The Spygate Saga

[Turkish]

45 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/26577430.southamptons-eckert-fa-misconduct-hearing-spygate-scandal/?ref=rss
 

This is a brilliant article from Alfie House. It has the nuance and, more importantly, context that so many other commentators miss. Blackmore, take note. 

He's very good. Talks a lot of sense and makes his points well

[Saint86]

27 minutes ago, OldNick said:

I will never understand why we needed to do it anyway!!! 

Even more sickening if it really is the case that the scouting team cocked it up, went late, and then infringed on the 72hour rule through their own poor organisation. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Midfield_General said:

I think we’re missing the real question here.

Which is: when the verdict is announced, what day and time will Saintsweb crash, what will the error message be, and how long will it stay down for?

I’m going for:

Friday 25th September

2.13pm

502 Bad Gateway

72 minutes 

 

In the same spirit, Verdict Word Bingo

"We'll have to sack him now."
"We should have sacked him then."
"We will appeal to CAS"
"The FA panel all work for 'boro."
"Murderers get less. Especially with the prisons full."
"We will appeal to the UN"
"Well, that was something about nothing. Tonda to take the next match."
"One thing that you can say about the FA. They have integrity."
" MLT was right about the aliens attacking the FA, if there was a ban."

[Holmes_and_Watson]

9 minutes ago, Stripey McStripe Shirt said:

Due a statement with the corner flag any moment now, surely?

I saw a flag on the Beeb, and assumed it was us, only for it to be about Man Utd's debt. 

[saintant]

28 minutes ago, trousers said:

Is there a limit on the number of analogies we're allowed to post on this thread per day? 🙂

.

Edited 1 hour ago by saintant

[Holmes_and_Watson]

23 minutes ago, trousers said:

Is there a limit on the number of analogies we're allowed to post on this thread per day? 🙂

Forum analogy limits remind me of [SaintsWeb have blocked this post due to: Limits Reached]

[Draino76]

54 minutes ago, 23rdSaint said:

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/26577430.southamptons-eckert-fa-misconduct-hearing-spygate-scandal/?ref=rss
 

This is a brilliant article from Alfie House. It has the nuance and, more importantly, context that so many other commentators miss. Blackmore, take note. 

All I see is adverts for hemorrhoid treatment and penis enlargement, which I think is a bit too of topic from Alfie.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

14 hours ago, skintsaint said:

Expert on both sides of the hearings.

I think it's great he feels comfortable to express himself.

Oh sorry, I read it as an "expert on earrings"

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, Draino76 said:

All I see is adverts for hemorrhoid treatment and penis enlargement, which I think is a bit too of topic from Alfie.

Me too.... Hope there isn't a pile on... 

[Lighthouse]

54 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

And has been said so many times, why is it ok to do it up to 72 hours before a match. Why is it also not banned in the EPL or in any other league around the world? The other point made multiple times, clubs can watch every game that other teams play as many times as they like on video. Not kicking around on a training ground but real tactics in real time in real matches. What are you going to get more useful information from? We know what the teams are an hour before the game with a good idea of how they will set up.

Games play out over 90 minutes plus and the outcomes are governed by what happens and how various people react in real time during the game. There is only so much prep you can do before a game no matter how much information you have on the opposition. We didn’t win any of the games we admitted to spying on the opposition beforehand.

Did we break an EFL rule? Yes, clearly.

Is the rule nonsensical given the above? Yes, clearly.

The reason you’ve said it so many times is because you don’t like the answer, so you keep ignoring it. If the rule was nonsensical then there’d be no reason whatsoever to break it, but we did. We broke it three times, apparently by accident because the scouts arrived too late on all three occasions, completely by coincidence.

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

18 minutes ago, trousers said:

As long as I can sit on it...

[Holmes_and_Watson]

53 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

And has been said so many times, why is it ok to do it up to 72 hours before a match. Why is it also not banned in the EPL or in any other league around the world? The other point made multiple times, clubs can watch every game that other teams play as many times as they like on video. Not kicking around on a training ground but real tactics in real time in real matches. What are you going to get more useful information from? We know what the teams are an hour before the game with a good idea of how they will set up.

Games play out over 90 minutes plus and the outcomes are governed by what happens and how various people react in real time during the game. There is only so much prep you can do before a game no matter how much information you have on the opposition. We didn’t win any of the games we admitted to spying on the opposition beforehand.

Did we break an EFL rule? Yes, clearly.

Is the rule nonsensical given the above? Yes, clearly.

It's considered okay before the 72 hours, so that all teams know when they can train generally, and when they can focus on tactical plays without fear of observation.

In that tactical window, teams can try out, and instruct on, a variety of options. Not just what you can see appearing in games.

Attacking and defending set pieces being obvious ones. In those, there are far fewer variables in a set piece than across wider play in the 90 mins.

We have it because Fair Play Bielsa was watching every training session.

