The Spygate Saga

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

That's tempting, but the uncertainty over him wouldn't have helped us this season, and do we really want more of it. 

There wouldn't be much uncertainty I wouldn't have thought. If the ban is draconian then we will know we have no chance on an appeal so we can use those two weeks to put a contingency in place.

[Miltonaggro]

1 hour ago, benjii said:

Still, good news on the 1!

That was 'setting fire to his majesty's dockyard' so only a 50/50 chance it would stick.

[egg]

41 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

There wouldn't be much uncertainty I wouldn't have thought. If the ban is draconian then we will know we have no chance on an appeal so we can use those two weeks to put a contingency in place.

He couldn't realistically carry on pending an appeal if he and the players know he'll be going anyway. Our contingency will be Lallana joining the rest of the first team coaching team. 

[bpsaint]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

So if that is right we could appeal in a fortnight once it's announced and then it could be another three weeks after that. Potentially another five weeks?

The question to that is when they find him guilty and he gets the ban, is he able to carry on coaching us until the appeal is heard or is he out of the picture with immediate effect?

Hypothetically could the FA wait till the Friday prior to the skate match to announce the verdict and ban, and we have to make do with Garner and Nivea for the match?

[Cuddles]

1 hour ago, Mboto Gorge said:

No surely it isn’t? Listen to any expert pundit and they’ll tell you what we’ve done is the worst thing anyone has ever done in football. A kid on an iPhone standing behind a tree 24 hours later than he’s allowed to, is way worse than a global flouting of 114 rules for 8 years while winning relentless silverware in the process. We deserve everything we get….

Yeah true. When you hear it like that you can only really see Tonda getting a 10 year ban and Salty forced to downgrade to an iPhone SE.

[Willo of Whiteley]

Simon Jordan, the normally not so voice of reason, saying what the sanction is will speak volumes given Southampton were kicked out the most lucrative game.

How do you punish a team in the most lucrative league?

We all know they’ll get a fine and a points deduction but they’ll still be a Premier League team going forward.

They aren’t being kicked out.

Personally I think they should get 115 point deduction spread over a number of years, maybe every year implicated.

[hypochondriac]

26 minutes ago, egg said:

He couldn't realistically carry on pending an appeal if he and the players know he'll be going anyway. Our contingency will be Lallana joining the rest of the first team coaching team. 

Why not? Man city will be appealing even though they know they have very little chance of success and we would be the same. We will still appeal though because there's still a small chance we might be able to overturn things.

[Pilchards]

Actually the more I listen to the radio plus read about the City charges the more I feel they are fucked.

Can see them dropping a couple of divisions with a 5 year transfer ban.

I was wrong earlier saying they will get off scotch free after fighting it.

 

[OttawaSaint]

I'm late to the party.

Any updates on Tonda?

 

[saintant]

5 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

The FA is assessing Tonda, the PL is assessing Man City. Separate institutions so they will say independent decisions. The EFL also banned us from the final

Simon Jordan has said it will be interesting to see what City get as punishment compared to us so he feels it has relevance. I get that its two different organisations but I'm sure comparisons will be made and rightly so imo.

Edited 13 hours ago by saintant

[egg]

48 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Why not? Man city will be appealing even though they know they have very little chance of success and we would be the same. We will still appeal though because there's still a small chance we might be able to overturn things.

Club/manager, very different scenarios for me.

I've been in businesses when the person at the top is serving out notice. Everyone knows they're going, they know they're going, respect deteriorates, the relationship just isn't the same, and the workers are thinking ahead to who's coming in next. It never goes well, and it'll be no better for footballers. 

I just can't see it working, and I can't help but think that knowing he'd probably be on his way has impacted our season already. 

[egg]

55 minutes ago, Willo of Whiteley said:

Simon Jordan, the normally not so voice of reason, saying what the sanction is will speak volumes given Southampton were kicked out the most lucrative game.

How do you punish a team in the most lucrative league?

We all know they’ll get a fine and a points deduction but they’ll still be a Premier League team going forward.

They aren’t being kicked out.

Personally I think they should get 115 point deduction spread over a number of years, maybe every year implicated.

A multi season breach of that scale should have a sanction that bites for multi seasons. 

They'd still stay up with a 40 point deduction, possibly 50. That wouldn't give justice. 

I'd drop them down the leagues. 

[EssEffCee]

1 minute ago, egg said:

A multi season breach of that scale should have a sanction that bites for multi seasons. 

