| Make it so on 17:54 - May 20 with 1039 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Make it so on 17:18 - May 20 by DanTheMan |
I guess the argument is, would they have won if Southampton hadn't of cheated? I don't think so but it's impossible to say, which is the issue. |
Isn't this exactly what creates the legal difficulty with expulsion ...
If it's impossible to say whether the breach materially affected the outcome. That ambiguity can be used by both parties regardless of what side of the argument you sit on. |  | |  |
| Make it so on 17:57 - May 20 with 1022 views | NthQldITFC |
Appeal hearing to start at 6:00pm
...6.30pm in Middlesbrough
...7.00pm in Hull
and thirsty minutes ago in Wrexham
EFL to confirm |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:01 - May 20 with 1008 views | MK1 |
We will finish above either of them, so doesn't really effect us. No way the FA will miss out on another payday at Wembley anyway. |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:03 - May 20 with 996 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Make it so on 17:57 - May 20 by NthQldITFC |
Appeal hearing to start at 6:00pm
...6.30pm in Middlesbrough
...7.00pm in Hull
and thirsty minutes ago in Wrexham
EFL to confirm |
Is it live on Sky? |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:11 - May 20 with 969 views | Herbivore |
| Make it so on 17:54 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
Isn't this exactly what creates the legal difficulty with expulsion ...
If it's impossible to say whether the breach materially affected the outcome. That ambiguity can be used by both parties regardless of what side of the argument you sit on. |
You can't prove whether they actually gained an advantage but it is evident that they sought to gain an advantage. It is cheating whether they ultimately benefited from it or not. |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:14 - May 20 with 962 views | Bellevue_Blue |
| Make it so on 18:11 - May 20 by Herbivore |
You can't prove whether they actually gained an advantage but it is evident that they sought to gain an advantage. It is cheating whether they ultimately benefited from it or not. |
No one disputes it's cheating.
But I believe expulsion has only ever been used as a form of punishment when the match in question has been directly impacted eg pitch invasion/ fielding and ineligible player etc. | | | |
| Make it so on 18:22 - May 20 with 935 views | Herbivore |
| Make it so on 18:14 - May 20 by Bellevue_Blue |
No one disputes it's cheating.
But I believe expulsion has only ever been used as a form of punishment when the match in question has been directly impacted eg pitch invasion/ fielding and ineligible player etc. |
This is the first time a breach of this particular rule has been heard, so the outcome is by definition going to be unprecedented. I think the punishment is reasonable given that one of the offences occured during a knockout format that they progressed in. It doesn't matter whether they actually materially gained from it, they sought to materially gain by flagrantly breaching the rules. | |
| |
| Make it so on 18:31 - May 20 with 901 views | billlm |
Just get Boro and saints to play a one off game neutral ground and Boro start one up,
Or promote hull, |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Make it so on 18:34 - May 20 with 902 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
I think someone else suggested this… |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:46 - May 20 with 857 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Make it so on 17:34 - May 20 by GlasgowBlue |
The inept spy was caught very quickly and had Boro managed to put the ball in the back of the net, something which plagued them for the final months of the season, they would have put the game out of Southampton's reach in the first half.
I think Southampton should be punished. I don't think that Boro should be rewarded. [Post edited 20 May 17:37]
|
Yep, didn't earn it on the pitch at all. | |
| |
| Make it so on 18:49 - May 20 with 828 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
Not a huge surprise that Hull would chance their arm, given what's at stake.
You still haven't explained why Hull deserve to go up without having to play a final (the team that scraped 6th, a long way behind the rest) or why should they benefit from Southampton's cheating more than the team who actually played them. |  |
| |
| Make it so on 18:51 - May 20 with 833 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Make it so on 18:49 - May 20 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not a huge surprise that Hull would chance their arm, given what's at stake.
You still haven't explained why Hull deserve to go up without having to play a final (the team that scraped 6th, a long way behind the rest) or why should they benefit from Southampton's cheating more than the team who actually played them. |
Someone is going to benefit from this, either Boro or Hull.
I'm picking the team that won in the competition
(and who will for sure get relegated next year). | |
| |
| Make it so on 20:00 - May 20 with 739 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Make it so on 18:51 - May 20 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Someone is going to benefit from this, either Boro or Hull.
I'm picking the team that won in the competition
(and who will for sure get relegated next year). |
The difference is Boro's benefit is only getting to the final. You want Hull to benefit to the tune of £200m and the prestige of Prem football. And they didn't even play the guilty party. You're bonkers in the nut mate! | |
| |
| Make it so on 20:12 - May 20 with 727 views | J2BLUE |
| Make it so on 17:03 - May 20 by The_Romford_Blue |
If we’re talking about perfect scenarios… surely Boro beating Hull Saturday and then Hull win their case that they didn’t have time to prepare and both go up. 21 team prem and only 3 go down. That would surely be the best outcome for us. Albeit of course that is almost never going to happen |
Then it would have to permanently be a 21 team league which isn't going to happen. |  | | |
| Make it so on 22:36 - May 20 with 650 views | positivity |
nor did hull, finished 7 points behind boro and dodged the cheating team by not being good enough to finish 5th! | |
| |
| Make it so on 22:40 - May 20 with 622 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Make it so on 22:36 - May 20 by positivity |
nor did hull, finished 7 points behind boro and dodged the cheating team by not being good enough to finish 5th! |
They won their semi final, Boro didn't.
