Andrew Clark

@_Jono96_ @GazetteBoro My feeling is they had the stronger squad, momentum, we were missing our best player, etc. and we took them to the wire.We don’t know what match impact the spying had so we shouldn’t say we don’t deserve it whilst appreciating our finishing could’ve been better (& those 2 pens)

@AndrewClark442 @GazetteBoro Absolutely. But again, no amount of spying can impact that fluke goal. Don’t get it twisted, they’ve cheated and they should be given the highest punishment possible. They’re not going to send someone 5 hours unless they’ve had success in doing it before.

Middlesbrough handed Championship play-off final blow as major update emerges gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football…

@_Jono96_ @GazetteBoro Again, we don’t know that, cause & effect. We can chat all day about missed chances, (recurring theme), not signing a striker, having a weaker squad, etc. but we lost the game via a fluke cross and that’s a very fine margin in the biggest game of the season…

@AndrewClark442 @GazetteBoro We will have to agree to disagree then. Our finishing let us down, again. Nothing that happened off the pitch affected our finishing on it. Thats not me saying what they did was right, or had that it had no impact. They cheated, kick them out.

@_Jono96_ @GazetteBoro Of course, our finishing could’ve been better and we should’ve been at least 2 goals up from the first leg but the tie was played over 2 legs and we needed a tactical level headed approach. Despite conceding a lot of territory in the 2nd leg we lost through a fluke. Fine margins

@AndrewClark442 @GazetteBoro We got beat over 210 minutes of football. To say we fully deserve to be in the final is madness. Do Southampton deserve to be there? Absolutely not.

@_Jono96_ @GazetteBoro Nonsense, they ruined the game with their nonsense and we fully deserve to be in the final…

@GazetteBoro Tell you something, after this is all finished I genuinely hope the club ban the gazette from the club. You’ve absolutely rinsed this story, anything for a few clicks. The actual fan base recognises we got beaten. We just want Southampton to be punished for cheating. Do better.

@The_Speshal @slbsn Those predate Swindon, which produced written reasons establishing a fine fails public confidence in knockout football. That’s now the current law. if trend is toward stronger sanctions for inadvertent breaches, where does deliberate, premeditated operation sit on that spectrum?

@slbsn The EFL Trophy is also a discrete tournament. Liverpool’s Carabao Cup breach was also a discrete knockout tournament. Neither resulted in expulsion.

@craig_johns @deanoshaw They don’t need to prove the impact, it is the observation itself that is the broken rule, no causation needs to be determined.

@deanoshaw Indeed. Ultimately xomes down to three people. Impact it could have is subjective but, for me, the rule exists because of the impact it can have. As for WBA/Leicester, that was during a league campaign and rules are clearer on financial breaches. This impacted a knockout game.

Earlier this season, Swindon Town were expelled from the EFL Trophy after Disciplinary hearing. Ahead of Southampton's, there some relevant points from it. In particular, the EFL set out four reasons why expulsion was what they pushed for #Boro gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football…

@Mr1ting Re: EFL, Rule 127 does give power to sanction, including expulsion. It says they can impose ‘any sanction it thinks fit., deliberately left open for adaptability.

Someone's view of Spygate 2.0 so far #saintsfc

@Mr1ting No evidence Middlesbrough leaked anything. The official statement was one paragraph — position stated, legal rights reserved. Every other detail came from unnamed sources. Accusing Boro of leaking to spin a narrative is an assumption, not a fact.

@SfcSanJose7 On Totality: Embedded analyst, official photos, 280 miles on working day, 48 hours before match, deletion & flight suggesting institutional awareness, manager saying nothing. Vicarious liability also doesn’t require proof of direction, just close connection to employment function

@AndrewClark442 Tis Civil Law, but if they can prove no connection he was directed, paid or had previous. On the balance of probability it was a singular act.

No evidence Will Salt was Sent. No evidence Will Salt was Paid. No evidence anything (Salt), recorded was given back to anyone at the Club. No evidence it had any impact on the two legs. No evidence of prior spying by Salt. Verdict: Salt Guilty, Club misdemeanor #SaintsFC

@SfcSanJose7 Also the case is based on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt..

@AndrewClark442 They are however.... That would mitigate vicarious liability on behalf of the club. Also, this for me mitigates the expulsion to heavy fine and points which is unprecedented currently now.

@SfcSanJose7 Frolic of their own fails as watching opponent training isn’t a personal frolic — he was trained in opposition analysis as is publicly stated and this reason wouldn’t survive the totality of evidence.

@SfcSanJose7 Reg 127 requires only the attempt.They are vicariously liable for Salt regardless of direction. Even if it’s a misdemeanour by the club, 127 was created because a misdemeanour-level fine was already tried & deemed inadequate. The rule’s own existence answers the leniency question

And thats not condoning this whole shitshow. Merely presenting a case difficult to prove and therefore will be looked at with nore leniency. (rightly or wrongly)

@SfcSanJose7 The EFL caveated every decision and the commission is independent of the EFL — its decision isn’t bound by commercial arrangements. The semi-final legs being played doesn’t change what happened 48 hours before leg one. It was always going to be decided by committee.

If you seriously think theyll kick Saints out after allowing 2 Semi Final Legs to be played, Tickets, Travel and Accomodation being booked after they've green lighted the Final, Date, KO time. Then you are seriously fucking deluded. #SaintsFC

@marz194_2 The harm to innocent parties is caused by Southampton’s breach — not by correcting it. Middlesbrough’s innocent supporters are harmed too. The law says harm falls on the institution that created the situation.

Throwing #SaintsFC out of the playoff final would disproportionately hurt far too many innocent stakeholders than anyone directly involved. For Middlesbrough to make a public statement as such, while proceedings are now underway, surely prejudices the jury and is unacceptable.

@GazetteBoro It’s only a dilemma if the independent commission hasn’t got the balls to follow the EFLs own stated rules and disqualify Southampton and reinstate Middlesbrough. It is the only defensible sanction that satisfies their governing principle, 3 pt test and 3 other legal frameworks

🗣 An expert in sports law has described Spygate 2.0 as 'a massive dilemma' for the EFL 🤔 | #Boro gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football…

@Johnlay_1 Though I understand your frustration…I’d feel the same but it’s not a trivial matter, it’s blatant cheating…

@Johnlay_1 You mean a Southampton first team analyst trained to create opposition dossiers who previously worked for Forest & Villa, associated with Southampton for 5 years who was recording Boro’s training session 2 days before one of the biggest games of the season…

If this play off final gets moved/ postponed because some cunt was stood next to a tree filming a training session I will not be happy #hcafc

@oss_tiger @boroboy151 @Boropolis @ryanblackwood13 But then they fail to adhere to their own regulations of a just and fair outcome for all parties, where a wrongdoer cannot benefit from its wrongdoing.

@boroboy151 @Boropolis @ryanblackwood13 Unfortunately true, lowest risk litigation cost route

A brilliant article from Stewarts, the UK's largest litigation-only law firm, who consider the appropriate sanction to be imposed on Southampton if the club is found guilty of spying. Well worth a read. #Boro | #UTB | #SaintsFC stewartslaw.com/news/spy-games…

@M_O_Waddy @Boropolis The tactics used in the second match are a direct consequence of what happened in the first match, cause and effect so they can’t be taken as 2 separate independent matches.

@Boropolis Not sure Stewarts done all their research, says in their conclusion that saints went on to win “that match” but in fact drew that match didn’t we. And we all know what happened in the other match