Championship 2025/26 Season

[FrankieADZ]

7 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

You know who I feel sorry for? 

 

The half and half scarf sellers. 

 

them hull southampton ones will be collectors items now 

[oxtonfox]

1 hour ago, Trent Steel said:

I think its totally deserved, its cheating, pure and simple and they should be kicked out the playoffs and have a points deduction, which is whats happened so good!

 

The appeal Southampton are doing wont work, just accept the punishment.  its 3 counts of spying right ? probably a lot more too

 

I know its not fair on the players or the fans but its tough do do, the manager and hierarchy should walk on the ir own accord, cheating b@stards

Sounds like a Nick Di Marco piece of wizardry. Leicester last year, Sheffield Wednesday getting Div 1 point deduction scrapped and now Middlesbrough back in the playoffs. Dancing around the dozy football authorities. 

[Qwerty]

Quite a few pundits are saying the expulsion is an excessive punishment,  but I think they're missing the point.  The reason spying is banned is because it gives the spies an unfair advantage.  Fair enough if it was in the first few weeks of the season, and a team was low/mid table, then maybe a fine would suffice.  But in the context of a play-off, and a chance of promotion, the stakes are much higher.   Given that they've admitted spying before, it casts doubt on their entire season, particularly given the incredible turnaround they had after sacking Will Still.   If they weren't expelled, the EFL would effectively be saying we know you cheated, but now that you're over the finish line, we're going to let you have the gold medal anyway!  

 

With any crime, the punishment has to act as a deterrent.  If there's no meaningful deterrent, people will just commit crimes!

[Finnegan]

Anything less than expulsion would have been a bit of a disgrace tbh. 

 

At first my reaction was very much looking at it from Boro's point of view. Like, realistically I don't think it'll have made much difference and Boro lost pretty much on merit. They weren't good enough on the day. I don't think they frankly deserve to be in the final. 

 

But when you take them out of it and you look at it as Southampton vs the framework of the law, this isn't something they've accidentally fallen foul of. They've actively gone out of their way to willingly and willfully ignore the rules. They know they're cheating in the most literal terms and they've done it anyway and not just once. 

 

When you frame it like that, I'm sorry, but they need to be punished and quite strongly. 

 

[Tuna]

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

[Adster]

15 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

Whataboutery. What a surprise. 

[Rusko187]

16 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

The argument that Leeds only received a £200k fine for this situation is a bit daft. The rules were changed because of what Leeds did, so for another club to knowingly do the same thing after those changes were introduced is arguably even worse.

I hope the appeals commission upholds the original decision. What message does it send if a team can spy on another club’s training sessions, gain a competitive advantage, potentially secure promotion, and earn hundreds of millions in TV revenue as a result?

Edited 20 May by Rusko187

[21st Century Fox]

19 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

We cheated and were expecting a smaller fine but still have our £200m please.

[AKCJ]

Why did they think they had the right to cheat Middlesbrough out of the "£200m" game?

 

Southampton have had a result rescinded and were charged with a -4 point deduction. Anything beyond that is speculation.

 

Given they've apparently cheated more teams out of their privacy and ability to compete fairly, I would argue that it is a very soft penalty.

 

That statement reeks of entitlement.

[21st Century Fox]

[BenTheFox]

The fallout from this could be really severe should the appeal be dismissed. The manager will surely have to go, the players are already considering taking legal action against the club, they will begin next season on -4, they will receive year 2 parachute payments rather than year 1 parachute payments and will be up against three clubs who should be well equipped to deal with the championship, major sponsors may want to withdraw due to the reputational damage that has been done to the club etc. 

[David Hankey]

The fact of the matter is cheating, both on and off the pitch, has become the norm. It is endemic and reform is long overdue.

[Fox92]

Southampton were quite rightly punished for breaking rules but they should have just promoted Hull.

 

Middlesbrough had their chance over two legs and were not good enough to beat Southampton. Hull beat Millwall who had finished third so technically won the hardest fixture out of the play offs.

