Tonda Eckert

[Badger]

6 hours ago, sfc4prem said:

To who? Who are the FA accountable to? Most people don't see the FA in positive terms, banning Tonda won't improve that a jot. Who are they showing they 'mean business' to, exactly?

Themselves perhaps.
 

Nothing like a bit of internal back slapping and congratulating themselves on a “job well done” to face their many critics and media to boost self belief and ‘relevance’ in the modern world. 

[Verbal]

46 minutes ago, DT said:

If it IS to be a ban, would it be a touchline ban? Ie free to manage the team for all but the 90 mins from the dugout?

Would have thought that isn't that bad. Get him an earpiece. And a phone...

So give him the exact same gear that Will Salt had? I like this idea.

Edited 18 hours ago by Verbal

[benjii]

2 hours ago, Saint Marky said:

We’re you bullied at school?

I we'ren't bullied.

[sadoldgit]

39 minutes ago, Verbal said:

So give him the exact same gear that Will Salt had? I like this idea.

Perhaps they should make Tonda stand behind the nearest tree and communicate with the coaching staff via an old iPhone on match days for the length of his ban?

[Cuddles]

43 minutes ago, benjii said:

I we'ren't bullied.

Did you're go to school though?

[RedArmy]

3 hours ago, Saint Marky said:

We’re you bullied at school?

“We’re” you listening at school? 

[West Dean FC Legend]

8 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Perhaps they should make Tonda stand behind the nearest tree and communicate with the coaching staff via an old iPhone on match days for the length of his ban?

I've already posted this twice elsewhere.

They should just give him a house to live in with his family and then his friends, players, coaches etc. can see him most nights or afternoons to make sure he is getting on okay.

There is literally nothing they can do about it as the players and coaches are just being kind and thoughtful friends. Unless of course the FA want to imprison him or something?

[benjii]

36 minutes ago, Cuddles said:

Did you're go to school though?

Me am educate.

[egg]

7 hours ago, LordHester said:

People keep going back to this FIFA ban for 12 months, but banning an international manager for 12 months is very different from that length of ban for a club manager, who is going to miss way more games in that time. 

Yep.  The average international female football team plays  8 - 12 games per year. If the FA follow that precedent, it must right that any ban should match the games played in that 12 month period, not the time period itself. 

[ChrisPY]

1 hour ago, Cuddles said:

Did you're go to school though?

I don’t think they’re school was up their with the best.

[hypochondriac]

38 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep.  The average international female football team plays  8 - 12 games per year. If the FA follow that precedent, it must right that any ban should match the games played in that 12 month period, not the time period itself. 

Is a ten game touchline ban fair? Reduced to six in appeal? I'd probably take that at this point. Depending on how we get on in the league cup could be back in time for pompey....

Edited 16 hours ago by hypochondriac

[CB Fry]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Is a ten game touchline ban fair? Reduced to six in appeal? I'd probably take that at this point. Depending on how we get on in the league cup could be back in time for pompey....

This, I would think, is the landing zone the club are looking at. 6 game touchline ban say no more about it.

Anything longer than Paul Davis got for lamping Glenn Cockerill one (9 games) would be bang out of order.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

This, I would think, is the landing zone the club are looking at. 6 game touchline ban say no more about it.

Anything longer than Paul Davis got for lamping Glenn Cockerill one (9 games) would be bang out of order.

And if the FA gave him that I don't think any rival clubs would kick up a fuss or consider it unfair. They will be fully aware that an attempt to give him more than that will royally fuck up our season.

[gio1saints]

9 hours ago, Mr X said:

I still don't get how he could have been an assistant manager and still not aware of spying rules I don't believe his apology came from the heart tbh.... What's done is done and looks like he won't be managing us at least for this season... Do they want him so much they will appoint a temporary manager from within for a season 

Even though what I’m about to say will trigger the usual hate mail and even though I want Tonda as our Manager and even though I hate everybody dissing him like hypocrites theres one thing has always worried me about this case. 
 

