AyazzThatKnacks

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo i do feel a bit conflicted now with Southampton; as ever it’s not the fans, it’s the club (alleged - but i think we all agree something has occurred) but it becomes hard to disaggregate the two. But i know there are balanced fan’s like yourself who don’t deserve to be tarred.

@rfdavo @AyazzThatKnacks Personal note always had soft spot for Boro. Worked for a Boro fan years ago. Top guy who had my back at work in difficult times. I’d go with him to cheer on Boro at Fratton. He had to tell me to watch myself as we could only get tickets among the home fans!

Irrelevant things in hearing; - Boro not taking chances in first 45mins - Jan signing failures - Saints being fitter in ET - Boro time spent in top 2 - iPhone vs. DSLR - Age or job title or employee - layout of training ground - scheduling issues #boro #SaintFC

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo I’d say far more likely you’re involved if it’s a one off, or conclusive one off. Even the whistleblower would need to have some conclusive evidence. Because of vicarious liability rules the knowledge within the club angle shouldn’t affect things (the analyst is the club)

@rfdavo @AyazzThatKnacks Feel it depends on how extensive in terms of who in the club knew and how often it occurred. If is systemic I’d watch a Hull/Boro final & may the best team win. One off with limited people involved and we’re allowed to stay in? I’ll back the team at Wembley but know it’s muddied

@RalphInUEFA Yes they will be interested in the volume of offences not the impact of said offences. A lot of discourse on here has been about if it made a difference, which the hearing will not concern themselves with. It’s just a) has it happened b) how many times.

@AyazzThatKnacks It will be looked at when assessing the proportionality of any punishment I believe.

Boro fans keep banging on about us ‘benefiting’ from our breach of the rules if we go through to the final. We haven’t, it has had no material impact on the result of the match. #saintsfc

@SfcSanJose7 @Joeboro196 There are strict vicarious liability for the actions of their employees and technical staff carried out during the course of their duties. Basically so companies can’t throw an employee under the bus

@Joeboro196 I dont see the sense as you dont. But I also have seen nothing to suggest it was under the clubs instructions

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

@chris7t8 @BrookMatthew @slbsn Yeah i think that’s why the evidence (or lack thereof) from other clubs becomes the most important part of the hearing now.

@BrookMatthew @AyazzThatKnacks @slbsn I tend to agree, but according to EFL Swindon, made a mistake, and we're acting in good faith, but we still got the boot. So if the independent panel finds you guilty, you could be treading on thin ice, because you obviously were trying to gain an advantage.

🚨 The Play-Offs are a distinct competition in the EFL Rules. Why this might matter...

@rfdavo @SaintMofo_JP Yeah true, although guess neither side care if they get promoted.

@AyazzThatKnacks @SaintMofo_JP Two things happen from here; Southampton go to the play final with the footballing world against them. Boro go to the final with limited sympathy for Southampton and bitterness towards Boro. No real middle ground option.

@slbsn @BrookMatthew Are they trying to avoid it for the headaches that an expulsion will cause for themselves? With principles of punishment, vindication, deterrence and fairness of efl competitions I’m not sure how any other outcome other than expulsion achieves 3 of those 4

@BrookMatthew My feeling remains expulsion is disproportionate. The issue is the applicability of the alternatives. But my feeling is still that the Commission will try and find a way to avoid expulsion.

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo It just felt completely unnecessary; you were playing well, great squad, high confidence. I agree, if things escalated I’m sure there would be a lot of resentment towards boro but i think the real vitriol would be towards the club who sanctioned it.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo Loss of earning v loss of potential earnings is a challenge. I would absolutely have you favourite v Hull but nothing guaranteed. Among those I know we are just really disappointed someone felt the need to do it. That will turn to anger, directed at those ultimately responsible.

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo One hundred percent, no matter which way the hearing goes. Although i think the margin of odds are small, i think that’s why you get to continue to the play off final, as we can’t appeal that decision, but then we’ll pursue loss of earnings.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo I’m almost certain it’ll end up in court one way or another.

