Marius

Milan. 100% tweets re. LUFC.

[Marius @Marius_LUFC]

@British_Airways Thanks, Si. Sorry I deleted my original tweet as loads of bots were replying to it.

I’ll keep my fingers crossed.

[Marius @Marius_LUFC]

@British_Airways Yes, I’ve filed a missing item ticket.

I just thought maybe the cupboard hadn’t been checked? Or would it always be checked by crew?

[Paddy Power @paddypower]

Just heard from a Southampton staff member that Boro will be lining up in a 4-2-3-1 shape for the playoff final today

[Daniel Storey @danielstorey85]

The most incredible thing about Southampton and spygate is that, still, so much energy has gone into "err this is unfair" rather than apologising to fans, arranging refunds and going cap in hand to to beg them to stick with the club. They have torched their entire reputation.

[Lewis Deighton @LewisDeighton17]

GET I PREDICT A RIOT ON

[EFL Communications @EFL_Comms]

A League Arbitration Panel has today dismissed Southampton Football Club’s appeal against the Independent Disciplinary Commission’s decision in respect of breaches of EFL Regulations.

As a result, the original sanction remains in force. Southampton’s expulsion from the Sky Bet Championship Play-Offs stands, alongside the four-point deduction to be applied to the Club’s 2026/27 Championship record and the reprimand in respect of all charges. In accordance with EFL Regulations, the decision of the League Arbitration Panel is final.

Following the conclusion of the proceedings, the Sky Bet Championship Play-Off Final between Hull City and Middlesbrough is confirmed as taking place at Wembley Stadium on Saturday 23 May, kicking off at 3.30pm.

#EFL

[Adonis Storr @theadelites]

"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"

The difference between these two incidents couldn't be more stark - yet they keep being incongruously conflated.

It was Southampton denied Middlesbrough "the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million" - that is why the punishment fits the crime.

When #LUFC was fined £200,000, that was due to breaking ONLY regulation 3.4 - 127 did not exist then.

Leeds also didn't spy during the play-offs.

The play-offs are considered a separate competition.

The integrity of that competition has been called into question.

A sporting sanction was deemed the only possible penalty that would restore fairness and act as a deterrent - no fine would be large enough to dissuade espionage during the play-offs.

The only sporting sanction in the play-offs is expulsion.

The relevant precedent is not the fine for #LUFC, the relevant precedent is Swindon in the EFL Trophy.

The gravity of what Southampton has done doesn't seem to have hit home and while words of contrition sound nice - only acceptance of the punishment would show that they have really understood what they have done:

namely - cheating Middlesbrough out of a *fair shot* at winning the play-offs.

The integrity of the competition is central to the decision - nothing in this statement has contradicted that.

This statement is effectively saying: it was ok for us to take this £200 million game away from Boro through cheating; but it's not OK for it to be taken away from us by sanction.

This statement is saying - we thought because Leeds got fined £200,000 - that would be the price for our actions too. The implication being that was a factor in deciding whether to cheat or not in the first place.

This statement also comes across as laying the ground work for future litigation should the decision be upheld - by citing other teams punishments erroneously in an ill advised few paragraphs of whataboutism.

Which I do not believe helps Southampton's cause whatsoever as the panel deliberates the appeal.

Incidentally, if further evidence of spying comes to light, then that should also be investigated and - I assume - further points be deducted (as those incident would have occurred during the league, not playoffs.)

I find it very difficult to believe that there was no espionage committed between the admitted incidents that occurred in December and in April.

There are no shortage of clubs who have will feel aggrieved by Southampton's actions, many of whom, I imagine, will feel like they are owed some form of compensation.

And I doubt this statement will have been any comfort to them.

[Adonis Storr @theadelites]

Expelling Southampton was the only decision that would act as a deterrent and the most likely decision from the EFL.

The playoffs are considered a separate competition to the league and when a sporting sanction was the only feasible penalty (when £200m is the prize no fine would do) - the only option was to remove them - there are no points in the playoffs.

Football is defined by the finest of margins and any edge can be the difference.

When #LUFC spied on Derby they broke no specific law.

EFL Regulation 127 (the anti-espionage rule) was brought in after Spygate 1.0.

In addition to knowingly breaking that regulation, I presume aggravating factors would have included: the change of clothes by the spy; the Harwood-Bellis binocular celebration; the delay in admission by Southampton and other clubs having strong suspicions that they were also spied on.

Spying by its nature cannot be committed in good faith.

The fairness and integrity of the competition would have been at the forefront of the determination.

It’s cruel on Southampton’s fans especially those who travel every week and would have already made plans for the final.

But it was also cruel on Middlesbrough - who did nothing wrong, who broke no rules - and their fans.

Boro are absolutely right in their assertion that the information gleaned by the spy could very well have made the difference in such tight games.

Whatever the decision, I assumed that either club would take further action - I wouldn’t be surprised if the outcome of Spygate 2.0 led Southampton to look at their legal options - the stakes are that high.

But for me the right and fair decision was made - the precedent had been set when Swindon were expelled from the EFL Trophy.

The integrity of the competition is paramount and first and foremost,
it has to be fair.

Southampton spied and got booted out, it’s sensational, it’s (almost completely) unprecedented - but it’s absolutely the correct outcome.

[Michael Normanton @Michael_TSB]

They're still talking about it

[Sébastien Vidal @SebEcrivainFoot]

@ilMaestro_13 Non je n’ai pas le montant de l’offre de l’OM. Sois Marseille s’aligne sur l’offre de Leeds sois Feyenoord vendra au plus offrant. Il faut arrêter de dire que le joueur ne veut que l’OM. C’est faux, il apprécie le club mais ne ferme aucune porte

[Ellis Platten - AwayDays @ellis_platten]

I could cry.

(I first heard of him 7 days ago)

[Leicester City @LCFC]

I predict a riot 🎶

[FosseHub @FosseHub]

🔵 Leicester players trolling Leeds United with "I Predict a Riot"
[ 📸 @lcfcvk ]

[Will 💙💛 @Will_lufc_1919]

@LCFC Championship again ole ole

[Marius @Marius_LUFC]

@jamesbirch11 @AVFCOfficial Thanks, Dermot…

[Southampton FC @SouthamptonFC]

90+8: Leicester lead. [2-3]

[Jack Carroll @fatjacko]

I don’t know if I’m watching England or Socceraid.

[TIRO @tirofootball]

Venezia 1-0 Cremonese. VENEZIA PROMOTED BACK TO SERIE A!