Whitey Grandad

That's the point. He has not been identified publicly and may not even be reachable the moment.

Nope. They've said very little. Which could mean anything from they've got something to hide to they know nothing about it and need time to investigate further.

Or was after a job with another club who might have expressed an interest in one of Middlesbrough's players? It's not so far from Derby, or Birmingham, as it is from here.

This matter has nothing to do with English Law being a case of an agreement between the club and the EFL but in general employment legislation the relationship between employer and employee is known as that between Master and Servant the relevant point being that the Master is responsible for the actions of a Servant even if they have no knowledge of the transgression. This does not apply to contractors.

He is unlikely to have been a 75-year old on a work placement.

And the streets outside would be full of Saints fans regardless.

Me too. In exchange for an early resolution and a fine paid whilst we're still in the EFL.

It's a neutral holding statement.

"No longer works for us" Since last Thursday afternoon or since sometime a couple of weeks ago?

Indeed. Plausible denial is very important.

But if you describe him as a "university student" on a part-time work placement?

If you examine our statement it is pretty anodyne. No admission of guilt.

Long experience has taught me that no report in the press is anywhere close to the truth. On a local topic I was once called by the local paper for my comments and my words were, "Well, it doesn't help" The banner headline that week quoted me as saying, "NAIL IN THE COFFIN!" At the research labs where I used to work we had copies of all the major newspapers and there was once an incident about which I had detailed knowledge. They all covered the incident but from different angles. None of them got it right.

And that's the problem with unsubstantiated allegations such as these. There has been a lot of jumping to conclusions and assumptions of guilt. Some chap is spotted standing on a hill, some say hiding in bushes, some say with professional eavesdropping and spying equipment, some say with a phone and earphones. This chap refuses to give his name or say what he is doing there, as he us entitled to do. Somehow the assumption is that he must be acting for Southampton FC, probably even an employee. And erm... that's it.

I have read all sorts of things. Misidentification is a common comment. Pictures on a website are rarely up to date and photos from a couple of days ago seem to have been of another individual. CCTV is not the sharpest tool in the box. There are some comments that he went into the toilets, changed his appearance somehow and was never seen again. All somewhat circumstantial and unsubstantial. The analyst intern that you may be thinking of has stopped working for Saints. The question is when.

I assume that's a rhetorical question. If they did, the world would know by now.

Not you too! He has not been identified.

But just think how bad it could have been without all that nonsense.

Clean sheet for Wood.

So you think the allegations are true? Nobody even knows who this spy is supposed to be. If he exists.

Used to be. Not now.

I hope we've paid him enough 😉

Or walk around Trafalgar Square for five minutes waving his phone in the air. Then resetting it remotely as soon as it's stolen. Or get a mate to steal it from you.

Or breach of privacy?

Has the individual been positively identified yet?