| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize 11:21 - May 20 with 1310 views | Lion |
even though they lost. It just doesn't sit right with me. Forget Southampton's punishment for a sec, does it sit right with you? Shouldn't Middlesborough have to play Millwall, who also lost, for the chance to go to the final rather than just be given it?
|  |
| |  |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 15:03 - May 20 with 163 views | Lion |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 14:59 - May 20 by Clapham_Junction |
What has happened is the same outcome that usually happens in knock-out competitions. Where a team has fielded an ineligible player in a cup match, the other team is generally given the win (e.g. Swindon being kicked out of the EFL Trophy earlier this season and Luton (who they beat) reinstated). |
Yeah, this is a very fair point, however:
1) The biggest financial prize in world football
vs
EFL trophy
is a bit different, although i accept the principle should idealistically be the same as others have said. | |
| |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 15:19 - May 20 with 133 views | naa |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 13:51 - May 20 by Lion |
Ok Steve, fair comment, respectively written. It will certainly, you would imagine, deter teams from ever thinking of trying 'spy gate' again you would think and i do admire the football league for their stance, its pretty ballsy and i certainly didn't think Southampton would get thrown out - if it sticks ( legal challenges etc )
But if you were a betting man, would you bet that actually Southampton have been caught spying against us, 'Boro and, ahem, Oxford so admitted it, but have actually spied on every club that they have played since the current management structure has been in place.
And if they have, would that make you consider the prize for Middlesborough too great?
To be clear, i'm not sure if the punishment for Southampton is too much or not, but it does feel to me that 'Boro's gain is too much. Maybe there is no other way..... |
It seems almost certain to me that they spied on pretty much everyone. Note that the game they admitted were ones they failed to win so it's almost like them saying "hey, we cheated but it didn't gain us anything".
But they won almost every game between playing Oxford and us so seems highly likely to me they spied on most of those as well but it wouldn't look good to know that it did give them an advantage so they kept quiet. | | | |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 15:48 - May 20 with 108 views | Herbivore |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 15:03 - May 20 by Lion |
Yeah, this is a very fair point, however:
1) The biggest financial prize in world football
vs
EFL trophy
is a bit different, although i accept the principle should idealistically be the same as others have said. |
So it should be the same but shouldn't be the same? |  |
| |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 16:09 - May 20 with 93 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 14:48 - May 20 by Herbivore |
Saints got disqualified for cheating against Boro, I'm not sure how that means Boro have no business taking their place in the competition. If someone wins the 100m at the Olympics and then gets done for doping, nobody claims the person who finished second shouldn't be awarded the gold. |
That's the most simplistic argument ever, the rules are black and white for some of the stuff you are talking about.
All kind of off the field infractions happen all the time in football, from financial irregularities to tapping players up. This is clearly unprecedented. Glad saints have faced a punishment but Boro getting a free hit at a playoff final and Hull having 3 days to prepare is pretty mental. Especially in the context of how those games played out. |  |
| |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 16:31 - May 20 with 76 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 15:03 - May 20 by Lion |
Yeah, this is a very fair point, however:
1) The biggest financial prize in world football
vs
EFL trophy
is a bit different, although i accept the principle should idealistically be the same as others have said. |
If they'd been found out during the main league season, I think a fairer outcome would have been to deduct them points. Given the possibility that they spied on more games that admitted, that points deduction could have been quite hefty and potentially seen them drop out of the top 6, in which case they wouldn't have even had the chance to compete in the play-offs.
The timing of when they got caught is unfortunate, particularly for Middlesbrough, Hull and Wrexham who can all feel hard done by in different ways. [Post edited 20 May 16:31]
|  | | |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 16:36 - May 20 with 62 views | Herbivore |
| Middlesborough get a second chance at playing for a '300 million ' prize on 16:09 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
That's the most simplistic argument ever, the rules are black and white for some of the stuff you are talking about.
All kind of off the field infractions happen all the time in football, from financial irregularities to tapping players up. This is clearly unprecedented. Glad saints have faced a punishment but Boro getting a free hit at a playoff final and Hull having 3 days to prepare is pretty mental. Especially in the context of how those games played out. |
Not really, if an individual or team is disqualified for cheating in a sporting contest, which is what's happened here, then it's usual for the individual or team who lost to them to be reinstated in their place. Particularly when the cheating is directly related to the contest between those particular participants. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