Tonda claims he did not know it was not allowed. That’s the bottom line. And he’s stuck to that story. 
 

Is Tonda fucking thick as shit ? Or simply normal intelligence but being disingenuous?
 

Which is more likely? Occam’s razor and the fact he is a professional in this area suggests it’s more likely he’s making it up. 
 

 I’d say at least 90% + of the posters on here knew there’s something off about spying on opponents - at very least double check the rules - and know that, surely, Tonda must also know that. To claim otherwise is either blind loyalty or I’ve also got some magic beans for sale I can see you know your magic beans….

I wish he’d of just fessed up, not have me believe a lie. 
 

Damn it though I’m as bad as everyone else. I’m going to suspend my disbelief and sing his name anyway. What has this game got to. Integrity and respect my arse.

[LiberalCommunist]

Imagine it was Millwall. Sending a intern to a opposition training ground within the 72 hr frame on multiple occasions.  

Would that fill you with incandescent rage that would ingulf you for the summer?

It's laughably dumb. Its fucking stupid. If there's an advantage gained, hit them with a massive fine. Okay.

But I don't believe anyone would be dining out on this daily, waiting for the next over reaction from the governing body. I really don't.

I now find myself longing for the next infringement. The next scandal. Just imagine the punishment for lets say bribing a official. Illegal betting and manipulation of gameplay. Violence and threats against the opposition. Racism. Spending well beyond your means and tax avoidance. Ball-boys not returning the ball. Corner flag over watered. No hot water in the away team dressing room, 

The rules can be subjective. But the punishments cannot be this disproportionate. Every case from now on has a yard stick. But that's the point. We know full well that they will never go this hard again. This is the precedent. This is the one flex, from a bullshit cowardly organisation that spends most of its time avoiding accountability. 

 

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by LiberalCommunist

[Yorkshire Saint]

53 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

Even though what I’m about to say will trigger the usual hate mail and even though I want Tonda as our Manager and even though I hate everybody dissing him like hypocrites theres one thing has always worried me about this case. 
 

Tonda claims he did not know it was not allowed. That’s the bottom line. And he’s stuck to that story. 
 

Is Tonda fucking thick as shit ? Or simply normal intelligence but being disingenuous?
 

Which is more likely? Occam’s razor and the fact he is a professional in this area suggests it’s more likely he’s making it up. 
 

 I’d say at least 90% + of the posters on here knew there’s something off about spying on opponents - at very least double check the rules - and know that, surely, Tonda must also know that. To claim otherwise is either blind loyalty or I’ve also got some magic beans for sale I can see you know your magic beans….

I wish he’d of just fessed up, not have me believe a lie. 
 

Damn it though I’m as bad as everyone else. I’m going to suspend my disbelief and sing his name anyway. What has this game got to. Integrity and respect my arse.

He knew the rules.

What makes me laugh is the further stupidity that they present the thinking that saying they didn't know would make this less an issue. Saying you did not know has never worked in the face of complicity ever. It's just bloody stupid.

 

[wild-saint]

1 hour ago, gio1saints said:

Even though what I’m about to say will trigger the usual hate mail and even though I want Tonda as our Manager and even though I hate everybody dissing him like hypocrites theres one thing has always worried me about this case. 
 

Tonda claims he did not know it was not allowed. That’s the bottom line. And he’s stuck to that story. 
 

Is Tonda fucking thick as shit ? Or simply normal intelligence but being disingenuous?
 

Which is more likely? Occam’s razor and the fact he is a professional in this area suggests it’s more likely he’s making it up. 
 

 I’d say at least 90% + of the posters on here knew there’s something off about spying on opponents - at very least double check the rules - and know that, surely, Tonda must also know that. To claim otherwise is either blind loyalty or I’ve also got some magic beans for sale I can see you know your magic beans….

I wish he’d of just fessed up, not have me believe a lie. 
 

Damn it though I’m as bad as everyone else. I’m going to suspend my disbelief and sing his name anyway. What has this game got to. Integrity and respect my arse.

