20 May 2026 08:06:20
Think they should give it to Hull. Boro don’t deserve second bite. Give it to Hull and three relegated sides sorted next season.
Very harsh imo. It’s like a 300 mill fine. What did we get? 500k?

1.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 09:17:59
Yes, we got away lightly, really, Aus. I think, because when we did, it was unprecedented and so the powers had not got any real law set out.
Lots of my Hull City friends are a little bit stunned by what's gone on.
I hope it doesn't affect the team or preparation.
Hull deserves a good shot at this.

2.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 09:59:33
100% Ben, they're the guys who have suffered most in this, imo.

3.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 10:04:35
When Leeds were involved in their Spygate, there was no rule in place, so Leeds didn't break any rules.. 200000k fine for being unethical.

4.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 10:45:12
Maybe unsportsmanlike, but to get a fine like we did when no rules had been broken was harsh. Then we had pundits like Andrews, now of Brentford, calling for us to have a points deduction. A way over the top reaction.

5.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 11:01:06
100% disagree, Aus, what exactly have Boro done wrong? They played a tie against a team now proven to be serial rule breakers, so the result of that tie should be annulled, and they go into the playoff final.

6.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 11:41:10
They were never gonna win, spying or no spying. Southampton were the most obvious prem bound for decades. Ok. They were stupid for doing it. A fairer way would let them play the final, but start -1 or 2 goals. Boro don't deserve a second shot. It's a s*** show for all of them. And Hull, definitely.

7.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 11:57:36
When we were fined for doing the same thing once, not three times, Bielsa said it was common practice in other countries. The Southampton boss has made the same excuse.
It will be interesting, if the decision is overturned and a fine imposed, to see whether the Southampton boss pays it out of his own pocket as Bielsa did.

I very much doubt he has Bielsa's integrity.

8.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 12:07:14
Another point no one has yet raised is personal sanctions on those involved. The young analyst should not be made the sole fall guy, but he and the Southampton manager and Sporting Director should all get a minimum 1 year ban from football-related activities.

9.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 12:47:42
That's a fair shout too, JR.

10.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 14:01:08
If this is the third time they've done it, nobody will convince me that only the manager (who thought it was ok to do it) and a young intern analyst (who will do as he's told if he wants to keep his job) were the only ones who were aware of what was going on.

I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't common knowledge throughout the club. If the manager thought it didn't break any rules, why would he keep it secret? ?
All those involved should face sanctions, not just the analyst.

11.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 16:47:15
Boro were "never gonna win" Aus. How long have you been watching football to say something like that? In 1973, I went to the FA Cup final. We were the reigning cup holders and 3rd in Div 1, playing Div 2 Sunderland. We were at the peak of our powers, and absolutely battered them for 90 mins, but Jim Montgomery in the Sunderland goal had the game of his life, and we couldn't get anything past him and lost 1:0.

There ain't no such thing as a dead cert "never gonna win".

12.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 18:49:52
Whenever the EFL places a penalty on a club, there is always some undeserving club who benefits, in this case Middlesbrough. Hull may benefit, since I think they would fancy their chances more with this opponent.

When we were docked a second 15 points at the start of the 2008/9 season, Forest ended up being the recipient of a direct promotion as a consequence; we would have been promoted as champions, but no, Leicester [who also went to break the rules] were crowned champions, and Forest went up in second.

It is very hard to punish a team without unwittingly benefiting someone else unfairly.

Even a straight red card helps your immediate opponents for the remainder of a game, but then also benefits the next 3 opponents also [who were not the recipients at all of the offence] - they simply benefit to a degree.

Clearly the decision has not been made lightly, but it simply could not be a financial penalty, given the potential value of a promotion would dwarf the penalty.



Leicester, Villa and Forest all took the gamble to break the rules because the prospect of promotion outweighed any likely penalty. Had goal line technology been working when Villa played the blunts, Villa would have been relegated. There would have been no £100M transfer of Grealish, and likely Villa would have gone into administration. Their gamble paid off!

I do not buy the Southampton defence that this could cost them £200M - there is no guarantee they would have won the playoff. Maybe if the EPL had a backbone, they could distribute real penalties like the EFL. The EPL know that losing a big cash cow is their own penalty, and this is why they tinker with the issues rather than really sorting them out.

I am not shocked that Southampton were sanctioned like this, in fact I am more shocked that the EFL had the balls to do it. Time will tell if they uphold their decision.

13.) 20 May 2026
20 May 2026 18:58:11
Totally forgot Bielsa paid the fine. What a human being that man is!

14.) 21 May 2026
21 May 2026 10:58:29
Yes, Cork, and he made the media sit through a 4 hour presentation about his data on opponents! Top man!

15.) 21 May 2026
21 May 2026 12:04:44
Can't see Eckert doing that, Feath! It was brilliant genius!