Exactly my thoughts, too. Up the Boro!I’m not too bothered about playing in the Championship next season - I am bothered that a team prepared to cheat and breach rules may gain promotion because of their actions
@martin-bellamy “I am bothered that a team prepared to cheat and breach rules may gain promotion because of their actions.”
And in doing so opens the door to similar underhand shenanigans by others in the future. 😎
Hull have postponed selling tickets for Wembley as planned today as they say they are currently not able to do so - perhaps a sign Southampton may well be facing expulsion…
@pedro The facts are that Southampton breached the rules. We’ll never know whether by doing so, they gained an advantage in either of the two semi final legs, but there are also strong suspicions that this wasn’t their first breach.
If they’ve gained advantages in other games with the same spying tactic then we probably shouldn’t even have been playing them in the semi final legs, so it’s not a fact that we lost fair and square.
I’m not too bothered about playing in the Championship next season - I am bothered that a team prepared to cheat and breach rules may gain promotion because of their actions
That is very much my position on this. If there are rules that all members have signed up to, then those rules will only mean anything if they are not only signed up to but abided by. If there is no consequence for breaking rules, then why bother having rules in the first place? Clearly following the Leeds affair, it was considered something that everyone agreed needed to be prevented from happening again. Hence the "new" rule.
I would be more than happy if we were invited to take on Hull at Wembley, especially if a pattern of this cheating (because that is that it is) did indeed occur. Probably I would also be happy to take on Hull if it is only against Boro before Saturday's game that it happened. If it happened then the cheater cannot be seen to profit from that and any future clubs tempted to break the rule should be able to recognise there really is a cost to them if they do.
You have to feel sorry for Wrexham in all of this. Arguably they have been denied a top six finish because of Soton's unfair advantage during that stunning(?) 19 match unbeaten run. Perhaps even if Soton are kept in the Championship, Wrexham would have a good case to sue them in court for lost opportunity or whatever the legal term is....
It's hard to imagine that Southampton will be allowed to play in the final if found guilty of cheating - plus if there is evidence of further spying it puts into question their league finish too.
However, the play-off final is one of the biggest games in football with the EFL selling rights all over the world so hard to imagine them cancelling the final either.
So if the ruling awards the tie at the Riverside to Boro 3-0 then they we will progress to the final - and while it's true that you can't say what advantage Southampton got by spying on the training session - you could probably argue that if they didn't gain an advantage by doing so then why have they been spying at all?
Enough decisions have gone against Boro in recent weeks (that Ipswich penalty and the even the referee at Southampton missing a blatant handball and penalty for Boro too) for me to take it as a fair outcome. The tie was very close and if any information was able to stop one Boro goal at the Riverside then it cost us the tie.
Let's not forget if Boro do go to Wembley they still have to win a game of football to gain promotion and the same is true of Hull who still had to win a game to gain promotion. What it will do is deter any other team from risking cheating in the future and that is no bad thing.
Two points:
The steer given by the EFL to the "independent " panel that the case of the Canadian Ladies' Olympic football team might be considered as a precedent is ominous.
The two cases are completely different. The Canadians were deducted points which effectively downgraded them in relation to all of their competitors. But deducting points does not meet the circumstances here because the play-offs are mini Cup ties, knock-outs rather than points based. Deducting league points next season in a league in which the Boro may not be playing does nothing to compensate the club for its losses. There is no precedent, and any conclusion based on this assumption will be completely unfounded.
Secondly, there is a widespread assumption that we cannot know whether Southampton's fore-knowledge of our set up would have affected the result. In fact Boro, if they decide to do so (which they surely must), can provide a voluminous portfolio of cases in which Hellberg's set-ups have caught our opponents on the hop. Just off the top of my head I can think of the game at Hull in which an injury depleted squad meant Targett moving to centre-back, Bangura being brought in and Gilbert included in midfield. This caused Hull so much confusion that we were 4 goals up by half-time. Similarly, at Birmingham, Hellberg going to a back three meant that City failed to respond with the result that Targett strolled his way through an inviting space to put us two goals up by half-time. No doubt Hellberg could point to many other occasions when his tactical astuteness gave us a distinct advantage. So whilst it is true that we cannot definitively say whether the spying affected the result, the Boro can point to an impressively large number of cases when our set-ups took our opponents by surprise and produced very impressive results. And given that, even with the spying, the game could scarcely have been any closer, even the smallest advantage to us could easily have affected the result.
I trust that our ace lawyer will be making both points forcefully
The only thing that concerns me about us playing Hull in the Final is an unfairness to the Tigers who, presumably, are currently planning how they will beat Southampton not the Boro.
This makes it all the more important that a decision is made quickly in order that Hull can make plans by knowing who their opponents will be.
@martin-bellamy and that is a very fair point in terms of the overall integrity of the playoffs this season
It's fair to say if a decision is not made by tomorrow about who will contest the final then it won't be changed as the logistics of making arrangements for all concerned will not be possible. I would expect a decision today if Southampton are to be expelled.