 

If Middlesbrough beat Hull in the final that will feel weird to me

[Tommy Fresh]

Isn't it reported Eckert's reasoning is this is allowed in Germany? If so it seems very hard to believe they only did it 3 times.

[Rusko187]

Just now, Tommy Fresh said:

Isn't it reported Eckert's reasoning is this is allowed in Germany? If so it seems very hard to believe they only did it 3 times.

I'm of the belief they've probably been doing this ever since he took over.

[Nickaj]

47 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

Anything less than expulsion would have been a bit of a disgrace tbh. 

 

At first my reaction was very much looking at it from Boro's point of view. Like, realistically I don't think it'll have made much difference and Boro lost pretty much on merit. They weren't good enough on the day. I don't think they frankly deserve to be in the final. 

 

But when you take them out of it and you look at it as Southampton vs the framework of the law, this isn't something they've accidentally fallen foul of. They've actively gone out of their way to willingly and willfully ignore the rules. They know they're cheating in the most literal terms and they've done it anyway and not just once. 

 

When you frame it like that, I'm sorry, but they need to be punished and quite strongly. 

 

 

This pretty much represents my own views except that, for me, it's immaterial how much Southampton may have actually gained from their spying activities, the fact is that they hoped or expected to obtain an advantage by means which are against the rules of the EFL and that is why their actions merit these sanctions.

[LcFc_Smiv]

I dont understand the stance that they are essentially being fined £200m? Surely that only applies if they win against Hull and get promoted, which isn't a foregone conclusion, so on what grounds does that stand? 

 

They cheated, the manager owned up to it, and people within the club have got to be aware of it. You claim expenses in football if you have to go to the local supermarket to stock up on fruit and bits for the players, your telling me no one at the club is aware that one of their staff would be claiming mileage and expenses for their upcoming opponents. Eckart has admitted he thought it was a fair practice so seemingly they didn't hide the fact they were doing it? So how many people were actually involved or knew about it?!?!

[Tommy Fresh]

5 minutes ago, Rusko187 said:

I'm of the belief they've probably been doing this ever since he took over.

They could maybe have a case had it been say just Ipswich and Boro, as they could perhaps say oh we did it due to the size of the games. 

But Oxford? If you're spying on Oxford, along with Eckert apparently thinking there was nothing wrong with doing it, it seems unlikey they've not been doing it when physically possible.

Edited 20 May by Tommy Fresh

[ramboacdc]

"We got caught. We are sorry. We told them about the other times to help maybe show our spying didnt always result in a win. We only had to declare the times it was within 72 hours. We broke the rule but Leeds broke it first and despite them being the reason the rule was made, we should get that punishment instead." 

 

The whole bit of listing other non related deductions is asinine. Its a club knowing if they dont take the shot and get promoted now, they are ****ed. Sponsors may pull out, players may start legal cases, the whole coaching staff has to leave for sure. Its mental.

 

Ricky Lambert on TalkSport this morning was insane. "I dont see how this has given the players an advantage." Man has headed too many footballs if he doesnt see how knowing what your opponent may do in the upcoming match will benefit everyone, including the players who are briefed on what to expect and what to do.

[FrankieADZ]

54 minutes ago, Tuna said:

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

wow that statement is a load of waffle isnt it, trying to compare their what theyve done to leeds....Im pretty sure Leeds did theirs during the season, not the play offs....they did it once....and the rules were brought in after that, they got fined and later knocked out the play offs by derby....

the CEO of Southampton comes out with all that woe is them....plain and simple they went against the rules and tried to cheat...and got caught..they did it at least 3 times.....its 100% more than that cos there isnt no way they go from just doing it in december watching Oxford to back again in April when they watched Ipswich....

if you are going to cheat(try to) dont get caught idiots.....what they get, id be saying the same thing to us if it happened 

and all it does if this is overturned.....it shows cheats do prosper and there is no serious penalties for breaking rules etc

Edited 20 May by FrankieADZ

[Footballwipe]

Well anyone who thought Soton had any rationality or hope in their appeal can just read the weak statement from their CEO.

