Could Southampton be stripped of Championship play-off final place if found guilty in spying scandal? | OneFootball

Southampton are through to the Championship play-off final – but will they be at Wembley or could they be stripped of their place?

Saints are set to play Hull City for a spot in the Premier League after coming back from a goal down to beat Middlesbrough 2-1 in extra time of their Championship playoff semi-final second leg ⁠on Tuesday.

Shea Charles fired the Saints on their way to Wembley with a curled left-footed shot that bounced in off the inside of the post in the 116th minute after the 90 minutes ended 1-1.

Hull beat Millwall 2-0 in the other playoff semi-final in London on Monday.

The final, dubbed the “richest game ⁠in football” because of the huge financial rewards of playing ⁠in the top flight, will be on May 23.

But with a tribunal set to rule on allegations of spying by a Southampton staff member, could their be another late twist?

open image in gallery

Southampton edged past Middlesbrough in the Sky Bet Championship semi-final as the ‘spygate’ controversy rumbled on (Andrew Matthews/PA) (PA Wire)

What was the original spygate?

The dispute between Middlesbrough and Southampton brings back memories from 2019 when Marcelo Bielsa’s Leeds United were fined £200,000 by the EFL.

A Leeds member of staff was caught acting suspiciously outside Derby County’s training ground before facing Frank Lampard’s side on 10 January, with the club later apologising.

Manager Marcelo Bielsa later admitted when discussing the 2019 incident that he sent a member of staff to watch training sessions of every opponent during the 2018/19 season, with the EFL stating that Leeds failed to treat teams with “good faith”.

Though Bielsa maintains the club did not cheat, and that the decision to observe opponents was merely down to stupidity.

“I observed all the rivals we played against and watched the training sessions of all opponents,” said the Argentine.

“So why did I send someone to watch them? Just because I thought I wasn’t violating the norm. All the information I need to clarify [my tactics] I gather without watching the training session of the opponent … but we feel guilty if we don’t work enough. Watching it [the opponents training] allows us to have less anxiety and, in my case, I am stupid enough to allow this kind of behaviour.”

The EFL subsequently brought in a rule which specified: “No club shall directly or indirectly observe (or attempt to observe) another club's training session in the period of 72 hours prior to any match.”

open image in gallery

Marcelo Bielsa and Frank Lampard fell out over the incident in 2019 (PA)

What happened in “Spygate 2.0”?

This incident reportedly involves a Southampton performance analyst, with the specific nature of the allegations thought to centre around filming and pictures taken to record training.

The staff member was reportedly caught hiding behind a tree by a member of Boro’s media team, and was ordered to delete the footage from their phone before leaving the Rockliffe Park training base.

Southampton have been contacted for comment. Manager Tonda Eckert has refused to speak on the matter, repeatedly saying that he does not want to comment while the investigation is ongoing. He walked out of his pre-match press conference after being asked by a reporter: “Are you a cheat?”

What has the EFL said?

An EFL statement read: "The EFL has written to Southampton FC requesting their observations following a complaint from Middlesbrough FC relating to alleged unauthorised filming ahead of the two clubs meeting in Saturday's Championship play-off semi-final first leg.

"The alleged incident is said to have taken place on Middlesbrough's private property by an individual identified to be associated with Southampton. The League is treating this matter as potential misconduct under EFL regulations and will be making no further comment at this time."

The EFL has now formally charged Southampton with alleged spying.

What are the EFL’s rules about observing opposition training?

The EFL rule 127 covers "Prohibited Conduct - Observing Training Sessions", and specifies: "Without prejudice to the requirements of Regulation 3.4 (that each Club shall behave towards each other Club with the utmost good faith), no Club shall directly or indirectly observe (or attempt to observe) another Club's training session in the period of 72 hours prior to any match scheduled to be played between those respective Clubs."

Regulation 3.4 adds: "In all matters and transactions relating to the league, each club shall behave towards each other and the league with the utmost good faith."

open image in gallery

Kim Hellberg saw his side beaten in extra time (Andrew Matthews/PA) (PA Wire)

Could Southampton be stripped of play-off final?

Leeds were eventually fined £200,000 by the EFL over ‘Spygate 1.0,’ with EFL chief executive Shaun Harvey outlining that the punishment would act as “a clear deterrent” over future conduct in the league.

But The Times reports that a “sporting sanction” is more likely for Southampton than a financial one. That could mean the second leg victory is revoked, potentially leading Boro to be installed in Saints’ place in the play-off final.

The EFL hopes that the disciplinary hearing, which will be undertaken by an independent panel, will take place imminently so that a decision can be made ahead of the play-off final at Wembley on 23 May.

Middlesbrough manager Kim Hellberg was asked after the ⁠game about the possibility of Southampton being excluded from the final.

“I’m not going to ⁠make any suggestions on that or say anything about that question,” said Hellberg, who was emotional in his post-match press conference. “I’ll talk about what I think, and ‌it’s too short a time ​here to answer that question again. We’ll see ‌what happens.”