The one thing you fail to add is that in Germany it isnt against the rules and if its been part of his working practise then its not a stretch to assume he would continue particularly when he has been dropped in to a interim role overnight midseason. The bigger question is why (if they didnt) did not one person in the club tell him it was agaisnt the rules? Now thats the million dollar question.

[suewhistle]

2 hours ago, egg said:

Yep.  The average international female football team plays  8 - 12 games per year. If the FA follow that precedent, it must right that any ban should match the games played in that 12 month period, not the time period itself. 

I believe they only had two games in the period of the ban, maybe a non competition year. Can't remember where i saw that but check if you like.

[Whitey Grandad]

4 hours ago, benjii said:

Me am educate.

 

[bpsaint]

1 hour ago, gio1saints said:

 

Tonda claims he did not know it was not allowed. That’s the bottom line. And he’s stuck to that story. 
 

Is Tonda fucking thick as shit ? Or simply normal intelligence but being disingenuous?
 

 

Thing is he’s claimed he didn’t know it was against the rules, but yet an intern was sent to Eastleigh to spy on Ipswich and were told to disguise themselves in an Eastleigh kit. Pretty conclusive evidence of doing something we knew was wrong.

[CB Fry]

16 minutes ago, wild-saint said:

The one thing you fail to add is that in Germany it isnt against the rules and if its been part of his working practise then its not a stretch to assume he would continue particularly when he has been dropped in to a interim role overnight midseason. The bigger question is why (if they didnt) did not one person in the club tell him it was agaisnt the rules? Now thats the million dollar question.

He wasn't fresh of the boat from Germany. He worked in the EFL for two years previously at Barnsley.

[obelisk]

2 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Is a ten game touchline ban fair? Reduced to six in appeal? I'd probably take that at this point. Depending on how we get on in the league cup could be back in time for pompey....

Ludicrously over the top for an "offence" that is widespread throughout the game. We need to start fighting back against the FA blazer G&T brigade rather than meekly accept their musings. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, obelisk said:

Ludicrously over the top for an "offence" that is widespread throughout the game. We need to start fighting back against the FA blazer G&T brigade rather than meekly accept their musings. 

I reckon the mood music is leaning towards a ban. Whether I think it's unfair or not is irrelevant. The main thing is to ensure that it's not so disproportionate that we have no choice but to sack him.

[obelisk]

1 hour ago, gio1saints said:

I’d say at least 90% + of the posters on here knew there’s something off about spying on opponents

I'd say quite the opposite. Who knew before May that scouting opponents practising in public would brings down the wrath of gods. The immediate reaction was all a bit of a laugh and the rest of the world considers the saga to be bonkers.

[Verbal]

However bad we think it's going to be I'm pretty sure the actual judgment will be worse. After what happened at the end of last season it's hard to fall back on wishful thinking. 

[pingpong]

I'm still not even convinced tonda knew - he never actually sent the guy off to spy personally - all the surreptitious nature came from the go-between.

And the fact that arsenal televised their Friday training before the champions league final, and that world cup training was regularly observed by media and opponents all seem to run salt in the wound (pun intended). 

I hope this season we watch all opponents up until the 72 hour mark, and that we get some fans to Boros training ground before our game with them to stream some live training on YouTube, just to illustrate how stupid the rule is.

[saintant]

20 minutes ago, obelisk said:

I'd say quite the opposite. Who knew before May that scouting opponents practising in public would brings down the wrath of gods. The immediate reaction was all a bit of a laugh and the rest of the world considers the saga to be bonkers.

When spygate happened I heard directly from a reliable source who worked in the game as a senior analyst that this observing of other teams training goes on all the time. Everyone knew it was happening and, until Boro decided to kick off, there was an unwritten law that clubs turned a blind eye. Others on here have said similar. Doesn't excuse what we did but, for me, it puts it into perspective.

[RedArmy]

14 minutes ago, pingpong said:

I'm still not even convinced tonda knew -

Fuck me

[Saint Fan CaM]

2 hours ago, gio1saints said:

Even though what I’m about to say will trigger the usual hate mail and even though I want Tonda as our Manager and even though I hate everybody dissing him like hypocrites theres one thing has always worried me about this case. 
 

