The Spygate Saga

[Toadhall Saint]

I’m expecting an announcement from the FA by the end of this week.

[BranfootsLoveChild]

I think the FA will wait until we've climbed the table then fuck us over big time. 

[Patches O Houlihan]

1 hour ago, BranfootsLoveChild said:

I think the FA will wait until we've climbed the table then fuck us over big time. 

Did you hear Tonda on the last question of the Birmingham pre-game press conference? 

He was trying to say that the EFL and FA have fucked the Championship clubs over with an evening kick off on transfer deadline day. You could see he wanted to call them cunts; had about three goes at trying to phrase it so we understood he wasn't impressed, but might avoid a ban from the worthless thin skinned bureaucrats.

Edited September 1 by Patches O Houlihan

[Miltonaggro]

2 hours ago, BranfootsLoveChild said:

I think the FA will wait until we've climbed the table then fuck us over big time. 

Yep, I get the impression that’s the script. 

[StrangelyBrown]

I see the guardian are trying to stoke the fire:

https://share.google/PQ6EezOOG5JvEElE4

I do wish the media would give it up. Maybe focus on something useful like the FPL allocating a referee that used to play for bristol city to our game yesterday?

[CSA96]

 

[LiberalCommunist]

I really do think, if we were absolutely flying, annihilating the opposition, they would go harder on us. That would have them on a crusade to tear us down even further. In truth the damage (self) inflicted right now cannot be properly measured as yet. But it could well turn out to be catastrophic. Chucked out of a very winnable play off final, then subsequently missing out on the auto's due to the four point deduction, that could have ramifications for years! 

They want us to suffer. They want us as the example they still have control. But another punishment dump could be hard to justify considering we are still serving the last two. 

This inconsistency of form we are suffering from, might well be thing thing that quietly lets this unfold without too much fanfare. 

I mean, there's no club in the country who stands by a manager with a six month ban who can't keep a clean sheet and can't win away from home. They understand the consequences of the next over reaction. Him getting jettisoned by us the very next day does not fit the criteria. 

Six game touch line ban and a large personal fine incoming. Anything else and the baby is going out the window rapidly following the bath tub. 

This shit ends this week. We've all had enough.

[Disco Stu]

On 01/09/2026 at 09:52, BranfootsLoveChild said:

I think the FA will wait until we've climbed the table then fuck us over big time. 

The FA won't be deciding anything. The sanctions will be decided by a panel of three consisting of a KC and two "industry experts".

[do i not like fizzy pop]

I'm pretty much resigned to the opinion that the FA will throw not just the book but the whole library at Tonda, just as the EFL did at the club with expulsion from the playoffs. 

A soft target to be made an example of and they can be seen to be tough on rule breakers while City and Chelsea either get away with it or get a financial slap on the wrist. 

If the punishment is punitive then we as fans must not take it lying down, regardless of what the club does in the immediate aftermath. 

 

[Britannia]

I wonder if the lack of spending in the summer relieves some funds for a new manager?  Promoting Garner or Lallana, or both, seems the likely option.

[sfc4prem]

24 minutes ago, do i not like fizzy pop said:

If the punishment is punitive then we as fans must not take it lying down, regardless of what the club does in the immediate aftermath. 

I have severe doubts in our fanbase's ability to react in a proactive and fiery manner to an injustice like this.

[Nordic Saint]

1 hour ago, Disco Stu said:

The FA won't be deciding anything. The sanctions will be decided by a panel of three consisting of a KC and two "industry experts".

They'll be provided by the same company that the EFL disciplinary panel was - Sport Resolutions - so they will concur with them.

0a0e87d0-5538-11f1-ab88-f930a57d19ce.pdf

It's a shame Sport Resolutions have a monopoly in the business because with both the EFL and FA using them,  it means we get the same severity of punishment twice. If there were a rival company, the second panel might take a different view. But the panel members will all want to keep their lucrative jobs with Sport Resolutions so they won't risk disagreeing. It's all about money in the end.

Edited 15 hours ago by Nordic Saint

[qwertyell]

4 hours ago, CSA96 said:

 

Good, get it done.

Then we can finally draw a line under it and get on with the season without all the uncertainty hanging over our heads. 

Albeit, we chose this path, knowing full well that we were going to face further sanctions and disruption, rather than cleaning house and moving on in the summer. 

We've got no excuses for not having rock solid contingency plans in place, regardless of the outcome. 