[Holmes_and_Watson]

9 minutes ago, Draino76 said:

All I see is adverts for hemorrhoid treatment and penis enlargement, which I think is a bit too of topic from Alfie.

An insight into the issues and con erns of a sports journalist? 🙂

[23rdSaint]

.

Edited 57 minutes ago by 23rdSaint
Removed

[obelisk]

This saga had me wondering whether it's also even against the rules for an opponent to check which players are boarding a bus or aircraft when setting off to play a game. I suppose it must so be careful out there.

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, Draino76 said:

All I see is adverts for hemorrhoid treatment and penis enlargement, which I think is a bit too of topic from Alfie.

Aren't those adverts dynamic so they only show you what you have previously been searching for?

[hypochondriac]

Not sure you should be posting the entire echo article that is behind a paywall on here.

[bangkoksaint]

12 minutes ago, Draino76 said:

All I see is adverts for hemorrhoid treatment and penis enlargement, which I think is a bit too of topic from Alfie.

And you're only getting those because of what you've previulsy searched for!!😉

[Holmes_and_Watson]

@23rdSaint

Interesting that the FA could ask FIFA for a wider ban which it says they usually accept.

Preventing him from managing in every other country where it's not a rule. 

[Draino76]

I'm happy to share the full list of tailored adverts if you want. 

[egg]

13 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

The reason you’ve said it so many times is because you don’t like the answer, so you keep ignoring it. If the rule was nonsensical then there’d be no reason whatsoever to break it, but we did. We broke it three times, apparently by accident because the scouts arrived too late on all three occasions, completely by coincidence.

Yep, and that kind of approach, coupled with the "I didn't know the rule" line, and our "nothing either see here just give us a fine" line, will do nothing to help us.

When you've been caught playing with a wonky bat, and are in shit, you don't insult the intelligence of the people dishing out the punishment. It devalues any apparent remorse. 

Edited 55 minutes ago by egg

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Yep, and that kind of approach, coupled with the "I didn't know the rule" line, and our "nothing either see here just give us a fine" line, will do nothing to help us.

When you've been caught playing with a wonky bat, and are in shit, you don't insult the intelligence of the people dishing out the punishment. It devalues any apparent remorse. 

We don't appear to have done that though. There is currently no suggestion that we haven't been fully cooperative and honest with the FA during the investigation. 

[benjii]

14 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

The reason you’ve said it so many times is because you don’t like the answer, so you keep ignoring it. If the rule was nonsensical then there’d be no reason whatsoever to break it, but we did. We broke it three times, apparently by accident because the scouts arrived too late on all three occasions, completely by coincidence.

 No one has said that.

[Midfield_General]

1 hour ago, 23rdSaint said:

https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/26577430.southamptons-eckert-fa-misconduct-hearing-spygate-scandal/?ref=rss
 

This is a brilliant article from Alfie House. It has the nuance and, more importantly, context that so many other commentators miss. Blackmore, take note. 

Seeing it all set out like that, yeah, I think he's fucked. 

I hope not, but I think they're going to come down hard. I'm predicting six months total ban. 

[EssEffCee]

11 minutes ago, obelisk said:

This saga had me wondering whether it's also even against the rules for an opponent to check which players are boarding a bus or aircraft when setting off to play a game. I suppose it must so be careful out there.

No, it's not.

[egg]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

We don't appear to have done that though. There is currently no suggestion that we haven't been fully cooperative and honest with the FA during the investigation. 

With the FA, hopefully, but we can't undo our approach the EFL, and I'd imagine that Tonda will maintain his "I don't know the rule" line, and that his instructions were apparently given to go prior to the cut off, but missed each time.

[egg]

1 minute ago, Midfield_General said:

Seeing it all set out like that, yeah, I think he's fucked. 

I hope not, but I think they're going to come down hard. I'm predicting six months total ban. 

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

With the FA, hopefully, but we can't undo our approach the EFL, and I'd imagine that Tonda will maintain his "I don't know the rule" line, and that his instructions were apparently given to go prior to the cut off, but missed each time.

Has he actually said that anywhere?

[egg]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Has he actually said that anywhere?

I thought that was our position, but am happy to be corrected if I'm mistaken. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

Well Cantona got 8 months for kung fu kicking a fan, something which could have landed him in prison for assault. Anything comparable to that and even I would be thinking there's some sort of conspiracy.  

[AlexLaw76]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

What have you been told????

[hypochondriac]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

I thought that was our position, but am happy to be corrected if I'm mistaken. 

Interesting. I have never read that anywhere. Can anyone else confirm?

Edited 42 minutes ago by hypochondriac

[saintant]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

If what they fear comes to pass this could turn into an even bigger shit storm than the EFL verdict.

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

Ultimately after a certain point then as far as SFC are concerned the length of ban doesn't matter. Probably over three months and he would be sacked anyway so from our perspective, beyond that it could be ten years for all we should care. 

[beatlesaint]

Just now, saintant said:

If what they fear comes to pass this could turn into an even bigger shit storm than the EFL verdict.

