Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
EFL Playoffs 25/26 (Saints booted out of final and given 4 point deduction - pg34)
Comments
-
Must admit, I’m more and more coming around to it being very likely they ‘spied’ on us. What sort of convinced it for me was thinking about their obsessive abuse of Nathan and the now seemingly top to bottom collective approach so far to the ‘injustice’ they are now suffering. In my mind, a game against him, there is no way they wouldn’t have been saying they had to do what it takes to beat us/him that day (and it wouldn’t surprise me if they thought the same for the return fixture but hadn’t counted on the effect on proceedings of 3k Charlton fans turning up at their ground and very loudly giving it back for 90+ minutes and more 😁).0
-
Agree.PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.0 -
But we also started that game with Apter and Hernandez as our wingbacks and a guy called Lloyd Jones III playing at the back according to Google ...
8 -
PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.So murky, Bree wasn’t eligible.0 -
With a bit of luck the forthcoming inquiry will dig up some disgruntled member of staff (the interns?) who will spill more beans. They deserve more than just 4 points off.8
-
100% Arsene, I think they chickened out when it came to that part of the punishment, should be a minimum of 12 points off...Arsenetatters said:With a bit of luck the forthcoming inquiry will dig up some disgruntled member of staff (the interns?) who will spill more beans. They deserve more than just 4 points off.1 -
I think the panel carefully organised that punishment of only 4 points that included a credit for admitting by Southampton.eastterrace6168 said:
100% Arsene, I think they chickened out when it came to that part of the punishment, should be a minimum of 12 points off...Arsenetatters said:With a bit of luck the forthcoming inquiry will dig up some disgruntled member of staff (the interns?) who will spill more beans. They deserve more than just 4 points off.
They had no time to dig any deeper but knew that Saints would probably get found out later if they had lied to the enquiry. Hopefully internal emails or messages or whistle blowers will do for them as part of the FA/EFL follow up and more points can then be deducted?4 -
Other problem being that they were probably National League quality centre backs playing in L1 as well.cabbles said:I always knew Garner was a wrongun. Had disproportionately massive feet and tried to get league one centre backs to play out from the back0 -
Counterpoint: We have Apter and Hernandez starting at Wingback and got overrun by a pacier central midfield.PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.
Also, Eckert was still relatively new, so we had less scouting tape on them than they did on us.
I actually don't disagree with you, but I also think there were other potential reasons why we got battered.2 -
So it's the big day today...strange to think we beat both of them in recent weeks....well fairly recent with regards to Boro.1
-
Sponsored links:
-
29 -
12 -
Sure, and generally I can be accused of post-rationalising a performance that was both traumatic and embarassing to watch.SDAddick said:
Counterpoint: We have Apter and Hernandez starting at Wingback and got overrun by a pacier central midfield.PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.
Also, Eckert was still relatively new, so we had less scouting tape on them than they did on us.
I actually don't disagree with you, but I also think there were other potential reasons why we got battered.But re the team selection thing; looking back, Lloyd had been injured at Wrexham and it was not clear whether he would start. We also had other injuries at the back, but up to this point our defence had been the rock on which a steady start had been built. So there was a rich brief for a spy to get his teeth into. Would LJ in fact play, and would he be fully fit? Would NJ start Gillesphey? How would he set up the midfield, given the lack of obvious choices? It’s not unusual for weakened teams to be eventually overrun in a game by stronger opponents, but the key for me there is “eventually”. A weaker team with good spirit and self belief (which was very much intact at that point in our case) would usually be in the game for 60 mins or so, Chelsea Cup game an example. The choice of Apter and Hernandez took us all by surprise. It took Southampton a very, very short time to work out the rich opportunity this presented them.4 -
I think you are looking at this from the wrong perspective. You are talking about Southampton capitalising on a situation that developed in real time after a very early goal had been scored whereas the spying issue is all abut unsportingly trying to gain an advantage before the game has kicked off.PragueAddick said:
Sure, and generally I can be accused of post-rationalising a performance that was both traumatic and embarassing to watch.SDAddick said:
Counterpoint: We have Apter and Hernandez starting at Wingback and got overrun by a pacier central midfield.PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.
Also, Eckert was still relatively new, so we had less scouting tape on them than they did on us.
I actually don't disagree with you, but I also think there were other potential reasons why we got battered.But re the team selection thing; looking back, Lloyd had been injured at Wrexham and it was not clear whether he would start. We also had other injuries at the back, but up to this point our defence had been the rock on which a steady start had been built. So there was a rich brief for a spy to get his teeth into. Would LJ in fact play, and would he be fully fit? Would NJ start Gillesphey? How would he set up the midfield, given the lack of obvious choices? It’s not unusual for weakened teams to be eventually overrun in a game by stronger opponents, but the key for me there is “eventually”. A weaker team with good spirit and self belief (which was very much intact at that point in our case) would usually be in the game for 60 mins or so, Chelsea Cup game an example. The choice of Apter and Hernandez took us all by surprise. It took Southampton a very, very short time to work out the rich opportunity this presented them.0 -
Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔3 -
I would have thought all saints tickets to be cancelled.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔4 -
Given the shit week they’ve basically had, turning up at Wembley with a cancelled ticket and getting arrested trying to gain access to the match would probably cap it all off nicely.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔10 -
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any funnier…it turns out that Eckert’s dad worked in video surveillance!!!!! 📹👀 🤣🤣🤣🤣15
-
So armed with this information beforehand (if you believe the conspiracy) what exactly did Southampton do they wouldn’t otherwise have done?PragueAddick said:
Sure, and generally I can be accused of post-rationalising a performance that was both traumatic and embarassing to watch.SDAddick said:
Counterpoint: We have Apter and Hernandez starting at Wingback and got overrun by a pacier central midfield.PragueAddick said:The more I think about it, the more I'm buying the idea that we were spied on before the home game. I've just gone back over the season up to that point, trying to recall where we were - as a club - prior to that game. We hadn't let i in more than one at the Valley in any game; we were very unlucky to lose to Wrexham in the previous game and we'd had time to regroup in the international break; although we suddenly had injuries at the back. Lloyd Jones may not have been fully fit. Southampton were showing early signs of new manager bounce.
