Tonda Eckert

[Give it to Ron]

16 minutes ago, whelk said:

10 games

Touchline or stadium 

[Window Cleaner]

Luckily for us. Don't rate Howe. 

 

 

[Green]

31 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

Luckily for us. Don't rate Howe. 

 

 

I don’t know how serious the links were but some discussion about how we could have appointed Howe in the first summer of SR when we held on to  Hasenhuttl, delaying the sacking before getting Jones on board.

Also linked when we appointed Adkins 

[VectisSaint]

1 hour ago, Give it to Ron said:

Touchline or stadium 

More likely 'all footballing activity'. Stadium/touchline is not much different, and do not reflect what he 'did'.

[Wade Garrett]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

10 games

Fact or your estimate?

[Nordic Saint]

11 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

More likely 'all footballing activity'. Stadium/touchline is not much different, and do not reflect what he 'did'.

What did he 'do'? It was a club scouting activity involving the actions and knowledge of scouting staff as well as others at the club, contravening a new 72-hour rule, for which the club already received a ridiculously harsh punishment. 

Such severe punishments are being handed out by the EFL and the FA, not because they are appropriate, but because they are good publicity for the organisations involved and popular with the media and fans of rival clubs, especially those in the Middlesbrough and Portsmouth areas.

[Convict Colony]

2 hours ago, CB Fry said:

They have replaced him with what looks to me like a Tonda-alike

was on about jassle when he was at rb salzburg, will be interesting to watch, i dont rate howe or his mgmt skills.

[Window Cleaner]

2 hours ago, bpsaint said:

Madness, undermining Howe at each turn and now replacing him with some bloke that was a manager in the Saudi Pro League. Hope it all ends in tears for the Sportswashing FC fans.

Howe's results last season were unsatisfactory to say the least. True they sold players but who could say if Isaak would have done any better at Newcastle than he did at Liverpool, might not have got the same injury I suppose.

But Newcastle last season showed that they are (or were) an ageing side towards the end of the road. Change was necessary.

As for their potential new manager who knows what that will (or would) bring.

[Ted Bates Statue]

2 hours ago, Give it to Ron said:

Touchline or stadium 

Banned from the entire planet. But actually it's not for 10 games, it's 10 million seconds, which I grudgingly accept as a fair punishment

Edited 5 hours ago by Ted Bates Statue

[Give it to Ron]

1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

More likely 'all footballing activity'. Stadium/touchline is not much different, and do not reflect what he 'did'.

Big difference between stadium and touchline he would still manage on match day in dressing room etc if just touchline.

[Window Cleaner]

5 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Banned from the entire planet. But actually it's not for 10 games, it's 10 million seconds, which I grudgingly accept as a fair punishment

That's only a bit less than 4 months actually, so not that bad.

[HKsaint]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

10 games

For discrimination charge 

[Ted Bates Statue]

10 minutes ago, Window Cleaner said:

That's only a bit less than 4 months actually, so not that bad.

Still think anything more than a 3 match touchline ban would be overkill, and over 5-6 matches we'd be looking for a new manager. 

7 minutes ago, HKsaint said:

For discrimination charge 

I disagree, as that would be classified as aggravated breach and come under rule E3.2. The reason for my relative optimism is that he's only been charged under E3.1 which would seemingly relate to the act of spying and not the miscellaneous innuendo around bullying. 

[Window Cleaner]

3 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Still think anything more than a 3 match touchline ban would be overkill, and over 5-6 matches we'd be looking for a new manager. 

I disagree, as that would be classified as aggravated breach and come under rule E3.2. The reason for my relative optimism is that he's only been charged under E3.1 which would seemingly relate to the act of spying and not the miscellaneous innuendo around bullying. 

The charges refer to misconduct and bringing the game into disrepute. No discrimination apparently.

But misconduct is a big basket....

[die Mannyschaft]

On 29/07/2026 at 13:38, TheAlehouseBrawlers said:

Let’s be honest, it all depends on if any of the panel are good buddies with Gibbo

The whole is related to what Boro have said at start and what they wanted as punishment.  No one countered thus at EFL. SKY or main pundits who just want Saints to collapse or get relegated. 