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo No problem mate. Hopefully at some point, no matter the outcome, the fans are told least some of the detail, but suspect that won’t be the case as there will be further litigation.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo Fair enough. Apologies. I jumped the gun on that. Seen so many from all quarters assuming it’s been going on all season and that everyone at the club ‘must have known’ without having any knowledge of evidence.

@triciamcginnity @rfdavo No it’s Neil Bauser our chief exec who is on the board.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo Is it true that Gibson is on the EFL board?

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo You asked me though so i gave an answer! I also am not making a judgement, i have no idea how much evidence they have systemic cheating, at this stage we just know the boro one.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo IF. IF. IF. IF. IF. I keep hearing and reading if. Most saints fans are waiting for the truth to be known before making a judgement. Vast majority of others are believing everything the media spouts. IF. IF. IF. IF. IF.

@SaintMofo_JP @rfdavo If it’s repeated then it’s systemic tactical espionage and the efl will have to enforce the strictest possible sanctions to deter future rule breaches and preserve public confidence in the fairness of efl competitions.

@AyazzThatKnacks @rfdavo Why did you out repeated in brackets?

@rfdavo If it’s repeated then it’s systemic tactical espionage and the efl will have to enforce the strictest possible sanctions to deter future rule breaches and preserve public confidence in the fairness of efl competitions.

@rfdavo Great summary, i can’t believe how off topic some of the conversations are. The hearing is about (repeated) spying on teams contrary to the rules. How the game went, how boro’s form has been, the success of the spying is completely irrelevant

@Llewcalon @mrspongey @dgboro 100% I came out of the semi final play offs when you beat us and despite the fact we lost and you won, everyone was cool. Had a chat back into town with a group of cov fans and shook hands. We were gutted, you were elated but you won fair and square the games should be decided.

@mrspongey @AyazzThatKnacks @dgboro Proper fan bases mate 😉

Good response by Middlesbrough. Sad that they've been blocked from intervening. Southampton should be sanctioned and blocked from the final. Cheating should never be rewarded. If they beat Hull, their promotion would stink.

@Llewcalon @dgboro Fingers crossed mate! I never hold out much hope with the authorities taking decisive action but i hope you are right.

@AyazzThatKnacks @dgboro They may still be. Let's see what this independent body thinks about Southamptons cheating bullshit. Don't give up yet.

@Llewcalon @dgboro For all the bile I’ve seen on here over spygate, it’s also good to see the solidarity between fans. Even during the rivalries with cov and boro it was civil and good banter. Good luck for next season. I genuinely thought our destinies were intertwined 😩

@dgboro My pleasure mate. We've both been on similar journeys for years. Wanted you guys to come up with us for awhile now. I'm sure many Cov fans feel the same way. Southampton need to stay down and eat a little humble pie. #PUSB 🤝 #boro

@WeAreCharlieUS @JamesLeafe1 @inrictus Yeah that is the crucial part of the hearing. If Bristol have actual evidence, if they’ll take the whistleblower statements etc. that is what will decide the severity of the punishment. What isn’t relevant is the levels / proficiency at spying as it clearly stated in the clause

@AyazzThatKnacks @JamesLeafe1 @inrictus That's not being bad at it, thats example of different levels of "spying" My point is the current evidence is very weak for expulsion to be likely, yes if they find evidence of more spying and systemstic spying (very unlikely they do thou) that would change everything

Absolute delusional We understand Saints beat Boro, we understand Saints were the better team, we understand that Boro shouldn’t be in the final. But Saints literally spied on Boro. Not maybe, not alleged, 100% made the decision to spy on Boro on the eve of a playoff game. That is what is unlawful and that is what needs to be punished.

@WeAreCharlieUS @JamesLeafe1 @inrictus Being bad at a crime is not mitigation. The only variable in this is the systemic (or not) nature of it. If you’ve done it once (badly or otherwise) that is different if you’ve done it multiple times.

@AyazzThatKnacks @JamesLeafe1 @inrictus It's definitely relevant in terms of the punishment, if it's a drone vs just a dude standing by the road, the consequences would be very different, thats why all those media lying about the dude having high tech equipment basically destroyed the narrative