Tonda claims he did not know it was not allowed. That’s the bottom line. And he’s stuck to that story. 
 

Is Tonda fucking thick as shit ? Or simply normal intelligence but being disingenuous?
 

Which is more likely? Occam’s razor and the fact he is a professional in this area suggests it’s more likely he’s making it up. 
 

 I’d say at least 90% + of the posters on here knew there’s something off about spying on opponents - at very least double check the rules - and know that, surely, Tonda must also know that. To claim otherwise is either blind loyalty or I’ve also got some magic beans for sale I can see you know your magic beans….

I wish he’d of just fessed up, not have me believe a lie. 
 

Damn it though I’m as bad as everyone else. I’m going to suspend my disbelief and sing his name anyway. What has this game got to. Integrity and respect my arse.

The details of the case are largely unknown to the general public including you, me and the vast majority of those on this forum. The evidence appears to indicate that Tonda did not initiate the scouting of other clubs, but that he was approached to sanction the field trips which he did. Given the norm for him was that scouting was perfectly acceptable, in the heat of the battle it is likely he did not question whether the practice was legal in the UK EFL. The Head of Scouting should have known the laws surrounding the practice in the EFL and advised Tonda, however they didn’t so as I understand it, he/she has left the club. So while he was complicit and has admitted as much, he was not necessarily directly responsible and this might be used in mitigation. 

I’ve said before, Tonda has also been affected by the EFL’s incredibly harsh punishment in terms of damaged professional reputation and reduced income due to being prevented getting to the Prem.  This should also be taken into account by the FA, alongside his open ‘confession’ and co-operation in the investigation(s). To hand-out an overly harsh punishment to him such as any form of full match ban which would also affect the club and all its employees, the fans etc., would be utterly wrong, harsh and ridiculous. Hopefully the FA will see that the club has made reparations, hired Still and taken systematic preventative action, so that a fine and a suspended 3 game touch line ban will suffice.

Edited 12 hours ago by Saint Fan CaM

[Saint Marky]

54 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Fuck me

There will be zero acceptances from that desperate invitation.

[trousers]

13 hours ago, LordHester said:

People keep going back to this FIFA ban for 12 months, but banning an international manager for 12 months is very different from that length of ban for a club manager, who is going to miss way more games in that time. 

 

5 hours ago, egg said:

Yep.  The average international female football team plays  8 - 12 games per year. If the FA follow that precedent, it must right that any ban should match the games played in that 12 month period, not the time period itself. 

 

2 hours ago, suewhistle said:

I believe they only had two games in the period of the ban, maybe a non competition year. Can't remember where i saw that but check if you like.

I looked it up a while back when this first cropped up, and they played 3 competitive games in that 12 month period 👍🏻

Edited 11 hours ago by trousers

[trousers]

8 hours ago, bpsaint said:

Thing is he’s claimed he didn’t know it was against the rules, but yet an intern was sent to Eastleigh to spy on Ipswich and were told to disguise themselves in an Eastleigh kit. Pretty conclusive evidence of doing something we knew was wrong.

The 'disguise' thing *could* just have been a case of Tonda not  wanting Ipswich to know we were there, rather than covering for something he knew was wrong. (i.e. In a hypothetical world where spying isn't breaking any rules, there'd still be logic in trying to do it incognito...)

Unlikely? Maybe... But still a valid alternative explanation *if* Tonda genuinely didn't appreciate it was wrong to 'spy' in this league. 

Edited 5 hours ago by trousers

[trousers]

1 hour ago, RedArmy said:

Fuck me

 

23 minutes ago, Saint Marky said:

There will be zero acceptances from that desperate invitation.

Speak for yourself... I'm giving it the careful consideration it deserves 😍

[John B]

17 hours ago, Give it to Ron said:

Does he ? Have you not watched recent interviews?

