hanbolo

@PlayzytStyle @Yate5y EH! Not every club would be aware they've been spied on if they didn't catch the culprit, that's why they call it 'spying'. The source saying this was a Saints former employee

@Yate5y Not saying I believe it, just pointing out if it was true. Let’s be honest everyone from everywhere has just been picking and choosing what to believe to suit what they want.

You cannot be serious that we’ve waited this whole time, just for it to be a belief and that the clubs they had “evidence” from don’t actually want to get involved and are even unaware🤣Just win Saturday now.

@SfcSanJose7 More whataboutary The rule is simple, you don't observe. A person affiliated to Saints was caught observing. Rule broken The rule doesn't stipulate prove further who was paid, who was sent, the possible impact.

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

@BKyle19976 @Dawtry1988 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport Merely asking the veracity how/where this witness is now already written off?

@KenBox120380 @Dawtry1988 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport Now who's nervous? I seriously hope our owners solak and liebherr(miss) have their lawyers on standby

🚨 An intriguing take on how Southampton should approach the Spygate hearing, from an EFL club executive #saintsfc @TimesSport

@Dawtry1988 @BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport According to who?

@KenBox120380 @BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport The insider is Jason Taylor. And it appears, its becoming apparent that he hasn't been a reliable source, and is looking increasingly likely it was an isolated incident.

@BKyle19976 @Dawtry1988 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport The ex employee from Saints? I sense you're nervous!

@KenBox120380 @Dawtry1988 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport But there's no evidence anywhere apart from this weirdo at boro you fucking mong 😂😂😂😂😂

@Andy23696148 @saintlavoo It's been stated an infinitesimal number of times that the entire estate , including the physical patch of soil he was stood on is private land. You need express permission from any land owner in that scenario to be filming/recording commercially sensitive data.

@saintlavoo But if the guy was really standing in a public place then surely he would have every right to be there I don’t know if that photo is genuine but he’s clearly stood on the outside of a private property sign

Reading through all the bullshit and focusing on the few facts that are known is there actually a case to answer here. Just because borough say it is so does not actually mean it is

@TesseymanChris @chris7t8 @BillRobins6 Because the rule breached specified no such bullshit whatabouterry. The rule state's clearly "Don't observe opponents training 72 hours before a game"

@chris7t8 @BillRobins6 But why can't the game go ahead? Yes they spied on you, but you had 210 minutes (120 of them behind in a game they hadn't spied on you) and couldn't beat them, so tell me why the game shouldn't go ahead

Why can’t they suspend the hearing until AFTER the final? Surely that makes the most sense in this situation? #hcafc

@Dawtry1988 @BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport It said no such thing. It said Norwich are not party to proceedings which is entirely different of another party stating it happened to multiple clubs (without their knowledge)

@KenBox120380 @BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport Norwich's statement yesterday literally said ' the insider, so far hasn't been right about anything."

@BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport You asked, I answered Given the footage was taken on private land, there's far more to this than breaching one rule A civil case most likely will be following after this too You cannot film on private land for commercial use without express permission from the land owner

@KenBox120380 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport Someone with a grudge, seriously mate your fucking deluded if you think we spy. Of course we have watched as the rules allow

@BKyle19976 @SaintsExtra @TimesSport A saints ex employee

@SaintsExtra @TimesSport Wheres all the evidence from multiple clubs 😂😂😂 hull and Norwich don't have any, neither Coventry or arsenal

@AdamKettle17950 @RP2218 @EFL It's not the EFL's fault, it's a Saints made problem

@RP2218 @EFL EFL have never cared about fans They never will

So we could buy tickets, book coaches and hotels. Then you might just change the date or location at the last minute. Yeah fucking sound @EFL 👍🏻

@Barry79Talks @Rory_Talks_Ball It's the EFL's call to conduct it's own affairs given the short space of time they had. It's somewhat farcical a Southampton made problem is becoming everybody else's problem to solve

@KenBox120380 @Rory_Talks_Ball That would have needed to be implemented prior to the second leg being played. EFL should have postponed the 2nd leg until this investigation was concluded. EFL were hoping that Boro would win so they wouldn’t have to deal with the scenario.

