'Southampton should be kicked out' - Middlesbrough view given on Spygate situation | OneFootball

FLW's Middlesbrough fan pundit feels that Southampton should be punished hard over the story that's gripped the end of the Championship season.

Southampton could be in hot water over the recent "Spygate" allegations, and FLW's Middlesbrough fan pundit feels that the EFL need to make an example of them.

"Spygate" has become the story that is completely overshadowing this season's EFL Championship play-offs. Southampton stand accused of spying on a Middlesbrough training session ahead of their semi-final first leg, and the EFL have charged them under Regulation 127 of their rules, which prohibit clubs from observing the training sessions of opposing clubs within 72 hours of a match.

A bad-tempered second leg of the tie only seems to have inflamed matters further. Southampton won the tie to book a place at Wembley against Hull City thanks to a 117th-minute Shea Charles goal, but with Middlesbrough pushing hard for a footballing sanction and the suggestion that this might not even be the first time that the Saints have acted in such a way this season, it can only be considered that this place in the final is provisional until the EFL reach a verdict.

"Knowing small details is what wins football matches" - EFL urged to come down hard on Southampton over 'Spygate' scandal

The former Crystal Palace chairman turned TalkSPORT pundit Simon Jordan has offered one potential solution to the Spygate drama, that Southampton should hand over a proportion of their income to Middlesbrough, with his solution being "£20-30m."

This would amount to 10-15% of the expected increase in revenue that Southampton could make from returning to the Premier League, but Football League World have spoken to our Middlesbrough fan pundit Liam Day about this potential resolution and he's unimpressed: "I definitely think Southampton should be kicked out. I think what they've done is not right. It's cheating. It's blatant cheating and the EFL need to make an example of that, and say this isn't right."

Liam doesn't feel that the amount of money mentioned by Jordan isn't anywhere near enough to resolve this matter: "It's getting to the point where do I believe they're going to do that, no. If they gave us some money, it would have to be more than the 10% that has been suggested. I think you're looking at 50%, even. It's cost us a place at Wembley, potentially."

He feels that the small margins often spoken of where the modern game is concerned means that the EFL have to come down hard on this, and that the reaction of Southampton fans to the news hasn't helped their case: "It doesn't seem like much, in the grand scheme of things, but knowing small details is what wins football matches, as Hellberg said, and I don't think that's what Southampton fans are getting. They're embracing it and treating it as a joke, but it's not. It's blatant cheating."

And Liam firmly believes that the League need to make an example of Southampton over this matter, though he has little confidence that they will: "It's against the rules and rules are there for a reason. They need to be followed so they need to make an example of it and I hope they do, but I don't really have much faith in the EFL to do the right thing, to be honest with you."

Part of the EFL's problem in deciding an appopriate saction over Spygate will be a lack of precedent

A big part of the problem in judging what appropriate restitution over Spygate might look like in the event that Southampton are found guilty of the charges levelled against them is an almost complete lack of precedent.

In 2019, Leeds United were fined £200,000 after being caught spying on a Derby County training session ahead of a match between the two teams that January. But this was just a common-or-garden league match rather than a play-off semi-final, and their charges were brought under the considerably more general Regulation 3.4, which states that "each Club shall behave towards each other Club with the utmost good faith." Ironically, neither team were promoted that season, after Derby beat Leeds over two legs in the play-off semi-final before getting beaten themselves in the final by Aston Villa.

Following this, Regulation 127 was introduced, which states that, "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." The very fact that this specific rule was introduced might be considered a demonstration of how seriously they take the matter.

Simon Jordan's suggestion may not go down well on either the south coast or Teesside. Southampton would surely consider a fine running to tens of millions of pounds excessive, given what Leeds United were fined, while Middlesbrough are already known to be pushing hard for a sporting sanction against their opponents over this.

It remains the case that the charges could be thrown out. No formal decision has yet been reached over this end-of-season drama, but, in the eventuality that Southampton are found guilty, the ultimate question will end up being that of what message the EFL want to send out to clubs over how seriously they take the possibility of spying on opponents' training sessions.

At least a precedent will be set by whatever conclusion they reach, although it should be added that, no matter what they end up deciding, one of these two clubs is going to end up very unhappy indeed.