Saints expelled from Play Offs by EFL
- Thread starter tomw24
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I must`ve spoken to about 30 people about spygate, none of whom are Saints fans. Most reckon that our punishment is far too harsh. To those who thought that it is proportionate, I asked if it was worse than, say, a coach instructing players to feign head injuries so as to stop the game to waste time or disrupt the oppositions momentum, and thus affect the outcome of the game. They all thought the latter was worse.
Saw this on Facebook, posted by football Martin.
Southampton’s dramatic expulsion from the Championship play-offs has triggered an extraordinary intervention from retired High Court judge Sir Nicholas Mostyn, who has accused the English Football League of delivering a “grotesquely draconian” punishment and compared the club to a sacrificial victim “shot to encourage the others.”
Writing in a strongly worded opinion piece titled “Admiral Byng is shot again”, Mostyn argued that the EFL may have been wrong to insist Southampton had no further right of appeal after being expelled from the play-offs over allegations of spying on Middlesbrough F.C. training sessions.
The controversy began on 7 May when a Southampton intern was accused of attending a Middlesbrough training session and gathering tactical information ahead of the clubs’ Championship semi-final. Middlesbrough publicly demanded severe sanctions, including expulsion, while the EFL launched disciplinary proceedings within 24 hours.
Southampton went on to beat Middlesbrough over two legs, but days later an EFL disciplinary commission expelled the Saints from the competition entirely an unprecedented punishment that cleared the way for Middlesbrough to take their place in the final.
Mostyn argued that although EFL rules block standard appeals, Southampton could still have challenged the ruling in the High Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, which allows courts to intervene in arbitration cases involving “serious irregularity” and “substantial injustice.”
The former judge said the commission’s written reasoning was “grossly defective,” claiming it failed to explain what evidence supported findings that Southampton had engaged in a “contrived and determined plan” to gain a competitive advantage.
He criticised the ruling for making severe allegations without clearly detailing how witness testimony and written evidence led to those conclusions, arguing that Southampton had been denied a proper explanation for such a severe sanction.
Mostyn also accused the EFL of making an example of Southampton to deter other clubs, invoking Voltaire’s famous line about executing an admiral “to encourage the others” — a reference to Admiral John Byng.
The retired judge further suggested Southampton could even have sought an emergency court order delaying the Championship play-off final while a legal challenge was heard.
The case has divided opinion across English football. Critics of Southampton argue the club crossed a clear ethical line by attempting to gather tactical information before a decisive fixture, while supporters believe the punishment was wildly disproportionate compared with previous disciplinary cases.
The EFL has not indicated any intention to revisit the decision.
Southampton’s dramatic expulsion from the Championship play-offs has triggered an extraordinary intervention from retired High Court judge Sir Nicholas Mostyn, who has accused the English Football League of delivering a “grotesquely draconian” punishment and compared the club to a sacrificial victim “shot to encourage the others.”
Writing in a strongly worded opinion piece titled “Admiral Byng is shot again”, Mostyn argued that the EFL may have been wrong to insist Southampton had no further right of appeal after being expelled from the play-offs over allegations of spying on Middlesbrough F.C. training sessions.
The controversy began on 7 May when a Southampton intern was accused of attending a Middlesbrough training session and gathering tactical information ahead of the clubs’ Championship semi-final. Middlesbrough publicly demanded severe sanctions, including expulsion, while the EFL launched disciplinary proceedings within 24 hours.
Southampton went on to beat Middlesbrough over two legs, but days later an EFL disciplinary commission expelled the Saints from the competition entirely an unprecedented punishment that cleared the way for Middlesbrough to take their place in the final.
Mostyn argued that although EFL rules block standard appeals, Southampton could still have challenged the ruling in the High Court under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, which allows courts to intervene in arbitration cases involving “serious irregularity” and “substantial injustice.”
The former judge said the commission’s written reasoning was “grossly defective,” claiming it failed to explain what evidence supported findings that Southampton had engaged in a “contrived and determined plan” to gain a competitive advantage.
He criticised the ruling for making severe allegations without clearly detailing how witness testimony and written evidence led to those conclusions, arguing that Southampton had been denied a proper explanation for such a severe sanction.
Mostyn also accused the EFL of making an example of Southampton to deter other clubs, invoking Voltaire’s famous line about executing an admiral “to encourage the others” — a reference to Admiral John Byng.
The retired judge further suggested Southampton could even have sought an emergency court order delaying the Championship play-off final while a legal challenge was heard.
The case has divided opinion across English football. Critics of Southampton argue the club crossed a clear ethical line by attempting to gather tactical information before a decisive fixture, while supporters believe the punishment was wildly disproportionate compared with previous disciplinary cases.
The EFL has not indicated any intention to revisit the decision.
Well if a Southampton fan has said it then I'm convinced.
Ffs...
Ffs...
Just put it there for interest. I doubt SR will put any effort in making it go somewhere.
His first name is Football though, so…
I was on about the judge he was quoting tbf.
I thought that the article by Mostyn was really interesting. Cases involving arbitration and adjudication are nototiously difficult to predict and another retired judge is just as likely to make the opposite decision taking the view that a whatsapp group discussing spying on other teams would constitute a contrived and determined plan.
