The Kraken

Yep. Punishment doesn’t necessarily have to be pre-determined. It’s better when it actually is but there also needs to be some flexibility. Say, for instance (entirely hypothetically), there was only a one off instance of spying, it was in the league, and it involved one scout doing it off his own back and entirely without the knowledge of the club, one would think that might have a different (lower) level of punishment despite it being a very similar offence.

I don’t think he was the head, was he? Just a senior analyst who was recruited earlier in the year. Certainly there must be a big chance the things are related though.

With the docking of 6 points (reduced to 4) for the two league games, they’ve set something of a precedent. Though, given the season was over and reversing those results against Oxford and Ipswich would have made no difference whatsoever to our playoff status, perhaps there’s room in future for a 3-0 if the spying is identified straight away.

I’ve said this before. The analysis team should have the autonomy to say “we’re not doing that, it’s not allowed in the laws of the game”. Whether Tonda demanded it of them, or they just simply acquiesced, is irrelevant. The analysis management who sent Salt up there are equally culpable. In fact probably more so, they should know for certain what the laws of the game are regarding analysis and should never, ever knowingly break those laws.

Or expulsion from a cup competition, similar to fielding an illegible player in a cup round. Once we were caught and owned up to it all, I’m struggling to see what a more appropriate punishment is.

In what way do you find it harsh? Or, to put it another way, what punishment do you think better would have better suited, and why?

For the same reason that we received minus ten in league one, and not when it happened. Receiving the points deduction the previous season would have been no punishment whatsoever. As I said before, one can argue all they like with the severity of punishment, that part is subjective. The method of punishment is very cut and dried in comparison.

I don’t think it was particularly odd to explain why it happened. We were thrown out of the playoffs as it was deemed a separate knockout competition to the league campaign, and we had admitted to breaking the rules in the build up to said knockout game with Boro. That punishment is similar to fielding an illegible player in a cup competition, the punishment is being ejected from that competition and the other team progresses instead. Putting Wrexham into the final would have been absolutely mental. Simply no way can that have been allowed to happen. The closest you could get would have been to have been to dock Saints points 10 or 11 points from the league season, from which the only (right) outcome could have been that the semi final was restarted but between Boro and Wrexham. But we were docked 6 points reduced to 4 for the league transgressions, so Wrexham wouldn’t have made it with that punishment.

Its also utterly irrelevant and trying to portray Saints as the victims. Whatever one thinks of the severity of the punishment, its a simple fact that we broke some explicit rules and owned up to doing so on 3 occasions, including for an upcoming match. Trying to claim we're the ones who got stitched up is laughable.

Why would anyone need to question Boro? They suspected they were about to be spied on, they were right, and they put plans in place to capture evidence of it. Its absolutely barking mad to think they need to answer anything about why they were soi prepared to catch another team attempting to cheat. Crazy.

Dave Challinor is out of work. Incredible record of getting to the playoffs with teams in the lower leagues.

Yep, I was on holiday a couple of weeks back with pals and had a few poolside chats with a beer with them, they're not Saints fans. All agreed it was a bloody stupid thing to do and required some form of punishment, which we've had, and enough is enough. I agree with you though, I fear the worst and I think it'll be a long ban. Your notion of a touchline ban not being appropriate probably makes sense too. I don't see how they could/will say "you're banned from football for 6 weeks". Just can't see it. It's months IMO, and I can definitely see a ban to the end of the season being what they will push for. Interesting to hear Tonda say that the hearing is on Thursday, but he's already sat with the FA for hours before now to make his case. AFAIK the hearing is not just an opportunity for the FA to pass down judgement, so interesting to thinkl what is still to come.

At this stage I've got no idea what the FA will hand down. I go from suspended ban to season long ban, back and forth every day. I tend to think it'll be on the longer side of things, FA have a chance to look tough on a smaller club. However, if Tonda does cop a long ban, I'm not sure how other senior figures in the club aren't culpable too and should get the same. Tonda doesn't have direct control of the analysis team; so the Analysis team management are surely as culpable (if not more culpable, as they should have the autonomy to refuse a request from team management that is outside the bounds of football rules).

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cmp30p934g4lo FFS, can someone in the club get Parsons to shut his fucking trap. Fine to get ahead of the story if you're going to say something sensible like Tonda is able to do. Parsons is incapable of that, says 'we're not the victims' while the rest of his narrative makes out that we are, and basically makes a horlicks of trying to put across a balanced point of view. The bloke is a walking disaster.

Chelsea’s punishment was also reduced after they appealed the initial verdict (which itself was never initially reported but included a points fine). Here’s the google AI summary: Background and Discovery The Takeover: Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital uncovered incomplete financial records during their due diligence prior to completing the club's purchase. Immediate Action: The new hierarchy promptly reported the irregularities to the FA, Premier League, and UEFA, providing full access to historical files and data. Scope of Breaches: The hidden payments involved unregistered agents and third-party transactions spanning from 2009 to 2022. Sanctions and Outcomes FA Penalties: Following an independent investigation, the FA issued a £10 million fine and a suspended two-window transfer ban that runs until June 30, 2027. Points Deduction Avoided: An initial penalty featuring a suspended six-point deduction was successfully appealed and replaced by the transfer ban. Regulatory Leniency: Regulators cut potential financial fines in half because of the club's exceptional cooperation and proactive self-reporting. The entire process—including the initial six-point deduction and Chelsea's successful appeal—was kept strictly confidential and only announced to the public at the very end. The public did not know the points deduction had even been threatened until July 31, 2026, when the Football Association (FA) officially released the final conclusions of both the Regulatory Commission and the Appeal Board simultaneously.