So it seems the hearing will reportedly be tomorrow with a decision made the same day.
so we are about to find out just how funny all those camouflage suits and binoculars really are then....So it seems the hearing will reportedly be tomorrow with a decision made the same day.
@werdermouth I wonder if Southampton will be able to make a formal appeal if they don’t agree with the decision.
@werdermouth. “plus if there is evidence of further spying it puts into question their league finish too.”
I agree entirely with your comment, the problem is in ensuring you have irrefutable evidence to support the further spying charge and the lack of available time to gather it; it will be interesting to learn which other clubs have concerns and what supporting evidence they have. Additionally, the information from the former Southampton coach could be revealing and invaluable.
Given that the spying may have impacted a number of teams and therefore brings into question the validity of the final league positions, I took the view that disqualifying Southampton and promoting Hull to be a fairer way of dealing with the matter.
I appreciate that there would be cost implications to the EFL if the final did not take place and also the need to address the injustice to MFC, hence my suggestion that Southampton should also be fined; bans from working in football may also be needed for those identified as being responsible.
I agree that if a decision is not made by tomorrow at the latest then the chances of MFC being at Wembley will probably have gone.
We await the outcome with bated breath. 😎
Like others, I would be uncomfortable with Boro winning promotion as a result of Southampton being disqualified as this might cause a ripple effect with other clubs who might feel they have also been victims of Southampton’s actions. It’s a minefield. We all want to see Southampton get their just desserts but I’m not sure that Boro have a cast iron case for replacing them at Wembley. We blew our best chance with that disastrous run of lost points in home games where we should have done much better.
I was obviously typing my post at the same time as KP, so we’re of the same mind.
@lenmasterman. “The steer given by the EFL to the "independent " panel that the case of the Canadian Ladies' Olympic football team might be considered as a precedent is ominous.”
I had seen that this was an option the panel may consider but was not aware it was a steer from the EFL, I thought it had been suggested as one of the options available to them in a Times article.
Certainly worrying if it is an EFL steer. 😎
Here’s the latest statement from the EFL:
”
The EFL can today provide an interim update on the ongoing disciplinary proceedings involving Southampton following Tuesday’s Championship Play-Off Semi-Final Second Leg.
The Independent Disciplinary Commission hearing will take place on or before Tuesday, 19 May.
The exact date remains under discussion and is expected to be confirmed shortly.
The Commission will issue its decision as soon as possible following consideration of the relevant submissions and evidence.
As the proceedings are being conducted by an Independent Disciplinary Commission, the EFL does not control the proposed timetable.
Notwithstanding this, the EFL continues to plan on the basis that the Championship Play-Off Final will take place as scheduled on Saturday 23 May, with the kick-off time confirmed as 4.30pm.
Supporters should, however, be aware that the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings may yet result in changes to the fixture.
The EFL has a number of contingency plans should they be required, which also includes consideration of any appeal process, if required.
Ticket Sales for Championship Play-Off Final
Hull City and Southampton will share further information on their respective sales processes later today.
Sales will be subject to usual terms and conditions, and in the circumstances, fans are encouraged to pay particular attention to the terms and conditions.
Likewise, supporters should consider the situation when booking any associated travel and accommodation.
This decision follows ongoing coordination with the Clubs to ensure that on-sale arrangements can be implemented as soon as practicable.
The League recognises that this complex situation has caused concern and disruption for supporters, particularly those making travel arrangements, and will continue to provide as much clarity as possible.
However, in these clearly exceptional circumstances, the League considers this to be the most appropriate course of action.”
https://www.efl.com/news/2026/may/14/efl-statement--sky-bet-championship-play-off-final/
@martin-bellamy I know that it will be not easy getting our proposed eminent panel together at such short notice, however, the allegations were made before our home game well over a week ago.
To now give a date of on or before 19 May looks ridiculous, and lacking in importance. It is ominous that the EFL are blaming the “Independent” Commission as the ones dragging their feet. It is hard to believe that three qualified professionals could not be found at short notice amongst the high number of Legals both working (a little difficult possibly) and those retired.
To me it looks as though the EFL are throwing spanner’s in the works on this.
@pedro - The thing is that, to some extent, it is of their own making.
Have a rule in place without any mention of the penalty for breaking said rule is a recipe for confusion which is what we are seeing now.
Feel for the fans of Hull especially who are in the final on their own merits but still don’t even know if they will actually go to Wembley let alone when.
It is not a great solution although to my mind, I think the best outcome will be play the game and then publish the punishment which probably result in Hull going up.
EVen that doesn’t feel entirely fair for Boro but the alternatives such as a points deduction would open another can of worms.
@boro-beckys-dad It is not a great solution although to my mind, I think the best outcome will be play the game and then publish the punishment which probably result in Hull going up.
But that also causes problems, if Southampton win and therefore promotion. It would be so difficult to apply retroactive punitive punishment, possibly promoting Hull.
Of course a decision may be given on or before Tuesday 19, but I doubt it.
