| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week 08:34 - Sep 21 with 2066 views | muccletonjoe |
Has to be one of the biggest penalties handed out to any club, spying on Ipswich, Oxford and Middlesbrough has so far cost them a place in the Premier league play off final, plus 4 points from the current season. Could well now be a ban for the manager on top of that. |  | | |  |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 08:37 - Sep 21 with 2032 views | John_Warks_Willy |
I just read the BBC article on it with the club interviews.
Their chairman doesn’t come across particularly well. Definitely feels they’re a victim in all this.
Tonda comes across better, at least. |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:15 - Sep 21 with 1825 views | Guthrum |
They might well have lost in the play-off final anyway, so that is not the massive punishment (almost like a £200m fine) all the articles - and the club - are playing it up to be. |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:18 - Sep 21 with 1796 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:15 - Sep 21 by Guthrum |
They might well have lost in the play-off final anyway, so that is not the massive punishment (almost like a £200m fine) all the articles - and the club - are playing it up to be. |
Plus the obvious point that being kicked out of a match you cheated to be in is hardly a massive punishment |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:42 - Sep 21 with 1686 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 08:37 - Sep 21 by John_Warks_Willy |
I just read the BBC article on it with the club interviews.
Their chairman doesn’t come across particularly well. Definitely feels they’re a victim in all this.
Tonda comes across better, at least. |
They've played the victim throughout and had to apologise for their apologies more than once.
How Eckhart has been allowed to start the season in the job is a failing of the FA/EFL [Post edited 21 Sep 9:42]
|  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 10:32 - Sep 21 with 1599 views | MattinLondon |
They got kicked out of the playoffs - which they could well have won and then pocketed £200M.
They’ve had a points deduction - think it should be a case of letting it go. |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:52 - Sep 21 with 1381 views | charlie1 |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 10:32 - Sep 21 by MattinLondon |
They got kicked out of the playoffs - which they could well have won and then pocketed £200M.
They’ve had a points deduction - think it should be a case of letting it go. |
They admitted to cheating directly ahead of the game that secured their qualification to the play-off final.
Being kicked out of a game that you cheated to reach should be the absolute minimum sanction shouldn't it? Otherwise everyone would do it.
The value of that game is completely irrelevant. |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:55 - Sep 21 with 1366 views | bartyg |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 08:37 - Sep 21 by John_Warks_Willy |
I just read the BBC article on it with the club interviews.
Their chairman doesn’t come across particularly well. Definitely feels they’re a victim in all this.
Tonda comes across better, at least. |
Whole article is really sympathetic to them, something I don't feel is accurate across general society |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 13:07 - Sep 21 with 1308 views | football |
Neither come across well - like they are the victims in this. And Tonda using the 'i didn't know card' which is not a line of defense in my opinion. I really hope they throw the book at the club.
The whole 'its not fair' doesn't wash - they knew what they were doing to get an advantage over other clubs | | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 19:52 - Sep 21 with 1024 views | football |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 10:32 - Sep 21 by MattinLondon |
They got kicked out of the playoffs - which they could well have won and then pocketed £200M.
They’ve had a points deduction - think it should be a case of letting it go. |
No! Who knows how many other clubs they spied on. He knew what he was doing, it was deliberate and he should pay the price - with the club who knew about it and endorsed it | | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 20:09 - Sep 21 with 979 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:18 - Sep 21 by C_HealyIsAPleasure |
Plus the obvious point that being kicked out of a match you cheated to be in is hardly a massive punishment |
That’s the crux of it isn’t it. If it’s proven ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that Eckart was the orchestrator, he needs at least a year ban. I don’t see how it’s any different to drugs cheating, so maybe 2-3 years even. |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 20:38 - Sep 21 with 939 views | pointofblue |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 13:07 - Sep 21 by football |
Neither come across well - like they are the victims in this. And Tonda using the 'i didn't know card' which is not a line of defense in my opinion. I really hope they throw the book at the club.
The whole 'its not fair' doesn't wash - they knew what they were doing to get an advantage over other clubs |
The one thing I don't get - if he didn't think it was against the rules, why not spy on more than three teams? | |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 21:01 - Sep 21 with 889 views | Ryorry |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 20:38 - Sep 21 by pointofblue |
The one thing I don't get - if he didn't think it was against the rules, why not spy on more than three teams? |
And anyway, he's supposed to be a *professional* isn't he? And his salary £££££££ for being that? Imagine being head coach in the English Championship and not knowing the rules!  |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 21:14 - Sep 21 with 853 views | Dubtractor |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 20:38 - Sep 21 by pointofblue |
The one thing I don't get - if he didn't think it was against the rules, why not spy on more than three teams? |
Pretty certain they spied on more, supporting their ridiculous run of results, just that it was just those 3 where they were bang to rights. |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 22:24 - Sep 21 with 770 views | eirannach_gorm |
They are not Man. City, are they? | | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 07:35 - Sep 22 with 530 views | Churchman |
Southampton should have been relegated to League One and fined all their remaining parachute money as a minimum. They cheated and knew they were doing wrong.
Claiming they were denied £200m by being kicked out of the play offs is arrogant and incorrect. They actually lost nothing but a possibility that was never a guarantee. They’ve got away with cheating with a light slap on the wrist.
If anyone thinks it was only Oxford and ITFC they spied on (coincidently two games that proved meaningless to the table) they are either gullible or plain stupid.
