| Boro going up would be a complete farce! 19:15 - May 19 with 6578 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
I kind of welcome the EFL call but Jesus, they should not be rewarded for their joke of a season since March.
|  |
| |  |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:02 - May 20 with 643 views | positivity |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 01:02 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
No, Hull won their semi final |
that's not the hill you're dieing on "they should not be rewarded for their joke of a season since March."
hull's has been worse than your "joke of a season" and they didn't have to play a team who cheated before edging past them in the 196th minute of their playoff; the most marginal of wins! hull were fortunate not to be playing a team that cheated |  |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:10 - May 20 with 623 views | wischip |
Imagine if something similar happens next year when 6 teams are in the play-offs and EFL have to expel one club in the middle. Logistical nightmare. |  | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:11 - May 20 with 620 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
This you?
|  |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:18 - May 20 with 607 views | Gogs |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 19:17 - May 19 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
And they won the playoffs. Boro have no right to be a PL team next season. Promote Hull. |
I say promote Hull too. But only because I've got them in a 3 way accumulator for the play-off winners  Notlob and Notts County for league 1&2 |  | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:25 - May 20 with 591 views | E_I_E_I_E_I_O |
This is hard to unravel and you have to feel for the Saints fans. Plus spare a thought for both Hull and Millwall. Firstly Hull would have beepreparing to face Southampton. Secondly you have Millwall that have finished above Middlesborough. One team in the playoffs cheat yet it is the 4th place team that benefit and not the 3rd all because of the way the fixtures fall in the draw. Millwall would have a case for them being the team that get the final spot.
Another thought - If Ipswich had finished 3rd by 2 points or less then we'd have a case for automatic? Given we were spied on and only got 1 point in that game whereas could claim without the spying would have been 3.
Oh and isn't it funny Arsenal finally win the league and it's still not the biggest story of the day. |  | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 14:14 - May 20 with 531 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 07:12 - May 20 by Churchman |
I admire your determination to die on this particular hill, Joey, but I think you are wrong.
Southampton sought to gain advantage by breaking the rules. Not once either. The saddo doing it was caught in the act. That disqualifies (hopefully) Southampton. Their opponents should go through. The result of the tie is immaterial as far as I’m concerned.
There will never be a perfect solution to a situation like this, especially with something like the play offs that are inherently unfair.
For once I think the EFL have got it as near right as they can. Let’s hope they stick to it because if they don’t it’ll turn a epic mess into a farce. |
And even some Boro fans think you’re wrong, it’s hardly a crazy position. If they go up it will be ridiculous. Talking of gaining an advantage. Hull who actually won their SF have been royally a screwed a few days before their biggest game in a decade. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 14:15 - May 20 with 528 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 06:30 - May 20 by Blue_Heath |
Didn't they spend 200 days in 2nd spot, can't really argue they deserve to have a shot at going up. |
No let me explain it to you, the two teams that get the most points go up top 2. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 14:17 - May 20 with 524 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:02 - May 20 by positivity |
that's not the hill you're dieing on "they should not be rewarded for their joke of a season since March."
hull's has been worse than your "joke of a season" and they didn't have to play a team who cheated before edging past them in the 196th minute of their playoff; the most marginal of wins! hull were fortunate not to be playing a team that cheated |
You should try reading the entire thread where I outline it. Hull are clearly not fortunate at all you can’t be this stupid. Do you know how much prep would go into a playoff final? Millwall would have loved to finish 4th and end up with ultimately a free hit and a bye. That’s what’s happened in the end. [Post edited 20 May 14:20]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 14:21 - May 20 with 516 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 10:11 - May 20 by Cheltenham_Blue |
This you?
|
No but you couldn’t even understand that Town getting a point at WBA was good so I doubt you’ll understand my point here. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:22 - May 20 with 476 views | positivity |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 14:17 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
You should try reading the entire thread where I outline it. Hull are clearly not fortunate at all you can’t be this stupid. Do you know how much prep would go into a playoff final? Millwall would have loved to finish 4th and end up with ultimately a free hit and a bye. That’s what’s happened in the end. [Post edited 20 May 14:20]
|
i guess all the people who downvoted your weird edgelord take are stupid too? ok, you do you!
it's very simple, a team cheated in a knockout competition to gain an unfair advantage, that team gets knocked out and the team who were disadvantaged progressed.
if man city fielded an ineligible player in their fa cup semi-final they'd have been knocked out and soton would have taken their place in the final. don't understand why you're so weirdly down on boro here? | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:28 - May 20 with 471 views | Jon_456 |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:22 - May 20 by positivity |
i guess all the people who downvoted your weird edgelord take are stupid too? ok, you do you!
it's very simple, a team cheated in a knockout competition to gain an unfair advantage, that team gets knocked out and the team who were disadvantaged progressed.
if man city fielded an ineligible player in their fa cup semi-final they'd have been knocked out and soton would have taken their place in the final. don't understand why you're so weirdly down on boro here? |
And that exact scenario occurred earlier this year when Luton were knocked out in the early rounds of the EFl trophy. They were reinstated after it was found their opponent fielded an ineligible player.