Indeed, difference would be they wouldnt be given about 25 minutes to get an appeal together! 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, saintant said:

If what they fear comes to pass this could turn into an even bigger shit storm than the EFL verdict.

Not sure what you mean. If they ban him to the degree that we have no choice but to sack him, then it doesn't turn into much at all other than we have to get a new manager. Nothing else is going to happen to the club itself. 

[Midfield_General]

18 minutes ago, obelisk said:

This saga had me wondering whether it's also even against the rules for an opponent to check which players are boarding a bus or aircraft when setting off to play a game. I suppose it must so be careful out there.

When wondering about things like that, a simple test you can apply is to read the rules and see what they say.

Hope this helps

[Midfield_General]

7 minutes ago, egg said:

From what I'm told today, that's much lighter than the club fear. 

Go on...

[egg]

2 minutes ago, beatlesaint said:

Indeed, difference would be they wouldnt be given about 25 minutes to get an appeal together! 

Same day appeals are normal, and shouldn't take long to prepare. Essentially, you're saying that they initial panel got it wrong, and you don't need long to prepare why you say they got it wrong. 

The issue we had with the EFL case is that we chose to replace counsel prior to the appeal, presumably because she didn't do well. 

[saintant]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Not sure what you mean. If they ban him to the degree that we have no choice but to sack him, then it doesn't turn into much at all other than we have to get a new manager. Nothing else is going to happen to the club itself. 

The severity of the punishment handed out to Tonda will be judged by most fans of the club irrespective of whether we have to sack him. It's at the centre of this whole case. If Tonda receives a hefty punishment many fans will go ballistic. If you think it's not much just wait and see what happens.

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

Go on...

Significantly more than the mooted 6 months. Significantly. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, saintant said:

The severity of the punishment handed out to Tonda will be judged by most fans of the club irrespective of whether we have to sack him. It's at the centre of this whole case. If Tonda receives a hefty punishment many fans will go ballistic. If you think it's not much just wait and see what happens.

Again I'm not sure what you mean. If they ban him for 12 months let's say the following we will be forced to sack him. Fans will be pissed off but we will move on and get a new manager. I'm not sure what else you will be alluding to. Fans of other clubs won't give a shit other than a bit of schadenfreude.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Significantly more than the mooted 6 months. Significantly. 

Genuinely not sure why they would go for more than six months. At that point we will sack him anyway and it's job done as far as they are concerned if that is their aim. The deterrent is already there and longer than that has no precedent apart from a lot more egregious things in my opinion. It will start to look like very extreme if you're talking about a year ban plus. That's even me trying to look at it from a neutral point of view. Mad that they allowed him to start the season if this was the plan from the summer.

Edited 34 minutes ago by hypochondriac

[Farmer Saint]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

Genuinely not sure why they would go for more than six months. At that point we will sack him anyway and it's job done as far as they are concerned if that is their aim. The deterrent is already there and longer than that has no precedent apart from a lot more egregious things in my opinion. It will start to look like very extreme if you're talking about a year ban.

If they go too hard Appeal will be very easy and you could see it getting very litigious.

[EssEffCee]

6 minutes ago, saintant said:

The severity of the punishment handed out to Tonda will be judged by most fans of the club irrespective of whether we have to sack him. It's at the centre of this whole case. If Tonda receives a hefty punishment many fans will go ballistic. If you think it's not much just wait and see what happens.

What are people gonna do? Write angry letters and start a petition?

[saintant]

9 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Again I'm not sure what you mean. If they ban him for 12 months let's say the following we will be forced to sack him. Fans will be pissed off but we will move on and get a new manager. I'm not sure what else you will be alluding to. Fans of other clubs won't give a shit other than a bit of schadenfreude.

Clearly I am saying that our fans will go ballistic if Tonda is handed a ban significantly greater than 6 months which is what the club is fearing according to Egg. I get that we'll have no choice but to move on but I suspect the reaction of our fans will be far greater than you seem to be alluding.

Edited 27 minutes ago by saintant

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Farmer Saint said:

If they go too hard Appeal will be very easy and you could see it getting very litigious.

The only way I could see them doing a huge ban is if there is evidence that he directed things and told them to cheat or that there are more instances that have come to light (although I'd argue we'd know about that already if there were.) 

[obelisk]

10 minutes ago, Midfield_General said:

When wondering about things like that, a simple test you can apply is to read the rules and see what they say.

Hope this helps

Why do that when I can wait for the experts here to get on their high horse?

[whelk]

Can someone phone me when we have the outcome?

[hypochondriac]

Just now, saintant said:

Clearly I am saying that our fans will go ballistic if Tonda is handed a ban significantly greater than 3 months which is what the club is fearing according to Egg. I get that we'll have no choice but to move on but I suspect the reaction of our fans will be far greater than you seem to be alluding.

Some angry chanting and letters to the echo? What else do you think is likely to happen?