[M271]

I know that this is in relation to E3.2 and discrimination but interesting that the minimum 10 match player ban is reduced to 6 if has admitted to the breach at an early opportunity. IMO Tondas ‘offence’ is not as serious as this so should not be worse than this and hopefully less severe. 🤞
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cn4nlpwq1qyo

 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, M271 said:

I know that this is in relation to E3.2 and discrimination but interesting that the minimum 10 match player ban is reduced to 6 if has admitted to the breach at an early opportunity. IMO Tondas ‘offence’ is not as serious as this so should not be worse than this and hopefully less severe. 🤞
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cn4nlpwq1qyo

 

And that's making it harsher presumably from the start of the season. Tonda has three instances though.

[Nordic Saint]

16 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

And that's making it harsher presumably from the start of the season. Tonda has three instances though.

The Club does and the Club has already been punished. He is just one of many employees of the Club, for which the owner is responsible, including scouts and analysts. He didn't personally break the 72-hour rule and, by all accounts he didn't instruct anyone to break it. If it happened 73 hours before the game, no rule would have been broken. In a year when FIFA were telling teams they must make their final training sessions open to the public or face punishment, it might just as well have been Middlesbrough who were being punished for a petty breach of an arbitrary rule. It's hardly a serious crime like violence on the pitch.

But, the FA will want the publicity that a big headline punishment will garner. Severe punishments are always popular, even if they are inappropriate. 

Edited 4 hours ago by Nordic Saint

[Lighthouse]

49 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

by all accounts he didn't instruct anyone to break it

I think you’ll find he did.

 

49 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

If it happened 73 hours before the game, no rule would have been broken.

Yep, that’s the general idea of having a rule.

 

50 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

It's hardly a serious crime like violence on the pitch.

It was a deliberate ploy to cheat an opponent out of a game potentially worth £200m. I don’t think the ‘no big deal’ argument is going to wash with anybody who isn’t a Saints fan.

54 minutes ago, Nordic Saint said:

But, the FA will want the publicity that a big headline punishment will garner. Severe punishments are always popular, even if they are inappropriate. 

Absolutely baseless hysteria. The FA have absolutely nothing to gain from punishing Tonda.

[egg]

4 hours ago, whelk said:

10 games

The Canada ban was 12 months, and the average matches played by a female international team in 12 months is 8-12 games. Your 10 is bang in the middle of that. 

[egg]

1 hour ago, Nordic Saint said:

The Club does and the Club has already been punished. He is just one of many employees of the Club, for which the owner is responsible, including scouts and analysts. He didn't personally break the 72-hour rule and, by all accounts he didn't instruct anyone to break it. If it happened 73 hours before the game, no rule would have been broken. In a year when FIFA were telling teams they must make their final training sessions open to the public or face punishment, it might just as well have been Middlesbrough who were being punished for a petty breach of an arbitrary rule. It's hardly a serious crime like violence on the pitch.

But, the FA will want the publicity that a big headline punishment will garner. Severe punishments are always popular, even if they are inappropriate. 

Reference to the club punishment is irrelevant. Tonda will be punished for what Tonda has done. 

Re the rest, what Lighthouse said. 

[SW5 SAINT]

I think it’s unlikely that Tonda said to Salt go and spy on Middlesbrough, and make sure you do it within 72 hours of kick off..!

[Window Cleaner]

43 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

 

 

 

Absolutely baseless hysteria. The FA have absolutely nothing to gain from punishing Tonda.

Well apart from discouraging the same sort of endeavour in the future. Establish a base line punishment for future reference, avoid well Bielsa wasn't punished by the FA sort of stuff.

Footballing jurisprudence if you will.

[AlexLaw76]

2 minutes ago, SW5 SAINT said:

I think it’s unlikely that Tonda said to Salt go and spy on Middlesbrough, and make sure you do it within 72 hours of kick off..!

Why is it?

[trousers]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

The Canada ban was 12 months, and the average matches played by a female international team in 12 months is 8-12 games. Your 10 is bang in the middle of that. 

Although, FWIW, Canada only played 3 competitive matches in that 12 month period. #likeforlike

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, Nordic Saint said:

But, the FA will want the publicity that a big headline punishment will garner. Severe punishments are always popular, even if they are inappropriate. 

This makes no sense whatsoever.

[Window Cleaner]

3 minutes ago, SW5 SAINT said:

I think it’s unlikely that Tonda said to Salt go and spy on Middlesbrough, and make sure you do it within 72 hours of kick off..!

Of course it isn't. Schedules were made, hôtels and flights booked. Salt was also supposed to return the follow ing day.

[Wade Garrett]

Any chance the FA can put us out of our misery soon?

How fucking long do they need?