[trousers]

50 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

They'll be provided by the same company that the EFL disciplinary panel was - Sport Resolutions - so they will concur with them.

0a0e87d0-5538-11f1-ab88-f930a57d19ce.pdf

It's a shame Sport Resolutions have a monopoly in the business because with both the EFL and FA using them,  it means we get the same severity of punishment twice. If there were a rival company, the second panel might take a different view. But the panel members will all want to keep their lucrative jobs with Sport Resolutions so they won't risk disagreeing. It's all about money in the end.

Will Sport Resolutions be selecting panel members without any connections (no matter how fleeting) to the case this time around...?

[Weston Super Saint]

13 minutes ago, trousers said:

Will Sport Resolutions be selecting panel members without any connections (no matter how fleeting) to the case this time around...?

More importantly, will we be using legal council (at all?) that will actually bother to look?

[LiberalCommunist]

We've got no excuses for not having rock solid contingency plans in place, regardless of the outcome.

_________________________________________________

What, like a replacement lined up? 

Jesus, even on easy mode that plan has a massive failure rate...................its why we are sticking by the dude.

 

[Badger]

3 hours ago, Nordic Saint said:

They'll be provided by the same company…

It's a shame Sport Resolutions have a monopoly in the business because with both the EFL and FA using them,  it means we get the same severity of punishment twice. If there were a rival company, the second panel might take a different view.m But the panel members will all want to keep their lucrative jobs with Sport Resolutions so they won't risk disagreeing. It's all about money in the end.

So, no conflict of interest whatsoever.
 

And no it’s not about money, it’s all about the integrity of the game…

What bollocks. 

[Harry_SFC]

The fact that Parsons has done an interview with the BBC worries me. I think the club are expecting bad news.

Parsons speaking at all is bad news tbf. Bloke is a buffoon. 

[EssEffCee]

25 minutes ago, Harry_SFC said:

The fact that Parsons has done an interview with the BBC worries me. I think the club are expecting bad news.

Parsons speaking at all is bad news tbf. Bloke is a buffoon. 

Where is this interview?

[Harry_SFC]

Just now, EssEffCee said:

Where is this interview?

Being released on Tuesday morning

[Dr Who?]

The club or/and Tonda will have an idea of what the punishment might be, it will be a range between A and B. They will not be left completely in the dark. 

[saintant]

15 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

Where is this interview?

They were discussing this on TSP tonight. Apparently Tonda is doing an interview tomorrow then Parsons on Tuesday. The panel said they can't imagine Tonda will say anything new but are concerned about what Parsons may come up with. 

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, Badger said:

So, no conflict of interest whatsoever.
 

And no it’s not about money, it’s all about the integrity of the game…

What bollocks. 

Well at this point, it's about sports resolution covering their arses.

[Saint86]

40 minutes ago, Harry_SFC said:

Being released on Tuesday morning

Please tell me you guys are joking... There is no scenario where Parsons should be let near the press re spygate prior to it being all resolved, let alone a couple of days before the hearing... His track record on this is worse than appalling... One last chance for him to bury us further I guess.

Edited 10 hours ago by Saint86

[danjosaint]

Both shouldn't still have a job in SFC 

[Thripp87]

6 hours ago, qwertyell said:

Good, get it done.

Then we can finally draw a line under it and get on with the season without all the uncertainty hanging over our heads. 

Albeit, we chose this path, knowing full well that we were going to face further sanctions and disruption, rather than cleaning house and moving on in the summer. 

We've got no excuses for not having rock solid contingency plans in place, regardless of the outcome. 

That last paragraph gives Sports Republic and the likes of that cretin Parsons far more credit than they deserve. They will be caught like rabbits in headlights. 

[Willo of Whiteley]

If they’re reading an interview Tuesday then surely the outcome will be delivered beforehand?

Was suggested early Sunday morning that it would be end of the week an outcome would be delivered.

[trousers]

3 hours ago, Harry_SFC said:

The fact that Parsons has done an interview with the BBC worries me. I think the club are expecting bad news.

Parsons speaking at all is bad news tbf. Bloke is a buffoon. 

I've just heard this too... What the f*** do the club (or their lawyers) think there is to be gained by letting Parsons loose in front of a microphone BEFORE the FA panel reach their verdict...? Unless, as you say, the club have already been made aware of the FA's decision (ahead of the formal hearing on Thursday / Friday) and it's 'worse case scenario' and we're going to go down fighting... But, even so, Parsons FFS...? Have the club learned nothing after the Parsons shit-show before, during and after the EFL decision...?