They'd still stay up with a 40 point deduction, possibly 50. That wouldn't give justice. 

I'd drop them down the leagues. 

I think it'll be a point deduction big enough to relegate them. Think they'll prefer that route to actual expulsion as it doesn't cause issues elsewhere in the pyramid.

[saintant]

11 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

I think it'll be a point deduction big enough to relegate them. Think they'll prefer that route to actual expulsion as it doesn't cause issues elsewhere in the pyramid.

Should be treated the same as Rangers were in Scotland but it'll be too damaging to the brand.

[EssEffCee]

2 minutes ago, saintant said:

Should be treated the same as Rangers were in Scotland but it'll be too damaging to the brand.

The SPL minus Rangers is much more devalued than the PL minus City.

Plus they're not the same situation at all. Rangers were insolvent and were liquidated. 

[Behind Enemy Lines]

1 hour ago, Cuddles said:

Yeah true. When you hear it like that you can only really see Tonda getting a 10 year ban and Salty forced to downgrade to an iPhone SE.

Don’t knock that damage. My work phone is an iPhone SE. Every single day that causes me stress and extra work that you couldn’t possibly define, but it’s definitely there! 

[rallyboy]

This feels like good timing for us, the comparison of punishments will be very easy to make and their huge offences over so many years have taken us out of the firing line and offended every club in the country apart from Middlesbrough where Gibson's silence is unusually deafening, and I should know because I speak for every manager in the Football League.

City are fucked.

[bpsaint]

11 hours ago, Pilchards said:

Actually the more I listen to the radio plus read about the City charges the more I feel they are fucked.

Can see them dropping a couple of divisions with a 5 year transfer ban.

I was wrong earlier saying they will get off scotch free after fighting it.

 

Same. Having seen the full list of charges and the different financial breaches they knowingly carried on with I think they’re fucked. Plus there’s no way United, Liverpool or Arsenal don’t pursue legal action now having missed out on winning the league to City during those years of investigation, and as we’ve seen from the Burnley case there’s likely to be even more clubs that argue their loss to a financially doped City side during those years cost them European football, or even relegation. 
 

The Premier League are backed into a corner now, for the integrity of the league the punishment needs to for the crime.

Edited 2 hours ago by bpsaint

[Turkish]

2 hours ago, egg said:

He couldn't realistically carry on pending an appeal if he and the players know he'll be going anyway. Our contingency will be Lallana joining the rest of the first team coaching team. 

I know a coach willing to take the job on an interim basis. 6 years experience highly lauded for developing young players taking two no hopers to district team. 2 consecutive promotions, a top 3 finish in the A league, 2 x champions league winner and 1 x Europa league winner never achieved less than semi final in any knock out competition. Also took Harrogate Town from conference north to champions league winners on FM06. Huge charisma and popularity with Saints fans 
currently available after resigning from his last coaching role

#Turkishistheanswer 

Edited 12 hours ago by Turkish

[Viking Saint]

7 hours ago, do i not like fizzy pop said:

With the incompetence of the FA I'm more surprised Tonda hasn't been found guilty of the 115 Citeh charges 

Give it time....

[egg]

Just now, Turkish said:

I know a coach willing to take the job on an interim basis. 6 years experience highly lauded for developing young players taking two no hopers to district team. 2 consecutive promotions, a top 3 finish in the A league, 2 x champions league winner and 1 x Europa league winner never achieved less than semi final in any knock out competition. 
currently available after resigning from his last coaching role 

#Turkishistheanswer 

Ha! Any half decent coach should be able to get a tune out of this group. Indeed, I think many would have got a better tune than Tonda has so far this season. Throw your hat in the ring.

Get MLG in as your stats man, Whitey as your goalie coach, Duck on PR/comms, keep Lallana on as the stylist, put Garner back on the cones, and you've got the makings of a decent set up. 

 

[Fabrice29]

21 hours ago, MB said:

Look I really don’t give a shit. I’ll stop passing off info on here. Feel free to apologise to me tomorrow.

Sorrrrryyyyy

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, Pilchards said:

Actually the more I listen to the radio plus read about the City charges the more I feel they are fucked.

Can see them dropping a couple of divisions with a 5 year transfer ban.

I was wrong earlier saying they will get off scotch free after fighting it.

 

Yeah, they are fucked.

Sporting sanction wise though, isn't just the EPL? So the worst they can do is enforce a points deduction / demotion, possibly strip them of all titles, and potentially a transfer ban?