Luton then went onto win the competition so based on the OPs method, should they have their title stripped and the runners up be declared as the winner? | | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:30 - May 20 with 463 views | Ryorry |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:22 - May 20 by positivity |
i guess all the people who downvoted your weird edgelord take are stupid too? ok, you do you!
it's very simple, a team cheated in a knockout competition to gain an unfair advantage, that team gets knocked out and the team who were disadvantaged progressed.
if man city fielded an ineligible player in their fa cup semi-final they'd have been knocked out and soton would have taken their place in the final. don't understand why you're so weirdly down on boro here? |
Maybe it's all too simple for him?
If a horse wins a race but is discovered to have had an unfair advantage, eg from a drugs boost, it's disqualified & the second placed horse is declared the official winner.
Same for medallists & 4th place in Olympic Games etc. |  |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:51 - May 20 with 441 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:22 - May 20 by positivity |
i guess all the people who downvoted your weird edgelord take are stupid too? ok, you do you!
it's very simple, a team cheated in a knockout competition to gain an unfair advantage, that team gets knocked out and the team who were disadvantaged progressed.
if man city fielded an ineligible player in their fa cup semi-final they'd have been knocked out and soton would have taken their place in the final. don't understand why you're so weirdly down on boro here? |
Soton should be kicked out but this is not remotely as procedurally straightforward as people are making out. The ineligible player vs spying is one of the more ridiculous comparisons I've seen. One has a direct impact on the match (as in the player actually plays in the game) and one is indirect.
Added to the fact that the EFL rules are that much more direct when it comes to ineligible players.
45.1
“Any Club which plays an ineligible Player in a Match shall be guilty of misconduct.”
45.2
“The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit including, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing:
45.2.1 a reprimand;
45.2.2 a fine;
45.2.3 the deduction of points;
45.2.4 the suspension of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.5 the expulsion of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.6 ordering the Club to replay the Match;
45.2.7 awarding the Match to the opponent Club; and/or
45.2.8 such other order as it thinks fit.”
vs
127.1
“No Club shall, either directly or indirectly, engage in the monitoring, filming, recording or other surveillance of any training activity of another Club.”
127.2
“Any Club acting in breach of Regulation 127.1 shall be guilty of misconduct.”
127.3
“Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.” | | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:56 - May 20 with 431 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:22 - May 20 by positivity |
i guess all the people who downvoted your weird edgelord take are stupid too? ok, you do you!
it's very simple, a team cheated in a knockout competition to gain an unfair advantage, that team gets knocked out and the team who were disadvantaged progressed.
if man city fielded an ineligible player in their fa cup semi-final they'd have been knocked out and soton would have taken their place in the final. don't understand why you're so weirdly down on boro here? |
Oh DW, I take downvotes are a badge of honor by some of the takes around here. If you can't understand a team winning a SF and preparing for their opponent for a week and then 3 days before having to prepare for a different one in the biggest game in English football being unfair, then that's on you. Especially in the context of the way those 2 games went for Boro.
The EFL have been backed into a corner, but Boro have been massively lucky here, let's does not pretend otherwise.
Maybe listen to that Boro podcast I linked and see his view. Boro have not earned their place in this final on the pitch by some of their own fanbase's admission. Sure, that's not their fault that Saints broke a rule off the pitch but they have gained a huge break to just advance. The idea this isn't a discussion and won't be if they go up is plain stupid. Let's just hope for footballs sakes Hull win. [Post edited 20 May 15:58]
| |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:57 - May 20 with 428 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:51 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
Soton should be kicked out but this is not remotely as procedurally straightforward as people are making out. The ineligible player vs spying is one of the more ridiculous comparisons I've seen. One has a direct impact on the match (as in the player actually plays in the game) and one is indirect.
Added to the fact that the EFL rules are that much more direct when it comes to ineligible players.
