I don't. Think the lone wolf is the least likely explanation of the lot.
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
-
Don’t think they are saying lone wolf , just that it may not be from Tonda Himself ?
Not necessarily lone wolf but someone thought it would be a good idea to take a look at Boro’s ground as it is so open. So a one off.
If we do get kicked out, I’d suspect every player would have their agent looking for a move this summer.
I’d be fuming if all my work and effort was for nothing because of this.
I’d be fuming if all my work and effort was for nothing because of this.
****ing hell - this was posted on the Boro forum:
Quick question:
Is Tonda Eckert the worst German since Adolf Hitler?
(And Hitler wasn't even German until 1932, whereas Eckert has been German all his life, I believe)
Therefore my answer is yes
I don't know where to even start with that.
Best German since Albert Einstein imo
Breaking news:
Middlesbrough spy found in Southampton dressing room learning how to celebrate a win
Middlesbrough spy found in Southampton dressing room learning how to celebrate a win
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
We've been Paddy Powered.
You must log in or register to see media
That’s Colin from Portsmouth btw
Big fan of you being called Lobby as well.
I think that would need to be verified and run past James Corden first.
100%. Just seeing Tonda and his staff with their Manager of the Month trophy reminded me that they would likely have to be rescinded, due to his achieving results via illegal means; and those results themselves would all have to be reversed, with points handed back, all the way back to the start of his reign of terror, changing the actual landscape of the playoffs and who made it in; not to mention, wins over Southampton may well have handed many teams a run of momentum that would have kickstarted their season. Leicester would not have lost 4-3 had we not spied on them and worked out that going 0-3 down was the best way to achieve those three points, and they may well have survived, seeing as that result coincided with a pretty fatal loss of form. Infact, the whole season might have to be played again, with Saints starting on -2.
And actually infact, would we have hired Tonda in the first place if he had not achieved certain results via scandalous means with previous clubs in his support role that attracted us to him as an U21 coach? He'd not have been promoted as interim and then permanent manager without the aid of spying on other teams. I think there's probably recourse to not only go back to 1863 and restart the whole of organised football, adding into Ebenezer Cobb Morley's rules of the game that no watching other teams 72 hours before a match should be allowed - even though you could I think only watch Sheffield United back then - but back beyond that to rip up the rulebook and scrap all results of the Chinese game of cuju from 300BC, from which the roots of football came. I think that is my main fear around this hearing, as that would be a complete nightmare and we'd likely lose THB and Scienza at minimum!
Last edited:
This one even better. Short and sweet 
You must log in or register to see images
Additionally, if we were spying on other clubs and it was so responsible for our run, why can we still not beat Bristol City??
Their training ground is private & isnt visible to the public, obviously.
My longest post of the season but here we go... here's how I see it as of now and what I am expecting:
Saints are arguing for due process and the outlined timeframe because it gives them time to be thorough on their internal process. They're playing it pretty smart (IMO) by laying low, calling for alignment to the established due process and taking their time. In the meantime, we have now defeated Boro on the pitch and punted the hearing into the gap between the second leg and the final. Saints will be establishing lines of defence, items of mitigation and stress testing. Realistically, their priority beyond avoiding a very severe sporting punishment against the club will be putting enough distance between Tonda (and Spors) and whatever has gone on here, whether one (or both) of them were involved in this or aware of it to any degree or not
Saints need to be able to present that no senior decision makers at the executive level of the club were authorising or even aware of this activity. I suspect that when our internal investigation is complete, the outcome will be that we inform the EFL that nobody at exec level was aware of this and the intern was a lone wolf (harder to convince the panel with, I suspect) or acting under direction from a middle manager within the analysis team (far more plausible to the panel). Not quite the lone wolf theory but also not linking it back to those at the top of the football dept. They'll tell the panel that those involved have been/will be dealt with by the club as a demonstration to the hearing and there will be some sort of supporting statement from Dragan Solak/Phil Parsons expressing their anger/disappointment that club staff were behaving in this way. The photo of the lad at the training ground can actually be used in mitigation to show how amateur the operation looks and suggest that a club-coordinated spying mission would be a bit more sophisticated than a 20-something in jeans lurking next to a tree with his iPhone in his hand
I'm curious as to whether Tonda will or won't have known about this specifically. It's clear he places a lot of emphasis on analytics and staff who work on providing data insights - the first team analysts are always in his MOTM photos - but I doubt he has the time or inclination to be involved in the data-gathering process now that he's first team manager and has so many other plates to spin. Entirely plausible that within the analysis department, they have been carrying out this snooping (once or multiple times) and then condensing into summary notes / PowerPoint decks to put in front of the first team coaching staff inc. Tonda. They would not be calling out the source of all insights and the techniques used in obtaining all of the information