The reason they are fucked is because every man and his dog is going to sue the living daylights out of them, they will win, and man city will have to cover those costs out of the SCR regulations. We're talking hundreds of millions... several hundreds of millions.

Miss out on champions league footy... you can sue. Miss out on europea league... you can sue... Knocked out the FA cup semi final... you can sue... Stoke and Watford have both just won an FA cup and are due compensation for missing out on europe...

Any European side that they knocked out during the period when they breached Uefa FFP rules... you would imagine they may also have a case...

They have also financially doped their squad through illegal hidden payments and raised the cost of all teams in the premier league (and wide football league) over the period of a decade (give or take)...

Goes on and on.


Saints can make a claim that they damaged our champions league chances (we finished 3 points behind them in 4th)... equally they've poached youth academy starlets off of us through inflated wages and raised the cost of competing in the premier league.

On the most simple level. Every single club in the league will be able to claim along the lines that they have missed out on one position's worth of prize money for each season where city broke the spending rules...

Edited 11 hours ago by Saint86

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, EssEffCee said:

I think it'll be a point deduction big enough to relegate them. Think they'll prefer that route to actual expulsion as it doesn't cause issues elsewhere in the pyramid.

Its hard to make a case that they won't get expelled surely 😅

[Willo of Whiteley]

1 hour ago, Saint86 said:

Its hard to make a case that they won't get expelled surely 😅

The financial repercussions towards the Premier League basically ensure that they won’t get expelled.

[saintant]

7 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Yeah, they are fucked.

Sporting sanction wise though, isn't just the EPL? So the worst they can do is enforce a points deduction / demotion, possibly strip them of all titles, and potentially a transfer ban?

The reason they are fucked is because every man and his dog is going to sue the living daylights out of them, they will win, and man city will have to cover those costs out of the SCR regulations. We're talking hundreds of millions... several hundreds of millions.

Miss out on champions league footy... you can sue. Miss out on europea league... you can sue... Knocked out the FA cup semi final... you can sue... Stoke and Watford have both just won an FA cup and are due compensation for missing out on europe...

Any European side that they knocked out during the period when they breached Uefa FFP rules... you would imagine they may also have a case...

They have also financially doped their squad through illegal hidden payments and raised the cost of all teams in the premier league (and wide football league) over the period of a decade (give or take)...

Goes on and on.


Saints can make a claim that they damaged our champions league chances (we finished 3 points behind them in 4th)... equally they've poached youth academy starlets off of us through inflated wages and raised the cost of competing in the premier league.

On the most simple level. Every single club in the league will be able to claim along the lines that they have missed out on one position's worth of prize money for each season where city broke the spending rules...

Yeah plus they sold Bazunu to us claiming he was a goalkeeper.

[sandwichsaint]

City are basically finished aren’t they. I don’t see anyway they can carry on in the PL or in Europe. 
 

New club, new owners, start again in Lge2. 

[EssEffCee]

7 hours ago, Saint86 said:

Its hard to make a case that they won't get expelled surely 😅

If they expel them then they'll have to decide whether there's one less relegation place or one extra promotion place and either option will bring legal challenges from other clubs.

Whereas a 70-80 point deduction means they go down anyway and effects less of the pyramid.

[EssEffCee]

Not sure how accurate it is but I read somewhere that there is a statute of limitations on clubs being able to sue and given the period in question falls outside of it only clubs who have already reserved that option will be able to make claims.

[Gloucester Saint]

47 minutes ago, saintant said:

Yeah plus they sold Bazunu to us claiming he was a goalkeeper.

Plus Edozie as a ‘winger’ and Larios as an adult. Actually, that’s smuggling children, charge 116 it is then. 

[Gloucester Saint]

5 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

If they expel them then they'll have to decide whether there's one less relegation place or one extra promotion place and either option will bring legal challenges from other clubs.

Whereas a 70-80 point deduction means they go down anyway and effects less of the pyramid.

Great news if you’re Hull, Ipswich or Coventry as only two relegation spots. Spygate really did happen at the wrong time.

[trousers]

Quick 'out of curiosity' question to anyone ITK...

If the club wanted to, would they be at liberty to 'go public' on how the hearing went on Thursday, even if only releasing a holding statement that probably doesn't tell us much, or are they under an embargo not to say a single word, not even a one-liner holding statement, until the FA say we can?  

