be their head coach for much longer.

Uncertainty is the undercurrent of Southampton’s preparations. The most severe potential sentence is Eckert being banned from all football activity for a prolonged period, in which case he will surely have no choice but to step down.

The 33-year-old German spent the summer back home in Berlin with his wife and became a father.

After the initial hearing was delayed due to the Eckerts becoming parents, he travelled to London at the start of July, a week before his players were due to return for pre-season, and was interviewed by the FA. The process lasted two days and involved Eckert being interviewed for several hours, going into detail about what happened and giving his version of events. 

Sources close to the situation, speaking on the condition of anonymity, described the hearing as going well and appearing professional. The proceedings included an FA integrity manager, who allowed Eckert to share his thoughts and lay out what led to Southampton spying on opposing teams and the reasons and context behind his decisions.

Those close to Eckert say he appreciated the opportunity to share his side, having felt the initial EFL hearing, when they were deciding Southampton’s fate, was more focused on the facts of the matter and not the reasons behind it.

The matter of spygate raised questions culturally.

Eckert told those close to him that, previously when working in Germany, “training observation” was par for the course. Perhaps naively, he overlooked whether it was viewed the same way in England.

Having only been appointed head coach in December, stepping up following the sacking of Will Still from the role of under-21s boss he’d started last July, Eckert had not sat in the EFL meeting before the start of the season in which managers are informed of rule changes and the minutiae of certain rules. Eckert attended this season’s meeting on July 22 and read the EFL handbook over the summer.

More specifically, he wanted to understand the changes in culture. Why does English football view spying as a heinous crime while other countries openly admit to using drones to study upcoming opponents?

Eckert reached out to Gareth Southgate. The pair had a long conversation, with the Southampton coach asking for background on why the rules were implemented and the key perception differences of observing an opponent’s training session.

Sceptics will argue he did not require a former England manager to explain the rules, especially when surrounded at Southampton by a mostly English backroom team. Once Eckert authorised a staff member to spy on an opposition, someone more ingrained in the British game should have warned of the potential ramifications.

Admittedly, spying is more difficult to do in the Premier League, with training grounds gated and fenced. It is easier in the lower leagues and at some Championship clubs, due to better public access.

For example, Eckert was informed before December’s trip to Oxford of a public road next to the club’s training ground, which is used by dog walkers. As for Middlesbrough, they train next to a golf course.

Incriminating WhatsApp messages from Eckert to the club’s analysts were revealed during the hearing to decide Southampton’s fate. The Athletic reported at the time that sources with knowledge of proceedings said these were particularly damaging to the south coast club’s case.

Two of the analysts gave evidence, expressing remorse for their actions but saying they were pushed into going on the spying trips.

Privately, those close to Eckert bristle against that perception of him.

Eckert does not have the phone number of William Salt, the performance analyst intern who was caught filming Middlesbrough in training. According to those close to him, he has never sent or received a message from Salt. This is because of the chain of command at Southampton, which started at Eckert at the top and filtered down to Salt.

In preparation for the first leg of their play-off semi-final away at the Riverside Stadium, Eckert watched every game of Middlesbrough’s from January onwards. Early that week, with the game on the Saturday, Eckert and his coaching staff had a meeting which lasted over eight hours. At one stage, the question of midfielder Hayden Hackney’s fitness came up.

Hackney had recently won Championship player of the season. His presence or absence from the home team was going to form a critical part of preparations.

When Eckert was told Middlesbrough trained adjacent to a golf course, he sanctioned a staff member, without specifying who, to be sent up to the north-east to try to find out if Hackney was training. The conversation then moved on, leaving this matter up to the club’s analysts. Initially it was not supposed to be Salt who travelled but a more senior staff member. However, they could not go for other reasons.

Middlesbrough caught Salt spying on the Thursday, less than two days from the tie’s first leg. As it was within the 72-hour period before the match, Southampton had breached the rules.

Southampton’s response was to admit their guilt, also disclosing training videos from the Wednesday’s session to the EFL and all information from the technical meetings.

Salt is now a full-time employee at the club.