This has got "rest of season total footballing ban" written all over it IMO... There's no way Parsons gets in front of a microphone at this stage of the proceedings if the decision is either unknown or looking like it might be favourable...

What a load of old shite. 

Edited 7 hours ago by trousers

[manji]

24 minutes ago, trousers said:

I've just heard this too... What the f*** do the club (or their lawyers) think there is to be gained by letting Parsons loose in front of a microphone BEFORE the FA panel reach their verdict...? Unless, as you say, the club have already been made aware of the FA's decision (ahead of the formal hearing on Thursday / Friday) and it's 'worse case scenario' and we're going to go down fighting... But, even so, Parsons FFS...? Have the club learned nothing after the Parsons shit-show before, during and after the EFL decision...?

This has got "rest of season total footballing ban" written all over it IMO... There's no way Parsons gets in front of a microphone at this stage of the proceedings if the decision is either unknown or looking like it might be favourable...

What a load of old shite. 

WTF you taking about ? Guessing about unfounded speculation. Just shut the fk up and see what happens.

[trousers]

23 minutes ago, manji said:

WTF you taking about ? Guessing about unfounded speculation. Just shut the fk up and see what happens.

Are you my wife?

[Willo of Whiteley]

It’s all waffle until the end of the week lads

[Katalinic]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmp30p934g4lo

 

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

I reckon 10 game ban which will take us to *checks notes* just after the Boro game to ensure the wet fannies get as much sporting advantage as possible 🕵️

[musesaint]

14 minutes ago, Katalinic said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmp30p934g4lo

 

Was cautiously optimistic until I saw the interviews and BBC report. Surely this wouldn’t have happened if the club was confident about the outcome?

[qwertyell]

16 minutes ago, Katalinic said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmp30p934g4lo

 

Parsons sounds as unconvincing as you'd expect. 

[ant]

Parsons speaks so poorly, and astonishingly seems to have learned almost nothing from this debacle.

He deals in absolutes, yet delivers them with very little conviction. Peppering everything with a transparently fake mateiness.

I simply don't have faith in him as a leader or figurehead.

[Katalinic]

I think this interview was poorly advised - aside from the execution which has probably made things worse. The outpouring of sympathy  is somewhat lacking this morning to say the least. I think that they know it's going to be harsh - I hope I'm wrong. Once again though, it feels like Sport Republic amateur hour.

[trousers]

Having now listened to the Parsons interview (published a day earlier that Alfie suggested) I'm still baffled as to what the club thought they'd gain by a thinly veiled plea to the FA not to punish the club anymore than they have been already.... Surely this'll just rub the FA up the wrong way (very much like we did with the EFL)...?

P.s. does this suggest we're back to using the not so good lawyers rather than the Lord Pannicks of the legal world...?

Edited 23 minutes ago by trousers

[hypochondriac]

My guess is they have some sort of indication of what it may be and it's probably not good news. If it was all OK then why do interviews prior to the verdict? The only answer is damage limitation.

[AlexLaw76]

3 minutes ago, trousers said:

Having now listened to the Parsons interview (published a day earlier that Alfie suggested) I'm still baffled as to what the club thought they'd gain by a thinly veiled plea to the FA not to punish the club anymore than they have been already.... Surely this'll just rub the FA up the wrong way (very much like we did with the EFL)...?

P.s. does this suggest we're back to using the not so good lawyers rather than the Lord Pannicks of the legal world...?

The club are damned if they do damned if they don't, regarding the 'narrative'...

[trousers]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

My guess is they have some sort of indication of what it may be and it's probably not good news. If it was all OK then why do interviews prior to the verdict? The only answer is damage limitation.

Yep, surely the only possible explanation here is that we're in "worst case scenario" territory...? Can't think of any other reason why we'd do these preemptive interviews. 

Marvelous. 

[trousers]

 

 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, trousers said:

 

 

Where has the suggestion come from that we've sounded out potential new managers?

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

The club are damned if they do damned if they don't, regarding the 'narrative'...

Not doing an interview wouldn't have really cost them anything. 

[Katalinic]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Where has the suggestion come from that we've sounded out potential new managers?

