That is probably true, but being found guilty without a trial isn't right.
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 am surprised by the lack of comments around another **** show under the ownership of Sports Republic.
They have been an utter **** stain on our club since the acquired us.
Regarding the potential punishment, I couldn't rule anything out just yet.
I think it could well be more than just a fine.
They have been an utter **** stain on our club since the acquired us.
Regarding the potential punishment, I couldn't rule anything out just yet.
I think it could well be more than just a fine.
This isn't a legal matter - far less evidence is required. And we have only been charged - the hearing is yet to be scheduled. But we're clearly guilty of spying as we are responsible for the person's actions as he was employeed by the club.
It's not a criminal court, there is no 'trial'.
From what Alfie House has said the club aren't going to contest the charge.
I'm bored of it all now, if we are found guilty then take the punishment and move on.
It's being blown out of all proportion by clubs that want to gain something out of it, from what I gather it was an individual who was filming from a public area (a hill) overlooking the training ground, perhaps Boro should've taken steps to make the ground more secure.
If Saints defence is that it was a lone wolf then that is difficult to prove otherwise.
It's being blown out of all proportion by clubs that want to gain something out of it, from what I gather it was an individual who was filming from a public area (a hill) overlooking the training ground, perhaps Boro should've taken steps to make the ground more secure.
If Saints defence is that it was a lone wolf then that is difficult to prove otherwise.
In other news I was accused of eating all the jaffa cakes... the empty packet was seen beside the open recycling bin and I was the only person in the house at the time.
My defence that I would have surely recycled the box had I eaten the last one and not chucked it into the "vicinity" of the aforementioned recycling venue like some stereotype husband fell on deaf ears and the family court has decreed I am to blame.
I didn't actually eat ALL of them. I dropped one ripping open the packet and it fell in the dog bowl....
My defence that I would have surely recycled the box had I eaten the last one and not chucked it into the "vicinity" of the aforementioned recycling venue like some stereotype husband fell on deaf ears and the family court has decreed I am to blame.
I didn't actually eat ALL of them. I dropped one ripping open the packet and it fell in the dog bowl....
I don't doubt that someone was near the training ground, but it's going to be very hard to prove that this was either a "lone wolf" analyst thinking he's helping the team (and maybe his career), or that he was told by higher ups to do it. That will be Southampton's argument, and we most likely will never actually know the truth.
Not sure how you can blame the alleged actions of one person on the owners? There are plenty of other things to bash SR on, but I'm not sure this is one.
Agreed. We're still ultimately responsible though even if it was a 'lone wolf'.
Like you say we'll never know for certain the exact details but I personally won't believe it was done mush acting by himself.
"Companies are generally responsible for their employees' actions through a legal doctrine known as vicarious liability, provided the wrongdoing occurred "in the course of employment". This means employers can be liable for negligence, discrimination, or unlawful acts done during work hours or while performing tasks, even if the employer did not approve or know about them"
That last point will prove crucial ... even if said person is a lone wolf, if they're doing things aligned to the role and within the realms of their working setup then Saints would be liable to accept that they have responsibility (at the least for said person) - If we accept that bit, it might allow us to avoid any further recriminations on the rest of the coaching setup etc.
But as a fan I won’t like having our club with the reputation. In the unlikely event that we are cleared we will still keep that cheating reputation in the eyes of many
It also depends on the details. If it's a guy on a hill with his iphone then it's hard to prove anything. If he really did have a full-on set of expensive high-spec microphones and listening devices (which I slightly doubt) then it's more possible that could be traced back to the club.
Well I can easily - it is another mess their stewardship has overseen. Or have they not been owners when this happened?
And it is highly unlikely this guy acted without the knowledge of others, if that is what you chose to believe then so be it
I think it depends on how high up it went. If this guy acted alone and just woke up in the morning thinking “I think I’ll go and spy on Boro this morning” then, although the club will be ultimately responsible, I don’t think you can specifically point that at the owners. That seems unlikely and I would think that someone a bit further up knew but again, we don’t know if that got as far as the owners (tbh we don’t know anything in terms of the details).Well I can easily - it is another mess their stewardship has overseen. Or have they not been owners when this happened?
And it is highly unlikely this guy acted without the knowledge of others, if that is what you chose to believe then so be it
Until we actually know what happened (if we ever do), I actually think you can’t pin the blame on any person(s) specifically.
But if people responded to what I wrote not what they think I wrote.
I never said it was their fault, just surpsied at the lack of comments as another **** stain has occured under them.
It may be because the majority aren't obsessed with it, just grateful we actually have owners that keep us alive, for all of their faults, we are a lot better off than many other clubs.
I am far from obsessed with it, but their ownership hasnt been particularly successful.
Maybe you are easily please. I should have married you.
It only took 1 person to have a huge impact on the McLaren spygate incident in F1 (my dad was working for them at the time so knows all the ins and outs). And that was mostly implemented by Ross Braun gathering info for getting his team together when he left Ferrari.