I would be interested if the article was written before or after the appeal.
From a legal point of view, i believe that there must be a legal point in organisations being allowed to make whatever legal rules they like to run something like the EPL. I am sure the dispute could be unheld or challenged in the courts as the rules have nothing to say about how infringements are disputed. I would not bet on either outcome. Saints cannot challenge the right of the EPL to make a judgement but can challenge how it is calculated. The comment about the limited period of appeal is also something where i think the league would be vulnerable. I e English Law has more criteria to be satisfied than EPL rules. I am not sure how English law would deal with the breaches un EPL rules. Do all clubs sign an agreement each season to abide by these rules when they register ? That is about as much as you can say until it gets to court.
The absence of remedies in EPL rules is what is creating the ambiguity and the case law about evaluation of what constitutes a penalty is something which often gets challenged in the courts. There was a lot of this legislation about 10 years ago and recall the outcome of a case regarding a challenged parking ticket changing the law in that respect.
From a legal point of view and the proposed £200mill value of promotion ultimately being denied ,the outcome would be interesting. Any entitlement would be based on an assumption that we would beat Hull. I cannot see a court evaluating the cost of a 'what if.'
I would be fascinated if Saints got to legally enforce the release of paperwork to prove that the EPL were unduly influenced by Boro.
I would be interested if the article was written before or after the appeal.
From a legal point of view, i believe that there must be a legal point in organisations being allowed to make whatever legal rules they like to run something like the EPL. I am sure the dispute could be unheld or challenged in the courts as the rules have nothing to say about how infringements are disputed. I would not bet on either outcome. Saints cannot challenge the right of the EPL to make a judgement but can challenge how it is calculated. The comment about the limited period of appeal is also something where i think the league would be vulnerable. I e English Law has more criteria to be satisfied than EPL rules. I am not sure how English law would deal with the breaches un EPL rules. Do all clubs sign an agreement each season to abide by these rules when they register ? That is about as much as you can say until it gets to court.
The absence of remedies in EPL rules is what is creating the ambiguity and the case law about evaluation of what constitutes a penalty is something which often gets challenged in the courts. There was a lot of this legislation about 10 years ago and recall the outcome of a case regarding a challenged parking ticket changing the law in that respect.
From a legal point of view and the proposed £200mill value of promotion ultimately being denied ,the outcome would be interesting. Any entitlement would be based on an assumption that we would beat Hull. I cannot see a court evaluating the cost of a 'what if.'
I would be fascinated if Saints got to legally enforce the release of paperwork to prove that the EPL were unduly influenced by Boro.
I certainly think that the EFL would not want it released but surely a court cold demand it's disclosure ?
It would be a legal minefield made worse because the EPL had no rules to deal with the situation. I bet EFL lawyers will be all over the EFL constitution over the summer ensuring that this can never happen again. It would be fascinating just because of the law around what is or what isn't a penalty. and whether parties have the ability to implement them.
I am still fully expecting us to launch a legal case against the EFL.
Nothing less will satisfy me, I always said the approach the EFL took was potentially illegal - and I am hoping this is why we have the silence.
I also hope we are pursuing the way Boro played this out in the media - we were never given a fair trial from the moment this was reported.
If we sit there and take it like the little bitch Southampton are known for, I am unsure if I will continue to follow the club or the sport.
Have been getting more and more alienated from the game for many years.
This, as they say, is the...
Nothing less will satisfy me, I always said the approach the EFL took was potentially illegal - and I am hoping this is why we have the silence.
I also hope we are pursuing the way Boro played this out in the media - we were never given a fair trial from the moment this was reported.
If we sit there and take it like the little bitch Southampton are known for, I am unsure if I will continue to follow the club or the sport.
Have been getting more and more alienated from the game for many years.
This, as they say, is the...
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
I have spent a bit of time trawling through the EFL handbook looking for flaws, a lot of it is opinion and assumption but not specific, I reckon a law expert could could drive a legal bulldozer through some of it because of how it is worded. There are also instances where the rules have been breached and no action taken.
Legal enquiries would explain the almost deafening silence from the club since the decision was made.
It's one possible explanation but I wouldn't place any money on it being the reason TBH.
Wouldn't surprise me if the silence was just the club trying to let things blow over before the world cup starts.
Also trying to think of ways to justify a season ticket rise
I'd be shocked if the club were considering any sort of legal action and really don't think they should.
Also trying to think of ways to justify a season ticket rise
I'd be shocked if the club were considering any sort of legal action and really don't think they should.
The club can surely still put out a statement saying they can't comment further at this time whilst ongoing investigations are underway?
The silence is disgraceful.
The silence is disgraceful.
But that's what they did, no? I mean, all they can realistically do is put the same statement out, then everyone will complain that it doesn't say anything.
I agree, but I think there should be some halfway house where they at least reference it now a week later
Personally, I think they are having an internal PR quandary over what to say and also season tickets.
This is what I think too - they also need to publish the list of released players but assume they don't want that as their next communication.