sadoldgit

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.

A bloke standing by a tree nearly seeing something. Where in the rule book does that say it was the crime of the century? Also you need to look up the word “systematically.” I don’t think doing something 3 times qualifies as being “systematic.” It looks like you have swallowed Gibbo’s guff hook, line and sinker.

Because they have set a precedent in giving a massive sentence for a minor breach of the rules.

I think the words “forced” and “minors” are doing some heavy lifting here.

Can the FA actually get rid of him? If he wasn’t acting alone for example, do you get rid of everyone? They can’t sack him, they don’t employ him. They could suspend him, but for how long? We have already seen that the EFL struggle with proportionality. Anything that the FA does sets another precedent. A fine? Suspension? A scapegoat or everybody directly involved with the decision making? Dragan as owner? The EFL have already dug themselves into a very deep hole. Will the FA want to follow? The club have already received a brutal sentence. Anything else will be like spitting on the carcus. If SFC were in the EPL when this happened we wouldn’t even be talking about this. How does the FA deal with something that is not good faith in one league but not a problem in another? Yes, technically we broke the rules and that is what they will focus on, but the problem they have, as do the EFL, is the weakness of the rule itself. What is a proportional punishment for such a badly thought out rule?

The more heat he aims at us, the less heat coming his way for failure.