Tonda Eckert - Southampton

[demeant0r]

We seem to have become a society where it's expected to appeal everything and see it as a free hit, then the original sentence is watered down!

When was an appeal for anything lost and a harsher sentence awarded?

People can have their opinions, if it effects the fans etc that's a separate issue but you get caught cheating and you get chucked out, simple.

If a manager insults an official and gets reprimanded and you appeal and lose, I think the punishment does get harsher, no?

[SG]

We seem to have become a society where it's expected to appeal everything and see it as a free hit, then the original sentence is watered down!

When was an appeal for anything lost and a harsher sentence awarded?

People can have their opinions, if it effects the fans etc that's a separate issue but you get caught cheating and you get chucked out, simple.

If a manager insults an official and gets reprimanded and you appeal and lose, I think the punishment does get harsher, no?

Same with players - the ban can be extended if the appeal is deemed frivolous

[C Block]

Much ado about nothing. It should be a financial penalty. Ridiculous punishment for such a trifling thing. I feel for the players who really deserve to be in the final after how well they've done the last few months.

If you field an ineligible player in the FA Cup you get kicked out, and it happens most seasons in the earlier rounds, and it's usually a genuine mistake made by the Club Secretary,
I'd argue that the Manager sending a member of the coaching team to go and spy on the opposition on at least three occasions is a deliberate action, and the punishment does indeed fit the bill,
The manager will be very, very lucky to keep his job after this.

[bog]

Much ado about nothing. It should be a financial penalty. Ridiculous punishment for such a trifling thing. I feel for the players who really deserve to be in the final after how well they've done the last few months.

If you field an ineligible player in the FA Cup you get kicked out, and it happens most seasons in the earlier rounds, and it's usually a genuine mistake made by the Club Secretary,
I'd argue that the Manager sending a member of the coaching team to go and spy on the opposition on at least three occasions is a deliberate action, and the punishment does indeed fit the bill,
The manager will be very, very lucky to keep his job after this.

Yes he will be very lucky. I would think the supporters will strggule to forgive him. A definite hero to zero at rockets speeds.

   

[blingo]

How happy will Hull be if they lose to Boro ?

[General]

We seem to have become a society where it's expected to appeal everything and see it as a free hit, then the original sentence is watered down!

When was an appeal for anything lost and a harsher sentence awarded?

People can have their opinions, if it effects the fans etc that's a separate issue but you get caught cheating and you get chucked out, simple.

It's a very american way of doing things and, I fear, we are much more influence negatively by american culture, business interests and politics than we should be, as much of it is rash, brazen, and crude (but there are obviously lovely parts of it too).

[bencher]

There's cheating throughout football. Every dive is cheating. Every professional foul to stop a player through on goal is cheating. I just don't see why the sanction for this should be so much more severe than these on pitch cheating moments. They appeared to gain nothing from it anyway.

[demeant0r]

This thread and the other Soton thread seems to have a lot of people thinking we shouldn't be punishing this cheating or be punishing as severely because they didn't gain anything from it and this is actually really worrying me.

Should a student who cheated a test by copying another student not get severely punished since they failed because the student they copied from also failed? They didn't gain anything from it all the same. Of course that student should be punished, they tried to gain an upper hand. It doesn't matter if the upper hand was gotten or not.

[junior white]

There's cheating throughout football. Every dive is cheating. Every professional foul to stop a player through on goal is cheating. I just don't see why the sanction for this should be so much more severe than these on pitch cheating moments. They appeared to gain nothing from it anyway.

On the face of it having drawn the first leg they seemed to have got nothing from it, losing to Oxford (allegedly the first time they had done it) they got nothing and drawing with Ipswich you could say they got nothing.

Oxford if it was the first time then maybe the video footage was poor.

Ipswich maybe they were able to counter set pieces or styles of got a heads up on selection or injuries by players not being on the training ground (hasn't been stated when that video took place before that game) and allot some of that enabled them to get a 2-2 draw. No one will know but it could have.

The same could be said to the Boro first game, maybe without that info Boro may have won. I am assuming some of it was sent to Southampton before they got caught.

 No one will no what would of happened, but by filming I think most would say the may have gained some edge

I also think there is a big difference between a league game and a playoff game. The playoffs are worth more than £125 million so a 200k fine doesn't discourage the activity. A points deduction for every occurrence in the league stage seems fair, in the playoffs has to be a massive fine proportionate to what the gain is or being kicked out for me. Severe yes but how would we feel of it was Fulham

[SerbianLad]

There's cheating throughout football. Every dive is cheating. Every professional foul to stop a player through on goal is cheating. I just don't see why the sanction for this should be so much more severe than these on pitch cheating moments. They appeared to gain nothing from it anyway.

How have they gained nothing? They were the most in form team since he took over as head coach, after being absolutely terrible before that.

Does anyone actually believe they only spied in those three instances? Oxford game is probably the last game they would need that kind of advantage anyway. And why would they stop with spying for a few months and then do it again. I think by far the most likely scenario is that they spied on most if not all teams in the league. He even said that that's something that is "normal" in Europe and that he didn't know that you couldn't do that in UK,maybe not word for word but something similar to that.

[mcbride5912]

I have a fair amount of sympathy for the EFL, it is a very hard sanction to judge.