45.1
“Any Club which plays an ineligible Player in a Match shall be guilty of misconduct.”
45.2
“The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit including, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing:
45.2.1 a reprimand;
45.2.2 a fine;
45.2.3 the deduction of points;
45.2.4 the suspension of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.5 the expulsion of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.6 ordering the Club to replay the Match;
45.2.7 awarding the Match to the opponent Club; and/or
45.2.8 such other order as it thinks fit.”
vs
127.1
“No Club shall, either directly or indirectly, engage in the monitoring, filming, recording or other surveillance of any training activity of another Club.”
127.2
“Any Club acting in breach of Regulation 127.1 shall be guilty of misconduct.”
127.3
“Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.” |
Louder for the people at the back. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:58 - May 20 with 425 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:56 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Oh DW, I take downvotes are a badge of honor by some of the takes around here. If you can't understand a team winning a SF and preparing for their opponent for a week and then 3 days before having to prepare for a different one in the biggest game in English football being unfair, then that's on you. Especially in the context of the way those 2 games went for Boro.
The EFL have been backed into a corner, but Boro have been massively lucky here, let's does not pretend otherwise.
Maybe listen to that Boro podcast I linked and see his view. Boro have not earned their place in this final on the pitch by some of their own fanbase's admission. Sure, that's not their fault that Saints broke a rule off the pitch but they have gained a huge break to just advance. The idea this isn't a discussion and won't be if they go up is plain stupid. Let's just hope for footballs sakes Hull win. [Post edited 20 May 15:58]
|
It seems Hull share your view!
| | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:59 - May 20 with 421 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:58 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
It seems Hull share your view!
|
And so do some Boro fans. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:02 - May 20 with 410 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:30 - May 20 by Ryorry |
Maybe it's all too simple for him?
If a horse wins a race but is discovered to have had an unfair advantage, eg from a drugs boost, it's disqualified & the second placed horse is declared the official winner.
Same for medallists & 4th place in Olympic Games etc. |
You should consult an EFL rule book before calling any of this simple. | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:04 - May 20 with 407 views | badadski |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 20:17 - May 19 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
They'll probably miss 27 first half chances again and then cry about their defender make a stupid foul in the box, so I am not actually too sure what I am worried about. [Post edited 19 May 20:18]
|
I think the safest punishment would have been discounting Soton from playoffs and having 7th placed team to take their place. I don't like the Middlesbrough get out of jail for free card, losing and still progressing regardless of the spying against them as their is every chance they would have lost even without the spy gate.
It would have been more just that they have to play against the next best team to prove their worth before playing finalists. That's just my thoughts as how much advantage can truly be attained from spying for 30 mins on one training session that cant have been gotten out of a whole seasons worth of match play and data analytics? | | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:06 - May 20 with 402 views | itfcjoe |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:51 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
Soton should be kicked out but this is not remotely as procedurally straightforward as people are making out. The ineligible player vs spying is one of the more ridiculous comparisons I've seen. One has a direct impact on the match (as in the player actually plays in the game) and one is indirect.
Added to the fact that the EFL rules are that much more direct when it comes to ineligible players.
45.1
“Any Club which plays an ineligible Player in a Match shall be guilty of misconduct.”
45.2
“The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit including, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing:
45.2.1 a reprimand;
45.2.2 a fine;
45.2.3 the deduction of points;
45.2.4 the suspension of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.5 the expulsion of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.6 ordering the Club to replay the Match;
45.2.7 awarding the Match to the opponent Club; and/or
45.2.8 such other order as it thinks fit.”
vs
127.1
“No Club shall, either directly or indirectly, engage in the monitoring, filming, recording or other surveillance of any training activity of another Club.”
127.2
“Any Club acting in breach of Regulation 127.1 shall be guilty of misconduct.”
127.3
“Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.” |
What are the difference between those 2?
45.2
The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit
127.3
Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.
Basically, both scenarios say the Board can impose a penalty they deem correct |  |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:08 - May 20 with 391 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:30 - May 20 by Ryorry |
Maybe it's all too simple for him?
If a horse wins a race but is discovered to have had an unfair advantage, eg from a drugs boost, it's disqualified & the second placed horse is declared the official winner.
Same for medallists & 4th place in Olympic Games etc. |
What relevance does a horse race/ Olympic games have on the EFL and the Playoffs?
Take the emotion out of it and create an argument based on the relevant rules. Don't needlessly insult people because they don't agree with you! | | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:10 - May 20 with 369 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:08 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
What relevance does a horse race/ Olympic games have on the EFL and the Playoffs?