And then there's Spors, who made a point of letting everyone know he was assuming responsibility for scouting and analytics when he came into his role, gave Darren Mowbray his P45 as his first act and began reshaping the data/scouting dept. I have no way of knowing this but I would imagine that there's more of a chance that Spors was aware of this behaviour than Tonda
As others have said, I do not foresee an expulsion from the competition. It's simply far too big and expensive a can of worms for the EFL to open and Saints could immediately take it off to the high court to prevent the final taking place until further notice without our participation. This would tie the competition up in all sorts of nonsense that they will be keen to avoid. People (mainly Middlesbrough fans, tbh) need to remember that this hearing is EFL v SFC, not MFC v SFC and the hearing is in relation to this specific incident at Rockliffe. It is not a general inquest into staff activity at SFC
The one thing I would be keeping an eye on (and really the only thing that worries me) is the alleged appetite of other clubs in coming forward to the EFL to suggest that Saints have spied on them too, coupled with the claims that Boro have got a whistleblower who has worked for Saints and is prepared to go on the record. I am keen for the identity of the whistleblower to be known, especially if it's someone with links to both clubs and an axe to grind...
If proven/convincing enough for the panel, that would then escalate the punishment significantly as it would take us beyond it being a single transgression against Middlesbrough and be indicative of widespread nefarious behaviour against fellow members of the league. That would then trigger a new set of charges, investigations and hearings... which would surely drag on for even more time and presumably rumble past the playoff final
All that to say, I simply do not see a path where the EFL will want to meddle in SFC's participation at Wembley on May 23. They will not want to go down the path of expelling us in advance and, in the event that more allegations come to light and there are further hearings to follow the final, they would certainly not be looking to retrospectively amend the outcome of the playoff final (should Saints win) and open a can of worms that extends to preventing Saints from obtaining the prizes of winning 'the richest game in football' and their showpiece match. This would also implicate Hull City and their owner, Acun Ilicali. It would move from the EFL offices to the High Court quicker than you could say Manny Mayuka
Far more likely, again IMO (I am not a lawyer and am basing the above on experiences and what I have read online from other sources) is that the panel will hand down a substantial fine and possible points deduction (suspended or immediate), knowing that the PL will now support the EFL to enforce it should we win at Wembley on May 23. There is also the potential to give certain individuals bans from football for a period
This will obviously not satisfy Steve Gibson, who is letting it be known that he will only be pacified by Middlesbrough being installed in the final (which I don't see a route to, because they lost the semi-final across nearly 4hrs of football) and so the next step will be Gibson opening legal proceedings against Saints to try and pursue damages and push Solak into paying him to go away (as he did with Derby in 2022: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60350198)
TL;DR - I'm not worried about this specific incident. At present, I don't see any route where we are removed from the final. It would quickly get very expensive and although Gibson and Solak might have money to waste on hefty legal proceedings, the EFL is not a cash-rich organisation that will want to see legal documents landing at their office with claims for damages in excess of £100m. I am only concerned about the possibility of more allegations coming forward and being provable enough to ensure there are more follow-up punishments and the club being severely harmed as a result. Fingers crossed that is not the case but what a stupid, unnecessary situation to wind up in and put a cloud over the final period of the season
Saints are arguing for due process and the outlined timeframe because it gives them time to be thorough on their internal process. They're playing it pretty smart (IMO) by laying low, calling for alignment to the established due process and taking their time. In the meantime, we have now defeated Boro on the pitch and punted the hearing into the gap between the second leg and the final. Saints will be establishing lines of defence, items of mitigation and stress testing. Realistically, their priority beyond avoiding a very severe sporting punishment against the club will be putting enough distance between Tonda (and Spors) and whatever has gone on here, whether one (or both) of them were involved in this or aware of it to any degree or not