They should do one |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 07:35 - Sep 22 with 530 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:52 - Sep 21 by charlie1 |
They admitted to cheating directly ahead of the game that secured their qualification to the play-off final.
Being kicked out of a game that you cheated to reach should be the absolute minimum sanction shouldn't it? Otherwise everyone would do it.
The value of that game is completely irrelevant. |
100%.
They are using the "£200M value" attached to the PO final to argue that that is the penalty they have been hit with. It's total misdirection.
There may be (is) a more general problem with the difference between income of the "haves" in the Pl and the "have nots" in the EFL, but that's a totally separate issue about how the game has become dominated by money.
The issue at the heart of this is about cheating in a competition. In ANY competition in sport, if you get caught cheating, you are punished which can often include ejection from the competition. The EFL handled it really badly by allowing the 2nd leg to proceed without having convened an emergency meeting (e.g. they could have handed Boro a 2 goal head start for the 2nd leg). But they didn't and left themselves with a very awkward decision, but in reality had no other option but to eject them.
However, Eckart has had no punishment. He brought the game into terrible disrepute. It was on all the main news stories for days, cheating in English football. They clearly knew what they were doing, otherwise why hide behind trees, or disguise themselves in different kits? Why did they deny it initially? Why did the intern spy run away, and jump in his car and drive off? The intern was also reported as saying he was under intense pressure from Eckart to do the spying.
So why in the light of all this, do Southampton still try to play the victim? They as a club have caused damage to the reputation of football - and they don't acknowledge that. They think they have been dealt with harshly! It's rubbish, in my view the chairman should be punished for failing to acknowledge the wrong they did, as well as Eckart who needs to be punished with a lengthy ban. And this is not any animosity I have towards Southampton, in fact I have liked Southampton as a club with great fans and often similar status to ITFC. But cheating is cheating, and it has to be dealt with - both (i) the consequences (which happened with the ejection) and 4 point penalty and (ii) the perpetrators who need to be punished for their initiating it.
Edit: No doubt the EFL and the FA hoped Southampton would take action by sacking Eckart, as they did by hoping Southampton would lose the PO 2nd leg, and thus avoid needing to take action themselves. But as Eckart remains in his job, the FA now have to act and apply appropriate punishment. A minimum 12 month ban from English football. [Post edited 22 Sep 8:25]
|  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:34 - Sep 22 with 378 views | TheMover |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 20:38 - Sep 21 by pointofblue |
The one thing I don't get - if he didn't think it was against the rules, why not spy on more than three teams? |
Also, why did the person spying on us dress in Eastleigh kit, if they didn't know it was against the rules they wouldn't need a disguise | | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:45 - Sep 22 with 359 views | ellaandred |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 21:01 - Sep 21 by Ryorry |
And anyway, he's supposed to be a *professional* isn't he? And his salary £££££££ for being that? Imagine being head coach in the English Championship and not knowing the rules! |
As a former referee you might be surprised how many players and fans don't know the rules ( Laws of the Game) never mind a manager not knowing the rules on spying. |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:50 - Sep 22 with 343 views | HighgateBlue |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 22:24 - Sep 21 by eirannach_gorm |
They are not Man. City, are they? |
This week is just the hearing. One would hope that the delay between hearing and decision is not as lengthy as in the case of Man City (12 week hearing ending in 2024, still waiting).
Obviously there are a number of differences:
(i) this hearing is against Eckert, not Southampton
(ii) Southampton admitted the charges against them, so there is relatively little still to determine
(iii) a lot fewer charges covering a smaller period of time
(iv) the hearing is 2 days, not 60
(v) Eckert himself has admitted a fair number of the alleged facts
Clearly the main difference will be the fact that there's so much less money on the line, and Eckert has a lot less money than City with which to challenge it.
The delay in the City case is staggering, and my view is that given the special interest of fans in our megalith national sport, and the lack of confidence in its governance, these processes should have to be transparent. That may turn them into a circus, but so be it.
However, one optimistic thought is this - if you're a member of the panel deciding City's fate, and you are of the view that they are massively culpable, it may be preferable to allow them the procedural delays they (presumably) ask for, and further chances to put in additional submissions, in order to make your final decision more watertight, and give them fewer procedural grounds on which to make another interminable challenge.
We shall see. |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:58 - Sep 22 with 309 views | Mullet |
They’ve got off so lightly and acted like they’re victims. It’s appalling.
They should have been relegated immediately as a bare minimum- you can’t do anything which endorses cheating like the soft touch has. |  |
| |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 13:03 - Sep 22 with 291 views | BseaBlue |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 12:34 - Sep 22 by TheMover |
Also, why did the person spying on us dress in Eastleigh kit, if they didn't know it was against the rules they wouldn't need a disguise |
Exactly this. Add in the fact that some of the staff were stated as being uncomfortable with doing it so of course they would have known they were asking them to do things that were wrong.
Hopefully the punishment will be similar to the situation in the women's game and it will be at least a 1 year ban. |  | | |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 13:20 - Sep 22 with 241 views | Axeldalai_lama |
| Decisive F.A hearing on Tonda Eckhart this week on 09:15 - Sep 21 by Guthrum |
They might well have lost in the play-off final anyway, so that is not the massive punishment (almost like a £200m fine) all the articles - and the club - are playing it up to be. |
Exactly. Cheating or breaking the law and gaining an advantage can't be then used to negate the punishment.
It's like me robbing a bank and saying that being caught has cost me a life of supermodels and sports cars, surely that's punishment enough your honour!!
Actually might give this a go!! |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