Roan asked Parsons directly

[Katalinic]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Not doing an interview wouldn't have really cost them anything. 

Never complain, never explain.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Katalinic said:

Roan asked Parsons directly

Silly headline. There's no suggestion that we have looked at other managers. Having that in the headline suggests that we have done that but have denied doing so.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Katalinic said:

Never complain, never explain.

Grasping at straws but maybe their new high priced legal team have suggested this was a good thing to do to put some pressure on the FA prior to Thursday?

[trousers]

 

By

Dan Roan

Sports editor

Published

1 hour ago

More than four months since the Spygate scandal erupted, Southampton manager Tonda Eckert's wait to discover his fate for authorising an espionage campaign is almost over.

 

In the coming days, a decisive Football Association hearing will take place, after the German coach was charged with misconduct in July.

 

Spying on three clubs has already cost Southampton the chance of promotion to the Premier League (worth £200m), after they were expelled from the Championship play-off final. An EFL panel also docked the club four points for this season.

 

Now Eckert could be banned.

 

As the club prepared for the latest twist in the saga, BBC Sport spoke exclusively to both Eckert and Southampton chief executive Phil Parsons, who - in his first interview on the case - insists any further punishment would be "really tough to take".

 

But how are the club and their coach dealing with the prospect of more turmoil? What is at stake? And why have Southampton given a permanent role to the intern who was caught spying on Middlesbrough in May?

 

'It's been a big, big punishment'

"I would lie if I say that the summer has just been easy. Of course, if you care deeply about your profession, about the football club, there's nothing that prepares you for that. There just isn't."

 

Eckert speaks slowly and with an intense gaze when asked to reflect on being at the centre of one of the biggest controversies in English football history.

 

The 33-year-old apologised in June after an EFL independent disciplinary commission found he had orchestrated a "contrived and determined plan" to spy on Oxford United, Ipswich Town, then Middlesbrough before the play-off semi-final.

 

Having insisted he was unaware it breached EFL rules, and that the spying had no impact on performances, Eckert was backed by Southampton.

 

His team have made an encouraging start to the new season. Without the four-point deduction, they would be fourth in the table, rather than 13th.

 

"We've talked a lot over the summer of how we want to go through that process of addressing everything, giving everyone the chance to put questions out that are still there, to put out what they feel and have gone through, and then also close the door and move on," he says.

 

"Because the reality is it's a new season. We have big ambitions as a football club, and in order to reach them, we need to move on."

 

That is easier said than done, with Eckert in limbo while he awaits the outcome of the FA's disciplinary process.

 

"I've had the chance to sit down and just talk the FA through everything that happened," he says. "And now it's up to them to make a decision. I don't really have any emotions towards that."

 

So does he feel the FA has listened to him during its investigation?

 

"That was my impression," he says. "We sat for almost four hours, so it's been quite a long conversation."

 

When asked whether he feels the club has been punished enough, and if a suspension for him would be excessive, Eckert chooses his words carefully.

 

"It's been a big, big punishment," he says. "Absolutely unheard of in the history of sports.

 

"And it's tough for me to say that because it concerns me. I'm judging on myself, not an outside situation. But I've asked for forgiveness for what I've done. I've apologised publicly.

 

"I think the punishment has been very hard on the club for the last season. And to go into a new season on minus four. And the rest is not for me to decide."

 

 

Parsons is more forthright on whether the club has been punished enough.

 

"We don't know what the FA will actually hand out," he says. "It could be a long ban. It could be a short ban. It could be a suspended sentence.

 

"What we hope as a club is they actually recognise where we are at the moment, and what we've already been through, because I think it has to be taken into account. I really feel like we've taken enough. We've been hurt. I think it's one of the largest sanctions ever when it comes to football, or even sporting, history.

 

"This isn't just about the club, this is about people. We lose money not being in the Premier League, but [local] businesses lose money. We had to spend a huge amount on legal fees, and it really impacts the club even further. We don't want to be seen as a victim of this. We need to get on. We've had our cards dealt."

 

When it is put to Parsons that the EFL's punishments applied to the club - rather than Eckert himself - he says: "I think it's impossible to sanction the manager without the club getting hurt even more."

 

The most recent precedent for this case came at the 2024 Olympics women's tournament, when Fifa banned Bev Priestman - Canada's head coach - from all football for a year, after opponents New Zealand were spied on.