[Window Cleaner]

1 minute ago, Wade Garrett said:

Any chance the FA can put us out of our misery soon?

How fucking long do they need?

Well I expect they anticipated that he'd have been sacked long ago and keeping him on is a problem of our own création that has no bearing on their procédures. All their investigations take time.

[egg]

32 minutes ago, trousers said:

Although, FWIW, Canada only played 3 competitive matches in that 12 month period. #likeforlike

They did, but the average over that period is 8-12. Regardless, matching the time period not games would be nuts. 

[West end Saints]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

I think you’ll find he did.

 

Yep, that’s the general idea of having a rule.

 

It was a deliberate ploy to cheat an opponent out of a game potentially worth £200m. I don’t think the ‘no big deal’ argument is going to wash with anybody who isn’t a Saints fan.

Absolutely baseless hysteria. The FA have absolutely nothing to gain from punishing Tonda.

I think the use of the word cheat doesn't really help with assessing an appropriate punishment objectively.

Paying off officials is cheating. So is feigning an injury, gaining yards on throw in. 

It is the level of dishonesty and the likely implications of the action that matter.

It was premeditated and dishonest which would increase punishment.

However, the likely benefit is marginal, which lessens it 

It was this basis that previous FA chairman was on the radio saying our already received punishment was too harsh.

I think Tondas attitude at panel will also matter

[Lighthouse]

10 minutes ago, West end Saints said:

I think the use of the word cheat doesn't really help with assessing an appropriate punishment objectively.

Paying off officials is cheating. So is feigning an injury, gaining yards on throw in. 

It is the level of dishonesty and the likely implications of the action that matter.

It was premeditated and dishonest which would increase punishment.

However, the likely benefit is marginal, which lessens it 

It was this basis that previous FA chairman was on the radio saying our already received punishment was too harsh.

I think Tondas attitude at panel will also matter

We employed a level of subterfuge, albeit in a laughably bad manner, in order to gain inside information on their entire game plan and formations. It’s like playing blackjack, looking at everyone else’s cards and trying to claim you’re not cheating and the ‘benefit is marginal’.

[Doctoroncall]

9 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

We employed a level of subterfuge, albeit in a laughably bad manner, in order to gain inside information on their entire game plan and formations. It’s like playing blackjack, looking at everyone else’s cards and trying to claim you’re not cheating and the ‘benefit is marginal’.

Only if the game of blackjack was a practice game. 

Also, I’m not sure how you came to the conclusion the intern would gain information on their entire game plan and formation. A bold statement!  

Saints broke the rules trying to gain a sporting advantage and were punished. End of. 

[Starksj1995]

18 hours ago, woodsaint1 said:

Not big enough? The mid to top end of that is easily enough to get rid of him

Think if it’s 6 or longer may sack him 

[Starksj1995]

8 hours ago, beatlesaint said:

Has Dragan said if Tonda gets a ban and they lose an appeal he would get in a short term/caretaker manager? 
My old man reckons he’s read it but he’s 86 and easily confused 🤣

He said in summer if Tonda is banned he will support him but he can’t be manager so he will have to be replaced 

[Window Cleaner]

1 minute ago, Starksj1995 said:

Think if it’s 6 or longer may sack him 

Probably promote him to head information gatherer and let his assistant run the team for 6 months or so. Don't see the owner backing down at all.

[Dark Munster]

26 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

We employed a level of subterfuge, albeit in a laughably bad manner, in order to gain inside information on their entire game plan and formations. It’s like playing blackjack, looking at everyone else’s cards and trying to claim you’re not cheating and the ‘benefit is marginal’.

MLG mode on: I play blackjack and look at everyone else’s cards to keep count. Since I am trying to beat the dealer only, not them, it's not cheating. 

[Starksj1995]

1 minute ago, Window Cleaner said:

Probably promote him to head information gatherer and let his assistant run the team for 6 months or so. Don't see the owner backing down at all.

He said in summer he won’t be here if the fa ban Tonda 

[OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

It was a deliberate ploy to cheat an opponent out of a game potentially worth £200m. I don’t think the ‘no big deal’ argument is going to wash with anybody who isn’t a Saints fan.

Literally every friend I have who are season ticket holders at other clubs think we've been hard done by. Everyone. They all say the whole thing is a nonsense and we've been sh*t on.

It wasn't cheating. It was scouting.  

On another tack. When I said to my son, what employer would keep an employee that has lost the club potentially £200 million, his argument is we were nowhere near the play offs when he became manager. I've never thought of it like this.