Ironically, that first leg finished in a goalless draw, with Southampton riding their luck in the first half. Eckert told those close to him it was among their worst displays under his watch. Clearly, the early rumblings of spygate, yet to be felt fully, had some effect as Southampton struggled to get into Middlesbrough territory.

Gradually, the story’s impact started to affect Eckert, with every passing day heightening the scrutiny. 

According to a source close to the Southampton coach, he received death threats via LinkedIn. He was not allowed to drive himself anywhere, with the club offering additional protection, with security picking him up and dropping him off.

Eckert had to negotiate an EFL hearing and verdict, the second leg against Middlesbrough — which Southampton won 2-1 on May 12 — plus media speculation and coverage that had now reached the front page of national newspapers.

The Athletic reported some players were considering legal action. There were squad members who had taken 40 per cent pay cuts post-relegation from the Premier League a year earlier and were due to have that reinstated if promoted. Bonuses for wider staff, though, did not just centre on returning to the top flight.

A week later, on Tuesday, May 19, Southampton were ejected from the play-off final by the EFL’s independent disciplinary commission.

The next morning, Eckert requested that the players attend the training ground. The atmosphere was frosty. He asked them to control their emotions until the outcome of Southampton’s appeal against the initial verdict.

Once Southampton’s appeal had been rejected and their fate was definite the next day, the players came together again. Southampton’s ownership group led a meeting without Eckert, and sounded out dressing-room opinions. The response was that he should continue as coach.

The German wanted time to think, however. His wife, heavily pregnant, was back in Germany. He returned to Berlin shortly after. A few weeks later, Eckert decided that he retained the energy and desire to strive for promotion again. It was not thought players’ potential legal cases would materialise, with the coach believing morale had been dented but not broken.

Regardless, failure to achieve promotion last season did not help in a financial climate where Southampton were pulling back support for their women’s team and reducing the number of academy employees.

With the mood having been so disrupted, this off-season centred on restoring the mood.

Southampton have not experienced defeat in the league since January, so Eckert’s work was not focused on tactical evolution, but on trying to ensure that everyone at the club could move on. This remained a complex task against the backdrop of the FA’s ongoing investigation. 

Eckert invited his coaching staff over to Berlin for three days in June. They talked about how to regather trust and spirit. Smaller details included beginning pre-season later than most Championship teams, giving more time for everyone to take stock. When players and staff did return, Eckert wanted anyone who wished to speak to him and his coaches to do so, airing any frustrations and mapping out a way they could move forward.

The early signs, according to players and Eckert speaking publicly, are that they have been successful, particularly strengthened during a four-game pre-season tour in Germany. How robust those relationships are will be tested given the ire that will invariably be directed towards Southampton and Eckert once the Championship season begins this weekend.

How Southampton perform in their early games is imperative and would go a long way in building back trust with their fanbase.

All of this hinges on the FA’s charge.

Even with a four-point deduction, the club are aiming for promotion again. Scrutiny will be on Eckert from the outset, amplified by this ongoing question which casts further uncertainty over his position.

As Southampton try to move on, the shadow of spygate still looms large.
 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7488696/2026/08/14/tonda-eckert-southampton-spygate-spying-championship-season/?source=user_shared_article&smid=ta-ios-share

An interesting read indeed.... Thanks for posting.

There's certainly a few snippets of hitherto unreported detail in there, which I wonder why are only coming out now...?

[23rdSaint]

19 minutes ago, trousers said:

An interesting read indeed.... Thanks for posting.

There's certainly a few snippets of hitherto unreported detail in there, which I wonder why are only coming out now...?

I would guess a combination of Jacob's ties to the club, the Athletic's wider sources (hence Southgate insight) and perhaps the point we're at within the FA investigation. Purely speculative, though

[beatlesaint]

1 hour ago, Mozz said:

I wonder if this is a positive for Tonda's charge.

Given the broad nature of the 'disrepute' rule, and that it's against him as an individual (not the club as a whole). "naively ordered an EFL competition rule be broken" feels a lot less severe than the "ordered a rule be broken and then acted deplorably in bullying junior staff to ensure his orders were executed" narrative that was pushed after the EFL decision reasons were published.

I think it is a positive and certainly his actions since should hold him in good stead……hopefully.