Take the emotion out of it and create an argument based on the relevant rules. Don't needlessly insult people because they don't agree with you! |
It's their moral compass; they've all turned into closest Boro fans! Glad Saints are out but bizarre! | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:11 - May 20 with 369 views | positivity |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:56 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Oh DW, I take downvotes are a badge of honor by some of the takes around here. If you can't understand a team winning a SF and preparing for their opponent for a week and then 3 days before having to prepare for a different one in the biggest game in English football being unfair, then that's on you. Especially in the context of the way those 2 games went for Boro.
The EFL have been backed into a corner, but Boro have been massively lucky here, let's does not pretend otherwise.
Maybe listen to that Boro podcast I linked and see his view. Boro have not earned their place in this final on the pitch by some of their own fanbase's admission. Sure, that's not their fault that Saints broke a rule off the pitch but they have gained a huge break to just advance. The idea this isn't a discussion and won't be if they go up is plain stupid. Let's just hope for footballs sakes Hull win. [Post edited 20 May 15:58]
|
boro were massively lucky to play a team who thought the only way they could beat them was to cheat on them? that's a novel take!
could just as easily argue that hull were massively lucky to beat a millwall team who played beneath their capabilities!
from a selfish point of view, i'd love hull to win as they're clearly a poorer opponent than boro (as the 2 games against them, the 7 point deficit and the gd deficit of 21 shows).
however, from a justice point of view and for football's sake, the better team should win, which is boro.
hull will be properly prepared, boro's minds will be all over the place, if anyone has an advantage it's the tigers | |
| |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:12 - May 20 with 365 views | NedPlimpton |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 15:51 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
Soton should be kicked out but this is not remotely as procedurally straightforward as people are making out. The ineligible player vs spying is one of the more ridiculous comparisons I've seen. One has a direct impact on the match (as in the player actually plays in the game) and one is indirect.
Added to the fact that the EFL rules are that much more direct when it comes to ineligible players.
45.1
“Any Club which plays an ineligible Player in a Match shall be guilty of misconduct.”
45.2
“The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit including, without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing:
45.2.1 a reprimand;
45.2.2 a fine;
45.2.3 the deduction of points;
45.2.4 the suspension of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.5 the expulsion of the Club from the Competition;
45.2.6 ordering the Club to replay the Match;
45.2.7 awarding the Match to the opponent Club; and/or
45.2.8 such other order as it thinks fit.”
vs
127.1
“No Club shall, either directly or indirectly, engage in the monitoring, filming, recording or other surveillance of any training activity of another Club.”
127.2
“Any Club acting in breach of Regulation 127.1 shall be guilty of misconduct.”
127.3
“Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.” |
Sorry, i don't really see what the distinguishing features of a direct vs indirect impact on the game are. They both have an impact on the game and therefore the outcome, no?
With spying you can nullify an opponents threat from set pieces, find out how they're likely to set up, find out if certain players are back from injury, get insights into tactics etc. All of which could potentially have a huge impact on the outcome of a match. Probably more so than whether an ineligible player is playing, who could have a shocker on the day, or get injured in the first minute etc
Not really seeing how direct impact vs indirect impact makes any difference |  | | |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:12 - May 20 with 364 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Boro going up would be a complete farce! on 16:06 - May 20 by itfcjoe |
What are the difference between those 2?
45.2
The Board shall have power to impose such penalty as it may think fit
127.3
Any Club guilty of misconduct under this Regulation shall be liable to such penalty as the Board may determine.
Basically, both scenarios say the Board can impose a penalty they deem correct |
The difference is not what they can impose, it's what the defendant can challenge.
Under 45, clubs are on explicit notice that fielding an ineligible player can lead to:
- expulsion
- suspension
- forfeiture
- replay
- points deductions, etc
The EFL has effectively pre-authorised those sanctions within the rule itself.
Under 127, there is no equivalent sanction framework. It simply says the Board may impose “such penalty as it may determine.” That still gives broad discretion, but it creates much more room for challenge because:
- the rule does not expressly connect spying to expulsion or forfeiture
- there is no stated sporting remedy
- there is no guidance on seriousness thresholds
- there is less precedent around what sanctions are proportionate
So if the EFL tried to impose an extreme punishment under 127, a club could more credibly argue:
- the sanction was disproportionate
- the rule did not provide sufficient notice that expulsion/forfeiture was realistically contemplated
- the Board acted inconsistently or irrationally compared to previous cases | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