The players don’t think so certainly not Dobbin , Larin or Peretz

It is nothing to do with what the players think 

Do you not realise he has proved to be  dishonest and people like you should accept that fact.

 

[Sunglasses Ron]

7 hours ago, trousers said:

The 'disguise' thing *could* just have been a case of Tonda not  wanting Ipswich to know we were there

They don't know that we know? Well, we definitely now know that they know we know.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, John B said:

It is nothing to do with what the players think 

Do you not realise he has proved to be  dishonest and people like you should accept that fact.

 

By admitting what he did?

[Cuddles]

1 hour ago, John B said:

It is nothing to do with what the players think 

Do you not realise he has proved to be  dishonest and people like you should accept that fact.

 

How do you feel when Scienza goes over easily outside the box?

[BARCELONASAINT]

I no longer care if he knew or he didn't. He didn't kill anyone and what he did/club did is nothing compared to what bigger clubs do and get away with it daily.

Enough with the hypocrisy, forgive and forget and move on. For now he is our manager so lets give 100% our support to him and the team. 

[mss636]

10 hours ago, bpsaint said:

Thing is he’s claimed he didn’t know it was against the rules, but yet an intern was sent to Eastleigh to spy on Ipswich and were told to disguise themselves in an Eastleigh kit. Pretty conclusive evidence of doing something we knew was wrong.

Because if he thought it was ok he’d have sent the Spy wearing full Southampton kit with a flashing hat saying “I’m a spy”?

[bpsaint]

9 hours ago, trousers said:

The 'disguise' thing *could* just have been a case of Tonda not  wanting Ipswich to know we were there, rather than covering for something he knew was wrong. (i.e. In a hypothetical world where spying isn't breaking any rules, there'd still be logic in trying to do it incognito...)

Unlikely? Maybe... But still a valid alternative explanation *if* Tonda genuinely didn't appreciate it was wrong to 'spy' in this league. 

Why would Tonda care if Ipswich knew we were there if it wasn’t breaking any rules.

4 minutes ago, mss636 said:

Because if he thought it was ok he’d have sent the Spy wearing full Southampton kit with a flashing hat saying “I’m a spy”?

Numpty. If you genuinely don’t think what you’re doing is wrong why bother with a disguise, just let them in wearing normal clothes. It’s likely that anyone observing training that wasn’t meant to be there would have rightfully been challenged.

[hypochondriac]

5 minutes ago, bpsaint said:

Why would Tonda care if Ipswich knew we were there if it wasn’t breaking any rules.

Numpty. If you genuinely don’t think what you’re doing is wrong why bother with a disguise, just let them in wearing normal clothes. It’s likely that anyone observing training that wasn’t meant to be there would have rightfully been challenged.

Because he may have been aware that openly spying would not be welcomed by the opposing team but was aware that everyone does it on the sly and there was omerta around the practice. I think it's likely that he did know it was wrong but I can see a scenario where he wasn't aware that it was specifically against the rules.

[LiberalCommunist]

If it is as common place as people are saying, then our best form of defence would be to whittle out other spies and make this a football wide issue. The amount of football staff that get removed and feel spurned would make this a relatively easy task, especially when monetising it. Why wouldn't we be seeing more coming forward knowing how much of a shit show this has been? Is it the danger of self persecution, or something more sinister? 

But seriously, if this is common place, lets drag it into the light using any means necessary. 

[Dman]

21 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Because he may have been aware that openly spying would not be welcomed by the opposing team but was aware that everyone does it on the sly and there was omerta around the practice. I think it's likely that he did know it was wrong but I can see a scenario where he wasn't aware that it was specifically against the rules.

I think you'd have to be incredibly naive to think he wasn't aware that he was breaking the rules. 

I do think he knew, but also probably thought it was just one of those things that happen and isn't that serious and would at worst result in a slap on the wrists - which I agree with him on. 

[Give it to Ron]

2 hours ago, John B said:

It is nothing to do with what the players think 

Do you not realise he has proved to be  dishonest and people like you should accept that fact.

 

Where have I said I haven’t accepted he did wrong? Of course you have never made a mistake or done anything wrong in your life.