[hypochondriac]

35 minutes ago, trousers said:

An interesting read indeed.... Thanks for posting.

There's certainly a few snippets of hitherto unreported detail in there, which I wonder why are only coming out now...?

Agreed you'd think the club would have been keen to release the fact that he never directly contacted salt himself before now. Shaping the narrative is important.

[Wurzel]

Maybe I'm too optimistic but that strikes me as a leaked explanation to other clubs as the reasoning behind a lenient, hopefully suspended at worst, punishment about to be announced 🤞

[VectisSaint]

3 hours ago, beatlesaint said:

That’s an excellent article.

This chain of command business has always nagged away at me. The perception that Tonda goes directly to a junior telling him to go and stand by a tree in Middlesbrough takes some believing. The real blame for all this should maybe be laid at the door of the analysts manager. Ok Tonda initiated it but there were a few down the food chain before it got to Salt that knew it was against the rules.

Someone at the Solent Forum kind of bought this up by saying about Tonda being hung out to dry. Parsons denied it obviously but there has certainly been an element of it, or maybe the clubs lack of action in defending the claim.

I always thought responsibility should have gone higher than Tonda, it seems like he took the rap and people like Parsons were somewhat relieved.

[23rdSaint]

What's become clear to me since the height of the furore is that my support for Tonda as a person and as a manager is the highest it's been. I don't think I've felt this way about anyone in charge since Adkins.
 

I'm happy to admit that I voted for him to go in the second SaintsWeb poll but I think time and everything that's been communicated since has only bolstered my feelings.

Edited 10 hours ago by 23rdSaint

[HKsaint]

So there will be a hearing in the mid of September. It will all depend where we are in the championship table by that time. If we continue our unbeaten run, the punishment will be so severe that he cannot continue his manager role. If not, it will be much lenient. 

Edited 8 hours ago by HKsaint

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

7 hours ago, 23rdSaint said:

 Southampton admitted to spying on other clubs, including Middlesbrough, who they had defeated in the play-off semi-final. Middlesbrough took their place at Wembley, only to lose to Hull City.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7488696/2026/08/14/tonda-eckert-southampton-spygate-spying-championship-season/?source=user_shared_article&smid=ta-ios-share

Still makes me LOL every time, the whining twats.

[Disco Stu]

31 minutes ago, HKsaint said:

So there will be a hearing in the mid of September. It will all depend where we are in the championship table by that time. If we continue our unbeaten run, the punishment will be so severe that he cannot continue his manager role. If not, it will be much lenient. 

It does make you wonder.

[obelisk]

The whole affair was blown totally out of proportion with Gibbo's mate's in the press leading the outrage. The EFL so-called "independent" panel now must realise that they were prats to even fall for it all with their ludicrous punishment. Let's hope there are wiser and more sober heads at the FA, before lunch at least.

[saintant]

The fact that the FA have allowed this situation to meander on with no final decision made before the opening match of the season shows what a bunch of idiots they are. They've had more than enough time to put this to bed and only make themselves look totally incompetent by prolonging it. What is their excuse for not resolving this so that we can move on without this hanging over us? 

[HarvSFC]

It's almost as if our manager potentially facing a long ban (worst case scenario) could put off transfer targets.

[badgerx16]

21 minutes ago, HarvSFC said:

It's almost as if our manager potentially facing a long ban (worst case scenario) could put off transfer targets.

How many ways can we think of to punish the cheats ?

[Matthew Le God]

 

 

[Give it to Ron]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

 

Wasn’t he appointed after some of the spying thinking of Oxford for one 

[Cuddles]

4 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

 

Is this the chap Adam Blackmore is always talking about during matches, sitting near them?

[HarvSFC]

He was schmidt at his job, no loss.

[SaintsLoyal]

You can always rely on the pathetic to rake up a load of shite, just as the season is about to start.

Jacob tanswell claims hes a Saints fan LOL

The Pathetic slashes all over Jordan Sibley and he then opens the door to them, weak out of his depth head of comms !

 

 

 

 

[trousers]

9 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Agreed you'd think the club would have been keen to release the fact that he never directly contacted salt himself before now. Shaping the narrative is important.

Indeed. All a tad odd. 

Edited 3 hours ago by trousers