Funny things happen in football and they did in this league last season. Many would have done a double take when they saw our result at Portman Road. But that was hardly "clinical", at least not until after we'd hing on to the half time break and then later made some subs, one of whom decided it was time to be "unplayable" to quote Louis Mendez. Nobody could remotely suggest it was all part of a plan based on superior tactical knowledge.
Southampton probably would have won that game, given our injuries at the back. But the way they did it..4 goals in 8 minutes and looking like it could be 6-7 by H-T as Brownie feared...can you ever recall anything like that the Valley? It certainly wasn't like that against Chelsea despite the scoreline and their technical superiority being obvious throughout. I'd have to go back to the mid 80's when we lost 5-1 at home to Rotherham. Tony Towner and Ronnie Moore ran riot at their leisure. But we were a shambles of a club and Ken Craggs was sacked after that game.
There are of course counter-arguments, but it's the sheer precision of how Southampton played in that first half that stands out now. I found it quite chilling at the time, and remember wondering if about 8 of ours were playing with colds or something.
Stinks.
Also, Eckert was still relatively new, so we had less scouting tape on them than they did on us.
I actually don't disagree with you, but I also think there were other potential reasons why we got battered.But re the team selection thing; looking back, Lloyd had been injured at Wrexham and it was not clear whether he would start. We also had other injuries at the back, but up to this point our defence had been the rock on which a steady start had been built. So there was a rich brief for a spy to get his teeth into. Would LJ in fact play, and would he be fully fit? Would NJ start Gillesphey? How would he set up the midfield, given the lack of obvious choices? It’s not unusual for weakened teams to be eventually overrun in a game by stronger opponents, but the key for me there is “eventually”. A weaker team with good spirit and self belief (which was very much intact at that point in our case) would usually be in the game for 60 mins or so, Chelsea Cup game an example. The choice of Apter and Hernandez took us all by surprise. It took Southampton a very, very short time to work out the rich opportunity this presented them.
On this occasion (and not the only time) we were just poor.0 -
May be right...but denying access after purchasing a legitimate ticket, I mean who's to say who can attend and who can't in that scenario...guinnessaddick said:
I would have thought all saints tickets to be cancelled.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔5 -
Sponsored links:
-
It's pretty easy to work out if a ticket is legitimate or not, for one it'll have Southampton written on it instead of Middlesbrough.eastterrace6168 said:
May be right...but denying access after purchasing a legitimate ticket, I mean who's to say who can attend and who can't in that scenario...guinnessaddick said:
I would have thought all saints tickets to be cancelled.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔
Also, doesn't matter if they purchased a ticket at the time, it'll be in the terms and conditions that they can rescind access to anyone for a valid reason, and a team being kicked out of the playoffs and that event being "cancelled" will definitely be valid enough reason5 -
because their tickets are no longer valid. Wembley can't legally sell the same seat twice, so the Sinner's fans will get their money backeastterrace6168 said:
May be right...but denying access after purchasing a legitimate ticket, I mean who's to say who can attend and who can't in that scenario...guinnessaddick said:
I would have thought all saints tickets to be cancelled.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔0 -
The ticket they have isn’t legitimate now though. That’s all that matters. It doesn’t matter if at purchase it was legitimate.eastterrace6168 said:
May be right...but denying access after purchasing a legitimate ticket, I mean who's to say who can attend and who can't in that scenario...guinnessaddick said:
I would have thought all saints tickets to be cancelled.eastterrace6168 said:Just curious about the ticket allocation as it stands now, and if some Southampton fans could still turn up with their tickets and be in the same stand as 'Boro...can't see how it can be controlled, also denying someone a seat purely because of the team he supports is wrong, could still turn up just to watch the match, very difficult to fathom...
Imagine Sinners and 'Boro in the same stand!!🤔2 -
Will be hoping Hull pull off a surprise today, mainly for Dean Holden’s sake.6
-
Deserve it more, beat Millwall to get there, instead of relying on a team getting thrown out, and it's a feel good moment for them having been subject to a transfer embargo in the summerIsawsummersplay said:Will be hoping Hull pull off a surprise today, mainly for Dean Holden’s sake.0 -
.0
-
Woooosh!!0
-
You say whoosh after a joke that someone's missed, but everyone has found funny.eastterrace6168 said:Woooosh!!
This isn't a whoosh moment...3 -
sam3110 said:
You say whoosh after a joke that someone's missed, but everyone has found funny.eastterrace6168 said:Woooosh!!
This isn't a whoosh moment...
3 -
I might be alone in this but I want Boro to win. They were on the receiving end of all this shit not knowing if they would be playing or not. Yes I know Hull didn’t know who they’d be playing but at least they knew they were in it.3