When will these lot understand that if the punishment for breaking a rule is a fine that is a virtually infinitesimal fraction of the reward for benefiting from said rule breach then the rule may as well not exist?

@NodNolan @LewisThompson7 @Dan_Sheldon_ @mjshrimper @TheAthleticFC Or standard trespass law of illegally filming commercially sensitive data on private land without the express permission of the land owner. He could have used a chronophotographic gun for all I care, the rules are the rules Paul.

@LewisThompson7 @Dan_Sheldon_ @mjshrimper @TheAthleticFC Excellent to hear it wouldn't be the version suggesting "professional surveillance equipment"

Exc: #Boro have asked the panel if they can participate in the hearing. Ordinarily, an interested party can only make written submissions. If granted, it would be highly unusual & could create more tension with #SaintsFC. Story w/@mjshrimper @TheAthleticFC nytimes.com/athletic/72785…

@Barry79Talks @Rory_Talks_Ball It depends on the method. A voided game due to misconduct is typically handled by awarding a 3-0 win, in that scenario Boro are through.

@KenBox120380 @Rory_Talks_Ball It’s completely different. Everyone is allowed their own opinion of course. In this scenario where Southampton are thrown out, do Middlesbrough get to play in the final?

@Azeliabankscunt @JackKnutsen_ Right, that's what Derby once thought too. Likelihood is a civil case will follow on from this given it's a trespass case to film commercially sensitive material on private land without the express permission of the landowner. Saints best pray for that promotion money

@KenBox120380 @JackKnutsen_ If you don’t think that will be a major part of the assessment you’ll be really disappointed. Anyway you can’t appeal whatever the outcome so basically go fuck yourselves 😂

Here’s the difference. Leeds get caught spying, £200k fine. Southampton get caught spying, potentially removing us from a £180m football match and further TV and sponsorship money. The punishment difference is so vast, I can’t believe it’s even being considered. #saintsfc

@Barry79Talks @Rory_Talks_Ball I disagree, If they get thrown out it's no different to losing and going out. That wouldn't be deemed as fine, you're simply being ejected from a tournament for breaching the rules.

@KenBox120380 @Rory_Talks_Ball Unfortunately that’s not how the law works. If they were to throw Southampton out for this, it would set the bar for any future misdemeanour to be a fine of £150m+ The EFL need to create a specific rule & sanction for playoff competition

@Barry79Talks @JackKnutsen_ This rule covers the knockout tournament, if it didn't the EFL wouldn't now be charging Saints on it. The punishment isn't written down but it is what it is, that's what the panel have to now decide.

@KenBox120380 @JackKnutsen_ Say again?

@chrisirwin5 @TrueeeeBlueeeee @Rory_Talks_Ball Shouldn't this Chelsea supporter be taking this up with Frank Lampard, the rules in place because of him

@TrueeeeBlueeeee @KenBox120380 @Rory_Talks_Ball Or….. instead of spending that money we’ll just agree on the rules set by the governing body of the league and then trust the league to punish clubs that break those rules. Much easier

@KristianjWalker @NorthamScott Or overlooking there's an argument of a separate civil case of trespass given they recorded on private property for commercial interest, without express permission from the land owner

@NorthamScott its brilliant when you see these posts of southampton supporters fumbling over GDPR, its a like a comedy sketch. "We were caught cheating....... OH NO WAIT GDPR".

Starting to look like we’ll have a good legal case against Boro’ for breaches of GDPR and Defamation. 👍🏻

@Barry79Talks @Rory_Talks_Ball It's simple really, the punishment goes hand in hand with the risk. High risk cheat = big reward. You cannot then complain breaching of a rule with the above contest results in a big punishment. It goes hand in hand. A £100k fine means the rule is worthless

@Rory_Talks_Ball Unfortunately the law as it’s written is not fit for the playoffs. The crime does not amount to a fine of £150m+ which is what kicking out Southampton would amount to. EFL will definitely need to rewrite the rules for playoffs going forwards