 

Maybe a statement of a man who should be scrambling for his own job. This was on his watch. It's a failure and as a business executive the failure of his staff has cost them hundreds of millions of pounds.

 

Pathetic all round and the more you read the worse it gets. Not only that but the more pathetic scrambling from their CEO and own fans to think they deserve any less from this only embeds the view further.

 

I bet Le Tiss never thought he'd be toppled as the most embarrassing thing about Southampton FC, and yet here we are.

[Rusko187]

10 minutes ago, Tommy Fresh said:

They could maybe have a case had it been say just Ipswich and Boro, as they could perhaps say oh we did it due to the size of the games. 

But Oxford? If you're spying on Oxford, along with Eckert apparently thinking there was nothing wrong with doing it, it seems unlikey they've not been doing it when physically possible.

You raise a good point, the times they've admitted were times they didn't win games (with the exception of Boro as they couldn't exactly deny that)... so have they admitted to those games in a poor way of showing "well, we did spy but look... we didn't benefit from those games".

 

It is highly irregular a rookie coach turns the club around like he has, but it does beg the question have they been doing this ever since he took charge? 

 

Decision needs to be upheld, club can compensate fans.. they cheated, the rules were clear, they can't deny knowledge of the rules or even question the activity whether it was morally right and it definitely couldn't have been a rogue analyst, people in that club would have been well aware of what was happening. Throw the book at them.

[shen]

Their chief exec does have a point though, a bit like us and our sanctions: The big clubs get away with it or get a slap on the wrists at worst. 

It doesn't condone what Soton did, but it's likely common practice throughout the league pyramid. Some will just do it more covertly. 

The lesson is don't cheat, unless you can do it competently or with minimal risk of severe sanctions.

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 hour ago, Tuna said:

Club statement: 20th May 2026 | Southampton FC Official Site

A statement from Phil Parsons, Chief Executive, Southampton Football Club.

We have appealed yesterday's decision by the Independent Disciplinary Commission to expel Southampton Football Club from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs, and to impose a four-point deduction for the 2026/27 season. Before turning to that appeal, I want to address our supporters, our players, and the wider football community directly and without equivocation.

What happened was wrong. The club has admitted breaches of EFL Regulations 3.4 and 127. We are sorry to the other clubs involved, and most of all to the Southampton supporters whose extraordinary loyalty and support this season deserved better from the club.

We have provided our full co-operation to the EFL's investigation and disciplinary process. Following the appeal, we will also be writing to the EFL to volunteer our participation in a working group on the practical application and enforcement of Regulation 127 across the Championship. Contrition without change is hollow, and we intend to demonstrate change.

On the appeal itself: we accept that there should be a sanction. What we cannot accept is a sanction which bears no proportion to the offence. Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.

We believe the financial consequence of yesterday's ruling makes it, by a very considerable distance, the largest penalty ever imposed on an English football club. Luton Town's 30-point deduction in 2008/09 — to date the most severe sporting sanction in the English game — was levied against a club already in League Two, with no comparable revenue at stake. Derby County's 21-point deduction in 2021 cost them their Championship status. Everton's eventual six-point deduction in 2023/24 followed losses of £124.5 million, a figure dwarfed by what has been taken from Southampton in a single afternoon. The largest financial penalty ever levied by the Premier League, against Chelsea in March of this year, was £10.75 million, and was accompanied by no sporting sanction whatsoever despite involving £47.5 million in undisclosed payments over seven years.

We say this not to minimise what occurred at this club, which we have accepted was wrong. We say it because proportionality is itself a principle of natural justice. The Commission was entitled to impose a sanction. It was not, we will argue, entitled to impose one that is manifestly disproportionate to every previous sanction in the history of the English game.

Our appeal will be heard today, and we will provide a further update in due course.

Ah, we’ve found Aiyawatt’s speech writer. Be like Phil Jon, be like Phil

[Dan]

2 hours ago, FrankieADZ said:

them hull southampton ones will be collectors items now 

If you're a Portsmouth fan you're wanting to somehow get hands on a Southampton Hull one.