• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state with some features missing, normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Southampton spying compendium thread

Morny said:
It is mental how people have a logic of

Southampton cheated
To gain an advantage
Over Middlesbrough
So let's promote Hull :lol::lol:
Click to expand...
It's almost as if all these people that think they're 'cool' by not disliking little Boro actually do dislike Boro.

Hull have (as far as I know) not made any accusations of being cheated or spied on by Southampton, so why on earth should they get into the premier league without winning the competition to do so?
 
Last edited:

Roker SOL said:
That explains why Wrexham are saying the play-offs should be restarted. If it has been systematic, then other positions might have been affected.

Minefield.
Click to expand...

It completely is mate.

One created by Southampton and it's the EFL that's drowning in shit and being criticised from all angles because everyone thinks they have a valid concern.
 
c032745y said:
Same rationale applies to every drug cheat, financial cheat etc etc. Ben Johnson might've won the 100m anyway, why take the gold medal off him?
Click to expand...
Yes, that's right ... it can't be proven, one way or the other, and it's irrelevant as the punishment is for the act of cheating, not for the result of the act of cheating 🤷‍♂️
 
seahamstar said:
It's almost as if all these people that think they're 'cool' by not disliking little Boro actually do dislike Boro.

Hull have (as far as I know) not made any accusations of being cheated or spied on by Southampton, so why on earth should they get into the premier league without winning the competition to do so?
Click to expand...

They (Hull) have this sinking feeling that in a one-off final, they will lose to Boro.
 
Thornton said:
CoPilot has given me this.....

Coventry: 6 points removed (2 wins)

Ipswich: 4 points removed (1 win, 1 draw)
_____

Millwall: 1 point removed (1 draw)

Middlesbrough: 1 point removed (1 draw)

Hull: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Wrexham: 1 point removed (1 draw)
_____

Derby: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Norwich: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Birmingham: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Swansea: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Bristol City: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Sheffield Utd: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Preston: 0 points removed (2 losses)

QPR: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Watford: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Stoke: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Portsmouth: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Charlton: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Blackburn: 0 points removed (2 losses)

West Brom: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Oxford: 0 points removed (2 losses)
_____

Leicester: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Sheffield Wednesday: 0 points removed (2 losses)

Nee idea if that's right or not!
Click to expand...
If thats right millwall would get automatic over ipswich.... that decision to ban Southampton was right in every aspect but id does open a ..
Logon or register to see this image

Sometimes clubs have to accept a compromise for the better of the league but i firmly believe the Southampton decision should stand and all the rest of the clubs with lesser grievances should just lump it!
 
Whatever happens lots of clubs checking cctv etc to find this kid cos if they have lost to the saints and it has cost them promotion or relegation - Wrexham and Leicester then they will be wanting to be part of it all and can see this going on and on for the EFL
 
Flavonoids said:
Yes, that's right ... it can't be proven, one way or the other, and it's irrelevant as the punishment is for the act of cheating, not for the result of the act of cheating 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

Boro wanted to be at the hearing but were denied the chance to tell their side of the story: how drastically the starting XI was changed to mitigate spygate.
 
123SunTan said:
Boro wanted to be at the hearing but were denied the chance to tell their side of the story: how drastically the starting XI was changed to mitigate spygate.
Click to expand...
Turns out they weren't required to tell 'their side of the story' as it was ... irrelevant to the act being prosecuted, no?
 
rupert rigsby said:
mboro we're shite that's why they lost why can't you comprehend that
Click to expand...
It’s 99.9% likely that southampton won because they were the better team. However there is a chance that the spying had a negative impact of Boro/ gave southampton an advantage. We don’t know and will never the true impact of the spying had and that’s because Southampton cheated. It put’s an asterisk next to that first leg and questions how legitimate that result is - the performance in that game is irrelevant.

The commission should have just awarded the first leg to boro so they win on aggregate. Other two games should have been minimum 3 point deduction each for next season.
 
Last edited:
MadMackem10 said:
It’s 99.9% likely that southampton won because they were the better team. However there is a chance that the spying had a negative impact of Boro/ gave southampton an advantage. We don’t know and will never the true impact of the spying had and that’s because Southampton cheated. It put’s an asterisk next to that first leg and questions how legitimate that result is - the performance in that game is irrelevant.

The commission should have just awarded the first leg to boro so they win on aggregate. Other two games should have been minimum 3 point deduction each for next season.
Click to expand...

Nailed on that Boro playing at Riverside would have two headed goals and take a 2-0 advantage to the second leg on the southcoast.
 
seahamstar said:
It's almost as if all these people that think they're 'cool' by not disliking little Boro actually do dislike Boro.

Hull have (as far as I know) not made any accusations of being cheated or spied on by Southampton, so why on earth should they get into the premier league without winning the competition to do so?
Click to expand...
We did!I wonder what they would have done if they had actually played the final before the ruling was made and the cheats won?They would probably give it to Hull so in a way Hulls lawyers sorta have a point?.....not a great one but a point none the less.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top