I know the response to my curiosity on here will be: "What's the point of saying anything at all if they can't actually tell us any details" but that's not my point. I'm just curious as to what they are at liberty to say, even if there's "no point" in doing so.

Thank you kindly fellow Saintswebbers

 

[egg]

50 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

If they expel them then they'll have to decide whether there's one less relegation place or one extra promotion place and either option will bring legal challenges from other clubs.

Whereas a 70-80 point deduction means they go down anyway and effects less of the pyramid.

And they'd dominate the league, meaning less of a chance for promotion for clubs like us and other former PL clubs who were prejudiced by their cheating. Basically their "punishment" hurts us. 

They'd bounce straight back up anyway. 

That's not justice. Make them fight their way back through the leagues. 

[egg]

52 minutes ago, EssEffCee said:

Not sure how accurate it is but I read somewhere that there is a statute of limitations on clubs being able to sue and given the period in question falls outside of it only clubs who have already reserved that option will be able to make claims.

Limitation usually runs from knowledge. Until the findings against City, I can't see how there was knowledge. 

[TheAlehouseBrawlers]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

Limitation usually runs from knowledge. Until the findings against City, I can't see how there was knowledge. 

Indeed, innocent until proven guilty.  Let the suing begin…well, after the next couple of decades of appeals.

[Kenilworthy1959]

Fines and compensation will not hurt City. They are backed by a family worth a trillion dollars. They can cough up a couple of billion without blinking. Expulsion is the only thing that will hurt them. And they should go into League 2.  

[LegalEagle]

47 minutes ago, egg said:

Limitation usually runs from knowledge. Until the findings against City, I can't see how there was knowledge. 

6 year limitation issues and the like are not going to apply here

[Cuddles]

Will Salt behind a tree with an iPhone looks pretty smallfry now by comparison!

[S-Clarke]

I've not really spoken much on this over the last few weeks as it just winds me up so much.

The whole thing is frankly ridiculous.

- Ourselves partaking in this daft amateur move in the first place and being so bad at it (other clubs are much better at it)

- Boro having the number of anyone in the EFL to ensure they benefited from it.

- Ourselves getting the most ridiculous punishment at the time, which also followed through to the next season.

And the worst of all..

It's still FUCKING dragging on. We're months and months on, we've had a PL chance ripped away from us, started this season with a handicap, lost players in the summer we'd have been able to keep had we been promoted. And STILL there are rumblings that they're going to ban Tonda for many months from football. When does it stop? Do they have to liquidate us as well? If he gets banned for many many months, why was he allowed to start this season? Why have they allowed the club to go through a pre-season and a recruitment phase with this manager?

There is absolutley no reason as to why this should have taken so long. No reason at all. It's just a joke, the whole thing is a joke.

In light of the Man City judgements, it feels as if Football in the UK is on the brink of self-implosion. The dominos are stacking...

Edited 1 hour ago by S-Clarke

[bangkoksaint]

I have some sympathy for City fans. Like us the club have committed a rules breach and ultimately it’s the fans that suffer. 

[Jack]

Just now, bangkoksaint said:

I have some sympathy for City fans. Like us the club have committed a rules breach and ultimately it’s the fans that suffer. 

Yeah must be terrible going from mid table dross to winning everything for a decade

[EssEffCee]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Limitation usually runs from knowledge. Until the findings against City, I can't see how there was knowledge. 

Fair enough mate, I'll bow to your superior knowledge on this one.

Why do you think some clubs already registered their intent years back? Just to make sure?

[IFHP]

2 minutes ago, Jack said:

Yeah must be terrible going from mid table dross to winning everything for a decade

Typical Saints only us could break the rules and have nothing to show for it.

[sfc4prem]

5 minutes ago, IFHP said:

Typical Saints only us could break the rules and have nothing to show for it.

We do, we've got two very famous people, one of them a superhero, that made a funny video about it. Prestige.

[Charlie Wayman]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

Quick 'out of curiosity' question to anyone ITK...

If the club wanted to, would they be at liberty to 'go public' on how the hearing went on Thursday, even if only releasing a holding statement that probably doesn't tell us much, or are they under an embargo not to say a single word, not even a one-liner holding statement, until the FA say we can?  

I know the response to my curiosity on here will be: "What's the point of saying anything at all if they can't actually tell us any details" but that's not my point. I'm just curious as to what they are at liberty to say, even if there's "no point" in doing so.

Thank you kindly fellow Saintswebbers

 

sub judice