 

Parsons insists "the Canadian case is very different" but if Eckert , who is only contracted until the end of the season, is also banned, how long would it have to be for the club to look elsewhere for a new coach?

 

"We don't know," he says, firmly denying having approached other coaches in case Eckert has to leave. Parsons also says the club may appeal if the ruling goes against them.

 

"We can't worry about something we can't control at the moment," he says. "We have to deal with it when we get there but we're hoping that they look at it sensibly."

 

Parsons says the club's ownership "want" to back Eckert.

 

"We've been through an entire transfer window when it comes to recruiting players for Tonda, and that's another challenge.

 

"We have to be looking at all scenarios. We've always spoken about any punishment being disproportionate...You're looking for fairness in approach. And have we had that treatment to us, from a disproportionate punishment? Well, I think a lot of people will view it that way. But do we want to sit there moaning about it? No.

 

"But it's going to be really tough to take if we get another punishment, on top of being thrown out of the play-offs, four points this season, and potentially more. So we're really hoping that the FA, the panel, are looking as this with a balanced view to what's already happened, because it's been really heavy."

 

'A lot of people would have cracked'

When compared to the £10m fines that both the FA and Premier League handed Chelsea this year for making £47m in secret payments related to transfers across several seasons when they were owned by Roman Abramovich, some would agree Southampton have suffered enough.

 

Others however, would say the FA has little choice but to sanction Eckert.

 

After all, according to the EFL commission, the club employed "a particularly deplorable approach" by using junior members of staff to conduct the spying "at the direction of senior personnel".

 

An arbitration panel then detailed how a junior analyst intern said he felt under "extreme pressure".

 

Southampton's initial response to the crisis also contained "inaccuracies". Middlesbrough's head of football Kieran Scott said the club's behaviour had been "disgusting".

 

Parsons shrugs off such criticism.

 

And when it is put to him that many expected Southampton to sack Eckert, and had they done so they would not be facing the current uncertainty, he replies: "Yeah, but Tonda also picked up the team in around 20th place in the Championship, and without him and his team we wouldn't have been in the play-off positions, and I think that deserves a bit of loyalty.

 

"OK, he has made a mistake and he's paid for that dearly. This has been really tough for him as a person already. I admire how strong he's been through this process because a lot of people could have cracked, the amount of pressure he was under."

 

For his part, Eckert says he is "very grateful for the support of the club because that could have been very different, and I think in most cases would have been very different".

 

The vast majority of Southampton fans that BBC Sport spoke to also seem to fully back the manager, something he says "means everything" to him.

 

Why hire the intern who spied?

 

Another to be supported is the intern involved - Will Salt - who was recently handed a permanent role as an analyst in the club's academy.

 

The scandal began when a photograph was published of Salt secretly filming Boro from behind a tree at their training ground before the play-off semi-final.

 

"He's been through a tough time," says Parsons.

 

"When your photo is put out to the public, that is something tough to deal with. A lot of people probably underestimated how that could have impacted a young lad so we've got a job to make sure that he's looked after in his early career. But he's a talented boy as well. I get good feedback and he's got a good role at the club."

 

Asked if reintegrating Salt had been challenging, given his allegations about the way he was treated, Parsons says: "I don't think Will said he felt under pressure directly from Tonda himself. He felt under pressure in the situation. And everybody knows in a job you can feel under pressure.

 

"But, yeah, I think Will's managed himself really well, and he'll grow from this."

 

So has the club learned its lessons? Parsons insists Eckert has studied the EFL's regulations, but also argues the rules could be clearer.

 

"They're very grey - that's something I'll continue to raise in EFL meetings," he says.

 

"But look, we've done something wrong, we'll get on with it."

 

Moving on is not easy, though. Last week, Wrexham's owners aimed a dig at Southampton by referencing the scandal in a social media advert before the two teams met. And during matches, rival fans regularly remind the club of the scandal.

 

"History is history and it'll be a part of our story going forwards," says Parsons. "It's about how we react now. It's given us a real togetherness and hopefully that continues through the season because we're stronger like that anyway.

 

"There's a bit of siege mentality as well, right - of 'everybody's against us', so we've got to embrace it."

Edited 4 minutes ago by trousers

[tdmickey3]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Where has the suggestion come from that we've sounded out potential new managers?

Well, if they haven't made some kind of contingency plan for bad outcome then, its Lallana or one of the coaches as interim.

Surely we have some kind of plan?