They've missed out on promotion so I'd have thought a huge points deduction mid season so they can't get near the play offsIf Southampton had been caught spying mid season what would be the penalty have been?
Circumstances has made the potential penalty huge and that doesn’t seem fair to me.
You need some employment mate.My new favourite past time is posting 'what about City' below any football regulatory posts on Facebook, the amount of gammons you find liking and interacting is always a delight.
I think there was a £1m settlement but that was agreed between the clubs and Premier League didn’t get involved. The banning of Southampton was imposed by EFL not EPL, so it seems cheating is acceptable to EPL especially if they wear red.I’ve posted in another thread on the whataboutary, why were Liverpool allowed to completely escape any form of sporting or financial sanction for what they did to City in accessing the club’s scouting software. 115 is completely different to this Southampton story, however what Liverpool did is similar in observing another team’s activity to gain a sporting advantage.
I think there was a £1m settlement but that was agreed between the clubs and Premier League didn’t get involved. The banning of Southampton was imposed by EFL not EPL, so it seems cheating is acceptable EPL especially if they wear red.
Because City was in the shit for having inadequate data protection in placeSpot on. Our club didn't push it - we agreed a settlement, bizarrely, instead of making a big deal about it. It was our fault that Liverpool weren't looked in to
It was nothing to do with data protection. It wasn’t hacked. Liverpool employed our scouts and the scouts took our database with them.Because City was in the shit for having inadequate data protection in place
It was hacked. They used a City employee’s login details, which by definition, is hackingIt was nothing to do with data protection. It wasn’t hacked. Liverpool employed our scouts and the scouts took our database with them.
No it isn't.It was hacked. They used a City employee’s login details, which by definition, is hacking
Yes it is hacking. Hacking, by definition, is accessing a network without having authorisation to do so, regardless of how it was achievedNo it isn't.
Hacking would be using illegal resources to get a login from a City staff member to access the database.
in this instance, the bloke literally just logged in because his account hadn't been decommissioned.
Once he is no longer employed by City surely it would become illegal resources. The rumours were that it wasnt even the former member of staff using the login.No it isn't.
Hacking would be using illegal resources to get a login from a City staff member to access the database.
in this instance, the bloke literally just logged in because his account hadn't been decommissioned.
He did have authorisation, he had a live login. He didn't impersonate someone or steal credentials.Yes it is hacking. Hacking, by definition, is accessing a network without having authorisation to do so, regardless of how it was achieved
It’s a fact mate
So many of these wankers in the press and the nobhead muggles repeating the bullshit from Talksport are going to look so stupid when we’re cleared.
I bet none of them have the integrity to apologise or acknowledge our innocence either. Most sports journalists and cartel fans are too fucking stupid to even eat without someone holding their spoon.
But he knew he didn't work at City any more.He did have authorisation, he had a live login. He didn't impersonate someone or steal credentials.
Its murky waters with if that access ceases when he leaves etc but depends on the circumstances of his termination and contract tbf. When I left my last company I negotiated to keep access to all of the software that I use for my role.
Maybe someone at City HR was daft enough to not even ask about it.
Well, they've admitted to 3 doing it three times, 2 of which were for league games for which they've got a 4 point deduction for (2 per game) so i assume thats the barometer going forward.If Southampton had been caught spying mid season what would be the penalty have been?
Circumstances has made the potential penalty huge and that doesn’t seem fair to me.
He didn’t have authorisation as he had left the club, regardless of having a live login or not, otherwise why did Liverpool settle? Do you honestly believe City allowed a scout to have access to our database when he moved to a major competitor?He did have authorisation, he had a live login. He didn't impersonate someone or steal credentials.
Its murky waters with if that access ceases when he leaves etc but depends on the circumstances of his termination and contract tbf. When I left my last company I negotiated to keep access to all of the software that I use for my role.
Maybe someone at City HR was daft enough to not even ask about it.
Can anyone point me in the direction of the Liverpool hacking thread? I'd love to know what happened there, who was at fault, and whether the outcome was sufficient or not.
Should just rename this one. God knows it's been talked about enough times in hereCan anyone point me in the direction of the Liverpool hacking thread? I'd love to know what happened there, who was at fault, and whether the outcome was sufficient or not.