The play offs, as the EFL have clearly stated in their ruling yesterday, is a separate competition to The Championship.. | |
| |
| Make it so on 22:43 - May 20 with 605 views | positivity |
| Make it so on 22:40 - May 20 by GlasgowBlue |
They won their semi final, Boro didn't.
The play offs, as the EFL have clearly stated in their ruling yesterday, is a separate competition to The Championship.. |
they weren't cheated out of their semi final though. boro were
as a separate competition, the wronged party goes forward as with an ineligible player in the fa cup.
i'd love hull to get in the prem for purely selfish reasons, but there's no coherent, logical reason for it! | |
| |
| Make it so on 17:03 - May 21 with 488 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Make it so on 18:11 - May 20 by Herbivore |
You can't prove whether they actually gained an advantage but it is evident that they sought to gain an advantage. It is cheating whether they ultimately benefited from it or not. |
At the very least they disrupted at least one vital training session, less than 72 hours before a match, and caused Boro to have to change plans and try and bed in new routines in less than adequate time. And potentially also got up to date intelligence on Hackney's availability. | | | |
| Make it so on 17:12 - May 21 with 474 views | GeoffSentence |
I see both Hull and some personalities at Wrexham are trying to make the most of this.
There is no way in the world Hull deserve to go up automatically. They finished a distant 6th. They are losing the moral high ground here, acting like a bunch of desperate chancers.
The correct decision had been made. Southampton tried to win their tie by unfair means, they've been kicked out, it's only right that their victims take their place. |  |
| |
| Make it so on 17:24 - May 21 with 458 views | hype313 |
| Make it so on 17:12 - May 21 by GeoffSentence |
I see both Hull and some personalities at Wrexham are trying to make the most of this.
There is no way in the world Hull deserve to go up automatically. They finished a distant 6th. They are losing the moral high ground here, acting like a bunch of desperate chancers.
The correct decision had been made. Southampton tried to win their tie by unfair means, they've been kicked out, it's only right that their victims take their place. |
The crux of it is Boro should've been awarded a 3-0 win in the first leg, therefore won the tie on aggregate.
Normally clubs have 3 days to prepare for a fixture, Hull have had 4, so this argument you see happening if Boro win, will be futile. |  |
| |
| Make it so on 19:41 - May 21 with 402 views | darkhorse28 |
| Make it so on 17:18 - May 20 by Cheltenham_Blue |
If we are sending Hull straight up, surely we should just cancel the playoffs and give it to Millwall for finishing 3rd?
This could go on for months. |
The play offs are a separate competition with their own rules.
There’s no provision for this, but Hull are 100% correct, in law, in most cases, because the EFL didn’t award Boro a win, then there shouldn’t be a game. Hull win the play offs as their opponent is expelled.
It’s simple in law, but not in the rules. It’s happened before though where the finalist wins.
They have a good case. BUT it’s all about money and the EFL wanted the game to go ahead, otherwise they lose a fortune, and that I suspect is going to be a big problem.
I’m sure Hull have discussed not sending a team, because playing won’t help their case, but obviously you can’t take away a sporting opportunity just to aid the litigation. Imagine losing the case how you’d feel as a club.
It’s a serious mess. 100% Boro were out before the decision, a win wasn’t awarded so Hull are promoted.
Why they didn’t award a Boro win a see this coming says a lot, most of the player and whataboutary on losses that haven’t happened, don’t seem to have much merit.
But this does.
The EFL will prey for a Hull win.., and then they only have Wrexham annoyed at some smaller losses for play offs games they should have had. | | | |
| Make it so on 02:23 - May 22 with 322 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Make it so on 22:40 - May 20 by GlasgowBlue |
They won their semi final, Boro didn't.
The play offs, as the EFL have clearly stated in their ruling yesterday, is a separate competition to The Championship.. |
They don’t understand that I’m afraid.
They think Hull have spent the 10 days leading up to the biggest game in a decade for them working on themselves and some bits and bobs. Or that because championship teams play a 3 game week they’re used to finding out a their mid week opponent has suddenly changed on Sunday night or something. | |
| |
| Make it so on 07:10 - May 22 with 261 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Make it so on 02:23 - May 22 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
They don’t understand that I’m afraid.
They think Hull have spent the 10 days leading up to the biggest game in a decade for them working on themselves and some bits and bobs. Or that because championship teams play a 3 game week they’re used to finding out a their mid week opponent has suddenly changed on Sunday night or something. |
Do you need a hug? | |
| |
| Make it so on 07:23 - May 22 with 241 views | TheMover |
Personally, I think the panel should have awarded Boro a 3-0 win for the first leg, rather than saying that Southampton were expelled. That way Boro would have been the winners of the semi, rather than effectively getting a retrospective bye. | | | |
| Make it so on 07:26 - May 22 with 236 views | Herbivore |
| Make it so on 02:23 - May 22 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
They don’t understand that I’m afraid.
They think Hull have spent the 10 days leading up to the biggest game in a decade for them working on themselves and some bits and bobs. Or that because championship teams play a 3 game week they’re used to finding out a their mid week opponent has suddenly changed on Sunday night or something. |
People understand that, they just don't agree with your conclusion that Hull should get a bye to the Prem when usual practice is that if a team is disqualified from a knockout competition for cheating, the opponent they cheated against gets reinstated. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