@boro-beckys-dad I think they’ll have to publish any punishment before the game, otherwise what do they do if Southampton win?
There’s seems to be no doubt that spying on Boro took place and that an advantage could have been gained, even if a slight one. If nothing else they knew in advance that HH wasn’t playing and may well have seen set plays being practised. As someone else said, if there’s no advantage then why send someone up to Middlesbrough at all?
If KH had to change his tactics after spygate then who’s to say that the original plan wouldn’t have had a positive outcome? Even one goal for us would have seen us through at the end of 90 minutes at St Mary’s.
There are two or three positions needed to finalise this case. Firstly, a punishment for Southampton, secondly, some form of recompense for Boro and finally a fair treatment for Hull. Of the three teams involved, only one is guilty of malfeasance.
I totally understand peoples views on how unfair it is on Hull not knowing who they will play and when. Southampton argument will be they are being denied a chance to earn £200m+ if excluded, some are arguing that Millwall should be involved. I don’t agree with any of them, the only team that has been disadvantaged by Southampton is Boro so no other team should be considered.
Come on BORO.
IT is one almighty mess as Martin, Pedro and ExMil all say with differing solutions and views.
Whatever the Panel come up with, one or more teams will no doubt be objecting as to the unfairness of it all. As ExMil says, only Soton have themselves to blame for what has occurred.
What, I think, is certain, is that Boro will not be going to Wembley - look at the wording of the statement
“Notwithstanding this, the EFL continues to plan on the basis that the Championship Play-Off Final will take place as scheduled on Saturday 23 May, with the kick-off time confirmed as 4.30pm.
Supporters should, however, be aware that the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings may yet result in changes to the fixture.
The EFL has a number of contingency plans should they be required, which also includes consideration of any appeal process, if required.
Ticket Sales for Championship Play-Off Final
Hull City and Southampton will share further information on their respective sales processes later today.
Sales will be subject to usual terms and conditions, and in the circumstances, fans are encouraged to pay particular attention to the terms and conditions.
Likewise, supporters should consider the situation when booking any associated travel and accommodation.
This decision follows ongoing coordination with the Clubs to ensure that on-sale arrangements can be implemented as soon as practicable.”
No mention of Middlesbrough!
It's a bit ridiculous to expect Hull fans to buy tickets but advise them against buying travel tickets and accommodation until after Tuesday which is only three days before the proposed final!
Also ridiculous to expect Southampton fans to buy tickets having declared they could be expelled - which given it has been mentioned then I presume that is highly likely if found guilty (and given their analyst has been caught red-handed then it's a high probability)
Then there's the suggestion that the final could be both delayed and played at a different venue at an unspecified date after that advice not to buy travel and accommodation - surely it's becoming a farce.
Any other stadium will not have the same capacity as Wembley so do some fans then not have their ticket honoured?
I'm sure this could've been handled much quicker as it is now impossible to both expel Southampton and play the final on the scheduled date - does the need for a final give Southampton an opportunity to profit from cheating?
Sounds like as BB has said the punishment should have been made clear in the rules!
Tuesday is a deadline for the hearing to be concluded, the hearing actually begins tomorrow.
Apparently, we are presenting evidence which proves beyond reasonable doubt that Southampton have not only spied on us, but also spied on Bristol City, Millwall & Norwich.
Whistleblower was an analyst that was dismissed by Southampton in December, he reached out to a member of our staff as soon as this story broke.
We have employed 3 different lawyers to piece all of this together for us and present it.
Club are very confident sporting sanctions will have to be imposed on Southampton
OFB
Well I didn't expect the EFL to leave the door ajar for the Boro in such a bizarre way. Almost all outcomes now seem either weird or somewhat unfair to one or more of the teams. I do, of course, have a preferred outcome.
@pedro - rr retrospective punishment - isnt that what happened with Swindon in 1990?
Yes, it’s a real mess.
It seems to me that the best (or maybe least worst) solution has been floated by others on this forum today. In summary it is that if Southampton are found guilty they are withdrawn from the playoffs and will remain in The Championshio next season. In addition they will suffer a substantial points deduction at the start of the season (10 points maybe?) and be given a hefty fine (a million pounds maybe?) half of which goes to Boro. Hull City are promoted to the Premier League.
This solution is unlikely to be unwelcome to Hull City (why would it be when they benefit from it), Southampton can’t claim that it’s unfair for Boro to be awarded a final place when they beat us on the pitch in the semi-final. They suffer a very substantial penalty in being prevented from benefitting from Premier League millions and incur a loss of points and a fine. Boro might be satisfied that Southampton have been given a heavy sporting and financial penalty Those left unhappy will be Southampton but they have no one to blame except themselves, the television companies who lose coverage of a prestigious match (tough) and the EFL who lose some revenue (no real sympathy for them). Of course Steve Gibson may well be looking for a bigger penalty on Southampton to compensate for what he sees as MFC being seriously disadvantaged and as we all know once he has his teeth into something he doesn’t let go…………