Its ordering a lad watch a team train its not robbery, mass murder, just not within 72 hours!.

He will be punished but when do you stop shooting the dead dog?

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, Dman said:

I think you'd have to be incredibly naive to think he wasn't aware that he was breaking the rules. 

I do think he knew, but also probably thought it was just one of those things that happen and isn't that serious and would at worst result in a slap on the wrists - which I agree with him on. 

Maybe that is true and I don't think it's as far fetched as you do to suggest that he wasn't fully abreast of the rules on spying given that it's not against the rules abroad. Like you I said I suspect he probably did know but I can also see a scenario where he didn't. 

[BarberSaint]

11 hours ago, saintant said:

When spygate happened I heard directly from a reliable source who worked in the game as a senior analyst that this observing of other teams training goes on all the time. Everyone knew it was happening and, until Boro decided to kick off, there was an unwritten law that clubs turned a blind eye. Others on here have said similar. Doesn't excuse what we did but, for me, it puts it into perspective.

Well it actually does put it into perspective: it's not that bad if everyone does it or it is that bad and so then is everyone for doing it.

As I've said before, watching Doku and stopping Doku are different things entirely so I doubt spying on Man City would have helped much prior to them really taking it to us (while in first gear) at Wembley.

[Graffito]

2 hours ago, John B said:

It is nothing to do with what the players think 

Do you not realise he has proved to be  dishonest and people like you should accept that fact.

 

He has not “proved to be dishonest”. Eckert authorised something dishonest. That does not prove him to be dishonest. Somebody was saying he lacks integrity, maybe you, maybe someone else. Again not so. You are arguing from the very particular to the general; damning someone’s whole character based on something they did wrong. It’s a logical fallacy. 
 

And I think it does matter what the players think. If Eckert didn’t treat his players with honesty and integrity they simply wouldn’t play for him. Some have gone beyond that and praised him.

[Graffito]

1 hour ago, bpsaint said:

Why would Tonda care if Ipswich knew we were there if it wasn’t breaking any rules.

Numpty. If you genuinely don’t think what you’re doing is wrong why bother with a disguise, just let them in wearing normal clothes. It’s likely that anyone observing training that wasn’t meant to be there would have rightfully been challenged.

It was the reluctant Intern that requested an Eastleigh kit.

Edited 56 minutes ago by Graffito

[BarberSaint]

2 minutes ago, Graffito said:

He has not “proved to be dishonest”. Eckert authorised something dishonest. That does not prove him to be dishonest. Somebody was saying he lacks integrity, maybe you, maybe someone else. Again not so. You are arguing from the very particular to the general; damning someone’s whole character based on something they did wrong. It’s a logical fallacy. 
 

And I think it does matter what the players think. If Eckert didn’t treat his players with honesty and integrity they simply wouldn’t play for him. Some have gone beyond that and praised him.

Is 'against the rules', whatever they may be, dishonest?

 

If I tell a fib, am I dishonest? A white lie? Etc.

I don't think he's dishonest as he's never said he wasn't involved in it and been shown/had it proved that his comment(s) were dishonest. Equally, by that measure and irregardless of accusations other, Mr Salt *is* dishonest. But he, here, is allegedly the 'victim'. 

And of course, then, Mr Gibson and the Crying Swede are both honest and dishonest.

[Stripey McStripe Shirt]

1 hour ago, LiberalCommunist said:

If it is as common place as people are saying, then our best form of defence would be to whittle out other spies and make this a football wide issue. The amount of football staff that get removed and feel spurned would make this a relatively easy task, especially when monetising it. Why wouldn't we be seeing more coming forward knowing how much of a shit show this has been? Is it the danger of self persecution, or something more sinister? 

But seriously, if this is common place, lets drag it into the light using any means necessary. 

Yep, nothing would make me happier than if we pulled out a dossier of other clubs. I doubt it's that straightforward though, despite the fact the Boro found it so suspiciously easy to get evidence from themselves and other clubs within days. Almost like it was a set up..