If you allow Southampton in the playoffs, they will most probably win, get promoted and get the £200m + premier league payment package, having cheated for at least half a season. Any fine would likely be nowhere near the amount they receive from being in the premier league. Potentially a more significant points deduction which would likely get them relegated straight away is a possibility but then they would still be in receipt of the premier league money. That would reinforce the precedent that it is ok to cheat in the Championship as long as you get promoted which is a dangerous precedent to set.

So for those who think the punishment is harsh, what do you think a more apt punishment would be?

[Neutral Zone Ultra]

There's cheating throughout football. Every dive is cheating. Every professional foul to stop a player through on goal is cheating. I just don't see why the sanction for this should be so much more severe than these on pitch cheating moments. They appeared to gain nothing from it anyway.

How have they gained nothing? They were the most in form team since he took over as head coach, after being absolutely terrible before that.

Does anyone actually believe they only spied in those three instances? Oxford game is probably the last game they would need that kind of advantage anyway. And why would they stop with spying for a few months and then do it again. I think by far the most likely scenario is that they spied on most if not all teams in the league. He even said that that's something that is "normal" in Europe and that he didn't know that you couldn't do that in UK,maybe not word for word but something similar to that.

It's obvious that they admitted to spying on Ipswich and Oxford specifically to try and get brownie points from the EFL for being honest whilst avoiding legal action from those clubs given a) Ipswich were promoted anyway so don't care and b) Oxford were relegated with 4 points from safety, so can't argue that their game against Southampton being compromised has deprived them of safety. Highly likely they spied on many more clubs.

[bog]

I heard there is another stipulation in that they either change their nickname from Saints to Sinners or to The Cheetahs. 

[MikeTheCubed]

I heard there is another stipulation in that they either change their nickname from Saints to Sinners or to The Cheetahs. 

If you take the N out of Saints it leaves you with Stasi.

[Carborundum]

There's a variety of ways to look at it, the thread is an interesting read.  I'll offer a slightly different take.

Southampton had a chain of command authorising this spying.  Imagine how you would feel as the parent of the young intern at the sharp end at a) the point they have been instructed to go spying and b) when your son had been pilloried and ridiculed nationally.

Pretty furious and utterly distraught seems reasonable responses.  People in high places at Southampton need to reap a bit of what they have sown.

[C Block]

There's a variety of ways to look at it, the thread is an interesting read.  I'll offer a slightly different take.

Southampton had a chain of command authorising this spying.  Imagine how you would feel as the parent of the young intern at the sharp end at a) the point they have been instructed to go spying and b) when your son had been pilloried and ridiculed nationally.

Pretty furious and utterly distraught seems reasonable responses.  People in high places at Southampton need to reap a bit of what they have sown.

Just for clarification, as far as I'm aware he wasn't a "young intern", this was put out to try and deflect the blame,
He has been shown in many photos with Tonkert in full training gear, and the rest of the coaching team.

[john dempsey]

Change the lyrics of the Roy Orbison song from
Crying to Spying.
Hey presto a cracking new anthem.

[Carborundum]

There's a variety of ways to look at it, the thread is an interesting read.  I'll offer a slightly different take.

Southampton had a chain of command authorising this spying.  Imagine how you would feel as the parent of the young intern at the sharp end at a) the point they have been instructed to go spying and b) when your son had been pilloried and ridiculed nationally.

Pretty furious and utterly distraught seems reasonable responses.  People in high places at Southampton need to reap a bit of what they have sown.

Just for clarification, as far as I'm aware he wasn't a "young intern", this was put out to try and deflect the blame,
He has been shown in many photos with Tonkert in full training gear, and the rest of the coaching team.

If that's the case Southampton leadership think the truth is worse than indicating an intern was doing the spying.  Today their chief executive is claiming that the financial penalty of being excluded is disproportionate.  Which seems an argument premised on the assumption they would beat Hull. 

I understand the desire to appeal in hope, but sometimes when in a hole it's best to stop digging.

[Oakeshott]

"Which seems an argument premised on the assumption they would beat Hull."

No. If they were to play Hull, it would be entirely reasonable to assume a 50% chance of getting the 3rd promotion spot, ie a 50% chance of picking up what is widely said to be a £100m to £200m benefit. That, plus the 4 points deduction is a huge penalty for an admitted set of offences, and the Southampton case that it is out of proportion to other penalties given seems to me to be fair.

My bet is that the 4 point deduction will be removed and the loss of the play-off final place deemed sufficient. If I were Southampton and removal from the play-off final stands, I'd seriously consider legal action. It is not a matter of guilt, which has been admitted, but of proportionality of punishment.

A fair punishment would to my mind be Southampton and Middlesbro required to play a one-off at at neutral venue to determine who plays Hull, and a more substantial points deduction than the 4 points for the next season Southampton play in the Championship.

[Eton White]

This argument that Southampton are making that the penalty is disproportionate is frankly laughable.

The only reason the penalty appears to be so big (the loss of potential Premier League status, £200M etc) is precisely the reason that led them to cheat in the first place!

Simply put, they cheated in a competition and are being thrown out of it. If the prize for winning that competition was a coconut, the penalty would be a coconut. If the prize was the Premier League and £200M, the penalty would be the Premier League and £200M.

Sounds totally proportionate to me.