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint said:

Literally every friend I have who are season ticket holders at other clubs think we've been hard done by. Everyone. They all say the whole thing is a nonsense and we've been sh*t on.

It wasn't cheating. It was scouting.  

On another tack. When I said to my son, what employer would keep an employee that has lost the club potentially £200 million, his argument is we were nowhere near the play offs when he became manager. I've never thought of it like this.

It was cheating, ffs

[Matthew Le God]

4 minutes ago, OnceaSaintalwaysaSaint said:

It wasn't cheating. It was scouting.  

 

If I look at your cards in a game of poker, is that cheating or scouting?

[StrangelyBrown]

1 minute ago, Matthew Le God said:

 

If I look at your cards in a game of poker, is that cheating or scouting?

You should hide your cards better. It's taking advantage of your poor poker skills

[wild-saint]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

I think you’ll find he did.

 

Yep, that’s the general idea of having a rule.

 

It was a deliberate ploy to cheat an opponent out of a game potentially worth £200m. I don’t think the ‘no big deal’ argument is going to wash with anybody who isn’t a Saints fan.

Absolutely baseless hysteria. The FA have absolutely nothing to gain from punishing Tonda.

I haven’t spoken one person in real life that feels this whole witch hunt isn’t completely over the top. Not one! The only place you see these pearl clutching views are on the likes of X which is ground zero for extreme views.

[saintant]

14 minutes ago, wild-saint said:

I haven’t spoken one person in real life that feels this whole witch hunt isn’t completely over the top. Not one! The only place you see these pearl clutching views are on the likes of X which is ground zero for extreme views.

There has been plenty of pearl clutching on this forum.

[egg]

1 hour ago, Doctoroncall said:

Saints broke the rules trying to gain a sporting advantage and were punished. End of. 

Yep, the punishment against Saints has been done. 

Tonda isn't Saints. 

Separate entities. Separate punishment. 

[Mr X]

1 hour ago, West end Saints said:

I think the use of the word cheat doesn't really help with assessing an appropriate punishment objectively.

Paying off officials is cheating. So is feigning an injury, gaining yards on throw in. 

It is the level of dishonesty and the likely implications of the action that matter.

It was premeditated and dishonest which would increase punishment.

However, the likely benefit is marginal, which lessens it 

It was this basis that previous FA chairman was on the radio saying our already received punishment was too harsh.

I think Tondas attitude at panel will also matter

Here lies the problem, his attitude is that he still doesn't truly believe he did anything wrong imo 

[hypochondriac]

8 minutes ago, Mr X said:

Here lies the problem, his attitude is that he still doesn't truly believe he did anything wrong imo 

Based on what? He has quite clearly said he was wrong and apologised a nukber of times.

[TheSoundman]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

Yep, the punishment against Saints has been done. 

Tonda isn't Saints. 

Separate entities. Separate punishment. 

This for me is the real crux, and why the FA need to show some common sense (for a change).

1). If the FA go heavy on Tonda and ban him from football for 12 months... it's no punishment whatsoever for him. We'll have to sack him and he walks into another job in Italy or Germany next week. There's no way their FA's will uphold an English FA ban for this. So he effectively gets no punishment but we get another one as we need to start looking for another manager on the eve of the new season.

2). The FA go midway and ban him from the stadium for 10 games. It's an inconvenience for him and a pain in the arse for the club. Together with the 4 point deduction it could be the difference between us coming top 2 or facing some north east team in the playoff final 😉. It's still another punishment for Saints.

3). Or, the FA make Tonda wear a luminous pink T-shirt, a red nose and dye his hair green for 6 months. He'll feel like a prat but he can do his job and Saints genuinely don't get punished again (other than having a clown for a manager).

What is a fair punishment, when Saints have already been punished (twice)?

[The Kraken]

10 minutes ago, Mr X said:

Here lies the problem, his attitude is that he still doesn't truly believe he did anything wrong imo 

After the Phil Parsons “sorry, yeah not sorry LOL” omnishambles, I think Solak’s lawyers will be thoroughly invested in the process of what Eckert portrays as what he does or did/didn’t believe. So I’m not considering a problem as such. Much more the problem is what the club and Tonda admitted before, and how that somehow gets mitigated. 

The FA are also abiding by their rules and not the EFL’s. Similarities for sure, but not identical.

[2Morrow]

If we beat Colchester then first game back after the 10 games would be Pompey...

August and September banned.