EFL Playoffs time

I am sure Bury fans don't agree with Southampton's view-

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game —
 
So they're arguing that the reward of promotion is so huge that the punishment is unfair...

I think that really weakens their argument. They cheated to gain an advantage to win promotion and thus everything "huge" that comes with it so the punishment has to fit. Don't see their appeal being successful
 
cleavers said:
The amusing thing about all this is that they did it before games against two other clubs, and didn't win any of three games.
Click to expand...
They got 1pt v Ipswich and finished level on pts with Boro but above them on goal difference. If they have been deemed to have gained an advantage in that game then that 1pt means alot as the play off fixture would have been reversed. St Mary's first leg and Riverside second leg. Therefore giving Boro the better opportunity to progress. Lots of IF's, But's and Maybe's but 1pt can mean a great deal especially if you have cheated in getting that 1pt.
 
blue_danube said:
That's the same logic that weirdos use when they blame women in short skirts when they get assaulted.

What he did is against the rules and he was stood on private land. It doesn't matter if there was no hedge, he was breaking EFL rules and also stood on private land. Every aspect of it was against the rules.
Click to expand...
Yes but what about City ?
 
Ian Latham said:
They got 1pt v Ipswich and finished level on pts with Boro but above them on goal difference. If they have been deemed to have gained an advantage in that game then that 1pt means alot as the play off fixture would have been reversed. St Mary's first leg and Riverside second leg. Therefore giving Boro the better opportunity to progress. Lots of IF's, But's and Maybe's but 1pt can mean a great deal especially if you have cheated in getting that 1pt.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they didn't do it to get 1 point.
 
Doc_Testosterone said:
It is but as I wanted to write the severity jump between Leeds and this scenario is enormous. With precedent set, and no indication of what the punishment would be. I have read that CAS can’t be consulted in this.
Click to expand...
What other punishment would be possible. A fine of say £5M is trivial if Southampton were to get promoted.
A 10 point deduction next season might have been an option but complicated as, if promoted, they would be playing in a different competition with different rules.
With the punishment that has been applied no other clubs will be tempted to spy on opponents in the future so it has done its job.
 
The EFL have been placed in an almost impossible position. There isn’t a solution that can be fair or acceptable to everyone, whatever decision they eventually agree on, one party, two parties or all three parties are going to complain.
The one thing that is undeniable is that this situation is squarely on Southamptons shoulders. They knew the rules and decided to break them on several occasions. In an ideal world they would take the punishment handed out, apologise and move on. That would just leave Hull City to argue that they should be automatically promoted without having to play Middlesbrough.
 
Grealish’s Shinpads said:
If you can’t see the nuance between the varying degrees of advantage that something can bring about then I can’t help you.

Re-read my posts and you will see that at no point did I deny that spying would’ve given Southampton a sporting advantage. What I am saying is that the sporting advantage is very minimal and pretending otherwise is naïve at best.

My point is that the punishment is completely disproportionate to the harm that was done.
Click to expand...
If it cures the problem forever it is not disproportionate
 
Grealish’s Shinpads said:
Again, if you think that spying on a training session is what made all the difference here and that the punishment is proportionate then we can agree to disagree. In my view it is completely disproportionate. Southampton did something wrong and should be punished but they should be punished in a way that is proportionate to what they did.
Click to expand...
£200m fine?
 
Bozzie said:
The EFL have been placed in an almost impossible position. There isn’t a solution that can be fair or acceptable to everyone, whatever decision they eventually agree on, one party, two parties or all three parties are going to complain.
The one thing that is undeniable is that this situation is squarely on Southamptons shoulders. They knew the rules and decided to break them on several occasions. In an ideal world they would take the punishment handed out, apologise and move on. That would just leave Hull City to argue that they should be automatically promoted without having to play Middlesbrough.
Click to expand...
Theyve placed themselves in an impossible position.

Each rule should carry guidelines relating to the range of penalties if its breached.

That way no-one is in any doubt what the consequences are, and can have no complaints if they get caught.
 
I personally find it hard to believe that they only spied on Oxford, Ipswich & Boro, especially as the timelines are quite widespread.

Their form from the turn of the year has been excellent, coincidence?

Obviously if the turned up at Wednesday's Training Sessions the report would have just said "Absolute Shite"
 
moomba said:
Theyve placed themselves in an impossible position.

Each rule should carry guidelines relating to the range of penalties if its breached.

That way no-one is in any doubt what the consequences are, and can have no complaints if they get caught.
Click to expand...
Ah thankfully I'm not the only one wondering about that point.
Is it really that difficult to set out the guidance for penalties in football based on where you are in the pyramid.
In any other business when you enter a contract the penalties for failure to comply are explicit. Thus, when you start a season, you are entering a contract to abide by the rules set out by the FA - failure to comply should be set out at this point
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top