By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Apparently, the owner is now saying that the intern was at fault for not expressing doubts about the validity of his actions more strongly! And yet the owner continues to back the manager! Honestly, you couldn't make it up.... Hope the FA and EFL see it for what it is.....and throw the book at them. I'm still struggling to believe that they did not feel the need to spy between December and April. I'm sure it's just a coincidence - but interesting to note that following the defeat at Oxford. Southampton only lost 2 games all season. Against Middlesbrough and Hull! (i guess it would not have been a good idea to admit to spying in these games - even though they 'gained no advantage')
Interesting that the first 'spying' they've admitted to was way back in December - Eckert replaced Still as manager in November. Does make you wonder if there's more to this....I mean, if they thought it was necessary to spy on Oxford - why not every club?
The only issue I have with that though, is if Southampton still end up winning - then they've prospered from cheating.... and what if it isn't the only occasion?