Saints need to be able to present that no senior decision makers at the executive level of the club were authorising or even aware of this activity. I suspect that when our internal investigation is complete, the outcome will be that we inform the EFL that nobody at exec level was aware of this and the intern was a lone wolf (harder to convince the panel with, I suspect) or acting under direction from a middle manager within the analysis team (far more plausible to the panel). Not quite the lone wolf theory but also not linking it back to those at the top of the football dept. They'll tell the panel that those involved have been/will be dealt with by the club as a demonstration to the hearing and there will be some sort of supporting statement from Dragan Solak/Phil Parsons expressing their anger/disappointment that club staff were behaving in this way. The photo of the lad at the training ground can actually be used in mitigation to show how amateur the operation looks and suggest that a club-coordinated spying mission would be a bit more sophisticated than a 20-something in jeans lurking next to a tree with his iPhone in his hand
I'm curious as to whether Tonda will or won't have known about this specifically. It's clear he places a lot of emphasis on analytics and staff who work on providing data insights - the first team analysts are always in his MOTM photos - but I doubt he has the time or inclination to be involved in the data-gathering process now that he's first team manager and has so many other plates to spin. Entirely plausible that within the analysis department, they have been carrying out this snooping (once or multiple times) and then condensing into summary notes / PowerPoint decks to put in front of the first team coaching staff inc. Tonda. They would not be calling out the source of all insights and the techniques used in obtaining all of the information
And then there's Spors, who made a point of letting everyone know he was assuming responsibility for scouting and analytics when he came into his role, gave Darren Mowbray his P45 as his first act and began reshaping the data/scouting dept. I have no way of knowing this but I would imagine that there's more of a chance that Spors was aware of this behaviour than Tonda
As others have said, I do not foresee an expulsion from the competition. It's simply far too big and expensive a can of worms for the EFL to open and Saints could immediately take it off to the high court to prevent the final taking place until further notice without our participation. This would tie the competition up in all sorts of nonsense that they will be keen to avoid. People (mainly Middlesbrough fans, tbh) need to remember that this hearing is EFL v SFC, not MFC v SFC and the hearing is in relation to this specific incident at Rockliffe. It is not a general inquest into staff activity at SFC
The one thing I would be keeping an eye on (and really the only thing that worries me) is the alleged appetite of other clubs in coming forward to the EFL to suggest that Saints have spied on them too, coupled with the claims that Boro have got a whistleblower who has worked for Saints and is prepared to go on the record. I am keen for the identity of the whistleblower to be known, especially if it's someone with links to both clubs and an axe to grind...
If proven/convincing enough for the panel, that would then escalate the punishment significantly as it would take us beyond it being a single transgression against Middlesbrough and be indicative of widespread nefarious behaviour against fellow members of the league. That would then trigger a new set of charges, investigations and hearings... which would surely drag on for even more time and presumably rumble past the playoff final
All that to say, I simply do not see a path where the EFL will want to meddle in SFC's participation at Wembley on May 23. They will not want to go down the path of expelling us in advance and, in the event that more allegations come to light and there are further hearings to follow the final, they would certainly not be looking to retrospectively amend the outcome of the playoff final (should Saints win) and open a can of worms that extends to preventing Saints from obtaining the prizes of winning 'the richest game in football' and their showpiece match. This would also implicate Hull City and their owner, Acun Ilicali. It would move from the EFL offices to the High Court quicker than you could say Manny Mayuka
Far more likely, again IMO (I am not a lawyer and am basing the above on experiences and what I have read online from other sources) is that the panel will hand down a substantial fine and possible points deduction (suspended or immediate), knowing that the PL will now support the EFL to enforce it should we win at Wembley on May 23. There is also the potential to give certain individuals bans from football for a period
This will obviously not satisfy Steve Gibson, who is letting it be known that he will only be pacified by Middlesbrough being installed in the final (which I don't see a route to, because they lost the semi-final across nearly 4hrs of football) and so the next step will be Gibson opening legal proceedings against Saints to try and pursue damages and push Solak into paying him to go away (as he did with Derby in 2022: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/60350198)
TL;DR - I'm not worried about this specific incident. At present, I don't see any route where we are removed from the final. It would quickly get very expensive and although Gibson and Solak might have money to waste on hefty legal proceedings, the EFL is not a cash-rich organisation that will want to see legal documents landing at their office with claims for damages in excess of £100m. I am only concerned about the possibility of more allegations coming forward and being provable enough to ensure there are more follow-up punishments and the club being severely harmed as a result. Fingers crossed that is not the case but what a stupid, unnecessary situation to wind up in and put a cloud over the final period of the season
Last edited:
Does Gibson get to pick who is on the disciplinary committee too? It seems like he wants to control the whole thing!
Mirror reporting that Middlesborough have evidence that we spied on other teams too. Not sure why they would have it and not EFL.