sadoldgit

Is diving to get a penalty acting in good faith? Is pretending to be injured in order to get another player booked or sent off acting in good faith? Of course not but the worst you are likely to get is a yellow card, not a £200m sanction. Both actions are far more likely to effect the result of a game than spying too.

My spy was just as effective as Will Salt it seems. Spygate was mentioned in a few of the speeches. Roy Keane shed a few tears when he saw his daughter in her wedding dress and during his speech. No inside info about any intentions to move or not. I’m expecting to face EFL sanctions for this?

I had an insider at the wedding. I’ll see if I can get any info.

Numerous? 3. None of which were a big deal by all accounts. As has been said numerous times, a storm in a tea cup and has been blown out of all proportion.

So obvious that the EFL have them yet nobody else does? The principle is that you don’t spy yet it is common place on the continent and the EFL say it is okay so long as you don’t do it within 72 hours of a match? The game is the same the world over. Where is the consistency? There is none. The point I and others are trying to make is that it is a stupid rule and that to throw a club out of a competition for breaching a stupid rule is completely disproportionate to the offence. I know a few posters struggle to understand it but it really isn’t that hard. I am sure even Noddy Holder in his mirrored hat could understand it.

There has been a lot of talk about how EPL training grounds are hidden behind high walls etc., but there is absolutely nothing that says you can’t fly a drone or even an hot air balloon over the training grounds.

And yet if they did it would not be against the EPL rules.

No it has nothing to do with Spygate, other than demonstrating that a spying mission the day before a match might be just as pointless as one more than 72 hours before a match and therefore no big deal.

“They” being who exactly? We still don’t know who is responsible for what and when. We don’t know of any mitigating circumstances. We don’t know one side of the story but you would carry on regardless? The only thing we know for sure is that the club has held its hands up to spying on other clubs within the 72 hour rule on three occasions. Before anyone is found guilty and thrown under the bus, for want of a better term, I, and I am sure plenty of other people, want to hear what exactly happened and who is responsible from the club itself.

I couldn’t agree more. I can’t find an ounce of enthusiasm for this World Cup. Everything Trump touches turns to shit.

It doesn’t matter if the training is tactical or not. The rule is about observing training within 72 hours. They brought the rule in because of what Bielsa did and had to be seen to be doing something.

You mentioned cup competitions. You were not specific.

The poster said that if you do it in a knock out competition you get kicked out. The FA Cup is a knock out competition. If two EPL clubs play each other in the FA Cup and one “spies” on the other, do they get kicked out of the competition?

Yes you have, because most people see what has occurred as being a minor breach of a silly rule (remind me again how many times Leeds committed the same offence, a lot more than 3 wasn’t it?). The anger being expressed is because the punishment does not fit the crime. If you don’t understand that by now there is no helping you. *** If the shoe had been on the other foot and Gibson had apologised to Parsons under the same set of circumstances, given what we now know a Parsons being a decent guy, do you honestly believe that Parsons wouldn’t have accepted the apology and leave the matter there? As Tonda said, games are settled by what happens on the pitch. In this case, ours wasn’t.

Not if you do it in the FA Cup. The other rule broken was one of fair play which could apply in all instances of cheating and was probably the more serious given that we didn’t gain a significant advantage in all 3 matches mentioned. Stick fair play in after all future infringements and any team could be looking at expulsion. The main point remains. The punishment did not fit the crime. Any crimes committed in future will raise the question of the possibility of expulsion.