| S’ton .. but who else??? 10:12 - May 20 with 1065 views | PhuketPete |
S’ton wants us to believe they only spied in three games but if you look at their results before and after the arrival of Tonda Eckhart, this simply isn’t credible.
In the games before Elkhart took over they were W2 D6 L5 for 12 points at less than 1 per game. In the following 13 games after he took over they were W6-D3-L4 for 21 points Ave 1.6
But then over the next half of the season they were W14 D5 L1 for ave 2.35
I know what my conclusion is.. but then I thought, “what other managerial changes have dramatically changed club fortunes in a barely believable manner?”
So I looked at Norwich. Under Liam Manning Norwich were W2 D3 L10 in their first 15 games. 9 points. Ave 0.6.
Enter Clement from stage right.. 32 games. W17 D5 L9. 56 points. Ave 1.8
Go figure…. Pereira has had some similar spike in success at Forest but it’s more fun to talk about Norwich. |  | | |  |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:11 - May 20 with 894 views | AndrewRatcliffITFC |
I read somewhere that Millwall also have some evidence of Saints spying on them. They drew 0-0 in January, how they set up after spying may have prevented Millwall getting a win, that has implications - with two extra points they would have pipped us to automatic. This could well rumble on. | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:12 - May 20 with 884 views | Dennyx4 |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:11 - May 20 by AndrewRatcliffITFC |
I read somewhere that Millwall also have some evidence of Saints spying on them. They drew 0-0 in January, how they set up after spying may have prevented Millwall getting a win, that has implications - with two extra points they would have pipped us to automatic. This could well rumble on. |
But we could have got 2 extra points too |  | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:14 - May 20 with 862 views | AndrewRatcliffITFC |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:12 - May 20 by Dennyx4 |
But we could have got 2 extra points too |
True | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:42 - May 20 with 801 views | ozzy_itfc |
I think the most amusing thing about all of this is the fact that for every proven / admitted spying case by Southampton, and even throwing the Millwall one into the mix, they failed to win any of the games!
Caveat being, the ones we know about so far... | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:47 - May 20 with 774 views | Dennyx4 |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:42 - May 20 by ozzy_itfc |
I think the most amusing thing about all of this is the fact that for every proven / admitted spying case by Southampton, and even throwing the Millwall one into the mix, they failed to win any of the games!
Caveat being, the ones we know about so far... |
If they spied on Oxford in December, they will have spied on every game since then.
Arsenal could appeal that they should still be in the FA Cup too. | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 12:02 - May 20 with 733 views | Xatticus |
I'll concede to what you know. I deny the rest. | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 12:12 - May 20 with 687 views | Exiled2Surrey |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 11:47 - May 20 by Dennyx4 |
If they spied on Oxford in December, they will have spied on every game since then.
Arsenal could appeal that they should still be in the FA Cup too. |
The ones they admitted to were because the clubs concerned would be unlikely to kick up a stink, because:
1. They will not play in the same league as Southampton next season;
2. Southampton did not win those games, so the clubs concerned did not suffer any disadvantage in the grand scheme of things; and
3. This undermines the argument that spying lead to an advantage
You would hardly expect them to fess up to fixtures where they came out of the traps like a greyhound and executed a remarkably foresighted strategic plan.
No-one believes that these are the only teams they spied on - no-one... | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 12:38 - May 20 with 613 views | Pinewoodblue |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 12:12 - May 20 by Exiled2Surrey |
The ones they admitted to were because the clubs concerned would be unlikely to kick up a stink, because:
1. They will not play in the same league as Southampton next season;
2. Southampton did not win those games, so the clubs concerned did not suffer any disadvantage in the grand scheme of things; and
3. This undermines the argument that spying lead to an advantage
You would hardly expect them to fess up to fixtures where they came out of the traps like a greyhound and executed a remarkably foresighted strategic plan.
No-one believes that these are the only teams they spied on - no-one... |
Hard to believe Southampton found it necessary to Spy on Oxford but not on Coventry who they played. 6 days previous.
Presumably FA will be asking Fulham, Arsenal & Manchester City if with hindsight they have any suspicions concerning FA Cup games. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 15:23 - May 20 with 452 views | PhuketPete |
Norwich had a similar dramatic upturn in results immediately after Clement joined, as S’ton did after Eckhart. Just sayin’ | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 16:58 - May 20 with 372 views | OldFart71 |
It is inconceivable that they just spied on Boro, Town and Oxford. I can maybe understand us and Boro. But Oxford.
That would be like spying on Eddy the Eagle by the Swiss camp when he was in the olympics. | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 17:59 - May 20 with 318 views | MVBlue |
Will someone please explain to me how the situation is different this year to Leeds V Derby in 2019???
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/fo |  |
| |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 18:02 - May 20 with 301 views | TheBoyBlue |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 17:59 - May 20 by MVBlue |
Will someone please explain to me how the situation is different this year to Leeds V Derby in 2019???
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/fo |
Weren't the rules different then? Or at least the punishment? My understanding is that the rules and punishment are only as they are now because of Leeds back then. | |
| |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 18:06 - May 20 with 292 views | farkenhell |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 17:59 - May 20 by MVBlue |
Will someone please explain to me how the situation is different this year to Leeds V Derby in 2019???
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/fo |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/fo
About half way down:
"The question now is what a suitable sanction will be - if Southampton are found to be guilty.
No-one can predict what the outcome can be, because there is no direct precedent.
The independent disciplinary commission will, in effect, be creating it - which adds further significance to its decision.
Unlike, say, a profit and sustainability hearing, there is no framework or sliding scale of offence-to-sanction. This is completely new.
When Leeds United were found guilty of spying on Derby seven years ago, they were fined £200,000.
But there are a couple of crucial differences.
Firstly, in 2019 there was no rule which outlawed watching the opposition train before a game.
Leeds could only be charged with breaching regulation E.4, which says clubs must act in the "utmost good faith" to one another.
As a result, the EFL brought in regulation 127, which specifically states "no club shall directly or indirectly observe (or attempt to observe) another club's training session in the period of 72 hours prior to any match".
Southampton are charged with breaching both, and they have made no attempt to deny the allegations.
Then there is the timing. Leeds boss Marcelo Bielsa was caught sending a member of his staff to Derby's training ground in the middle of January, hardly a crucial point of the season.
But Saints stand accused of spying on their opponents before one of the most important games of the season, a play-off semi-final.
The feeling at Boro is that if Saints go on to beat Hull and win promotion, the Premier League millions will more than offset any fine." | | | |
| S’ton .. but who else??? on 18:37 - May 20 with 228 views | Bluespeed225 |
That would be a really huge, Jurassic Park. size cherry, on a rather lovely post season cake! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
