• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Southampton spying compendium thread

andy78 said:
You must be logged on to see external links

Look at this statement.

"We're guilty but it's unfair that we were basically fined £250m".

Genuinely mental that their argument is that we should be allowed to go up and then only be rewarded £249,800,000.
Click to expand...
I think hands were tied when it came to disciplinary action against Leeds because there was no specific rule against spying. Now there is, because of that very case, and disciplinary action can be taken accordingly.

Also, they say sorry to the clubs involved and their own fans, but nothing about other clubs fans or their actions bringing the integrity of the competition into doubt. No doubt all carefully worded by the legal team.
 

Horley Chorley said:
They didn't need to risk having anyone caught spying at the training ground, when they could've easily captured video evidence of Boro's training session, using a drone.
Click to expand...
This , or sent a hired 3rd party to do it . If youre going to fiddle at least but a bit of deniability in there with a few degrees of separation. Mugs deserve banning for complacency and stupidity
 
SAFC11 said:
If theyre running through practice scenarios then yes as they would be using their starting line up and formation to train them for the specific tactical changes ahead of the match.
Look at marescas idiot comments after we beat Chelsea, claiming he had no plans for us playing a back 5 so was scrabbling around before kick off when he saw the starting 11 and warm up. If he could have watched us train he would have planned differently (though it think he was just an idiot and we had adapted to a back 5 at times anyway)
Click to expand...
Well exactly. Surely the info was there to prepare for the possibility of us changing to a back 5.
 
chriswallace85 said:
Obviously it goes on, or at least has done in the past. This could be the tip of the iceberg. Who knows. Perhaps all these ex-pros saying the punishment is a bit extreme know something we don't. We know about Bielsa, and apparently it was common place in South America and on the continent.

I just think the whole thing's crackers.
Click to expand...

Biela was shocked to learn that the tactic was questioned ...
 
HorsePills said:
I think hands were tied when it came to disciplinary action against Leeds because there was no specific rule against spying. Now there is, because of that very case, and disciplinary action can be taken accordingly.

Also, they say sorry to the clubs involved and their own fans, but nothing about other clubs fans or their actions bringing the integrity of the competition into doubt. No doubt all carefully worded by the legal team.
Click to expand...
They also don't even mention Hull and just took the stance that winning was a given so they've been fined a record amount, when the actual amount they've been fined is literally zero.
 
123SunTan said:
Biela was shocked to learn that the tactic was questioned ...
Click to expand...
I kna.

I've laughed off all this spygate stuff all week 'cos I expected nowt more than a slap of the wrists and the game to go ahead as planned with Southampton in it.

I didn't realise they'd brought in article 127, and I certainly didn't expect them to punish it as harshly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top