Steve Lansdown coming on TalkSport with Jim White -

[ScottishRed]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Perhaps a fairly big fine for Leeds, some sort of say 3 game touchline ban for Bielsa and a suspended points penalty subject to a new rule change?

A points penalty here and now? Don't see how personally.

Thing is Mr P if the EFL introduced a new rule then punished Leeds and Bielsa retrospectively all hell would break loose.

The argument being what is to stop the EFL continuing to introduce new rules when something happens that they don't like and then punish the offenders who committed the act before the rule was in place - absolutely zero chance of that happening.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Thing is Mr P if the EFL introduced a new rule then punished Leeds and Bielsa retrospectively all hell would break loose.

The argument being what is to stop the EFL continuing to introduce new rules when something happens that they don't like and then punish the offenders who committed the act before the rule was in place - absolutely zero chance of that happening.

That's a good point- would set a dangerous precedent and as you say could develop into a free for all with rules, punishment etc.

A formal warning and then a new rule? Not sure what the best answer would be, because it can't really be condoned but at the same time could create more problems, a lot more problems, than it solves.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The interview now seems to be up on Talksport site if anyone missed it- listening to it now.

https://talksport.com/football/efl/481747/marcelo-bielsa-leeds-united-deducted-points-spygate-bristol-city/

[downendcity]

A part of me is thinking " so this is what us flying under the radar really means!".  

On the other hand, Steve has worked all his life in an industry where having "inside information" - shall we call it spying? - and acting on that information to gain an (financial) advantage/benefit, is a criminal offence. In view of this, it would be understandable for him to take a dim view of something similar happening in football, whereby a team seeks to gain advantage by spying on, and gathering "insider" information on the opposition, and reacting vociferously.

The fact that 10 other chairmen/owners off championship clubs have written to the EFL and obviously feel the same as Steve, means he is not a lone voice. Perhaps it might force some sort of change in football rules, although I suspect the creation of a spying offence would be very difficult to police.

I have  visions of club spys dressed in raincoats, false glasses, noses and moustaches and sneaking from tree to tree around training grounds - Carry on Spying!

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

So to summarise:

Some anonymous fans on an anonymous forum who may or may not spend their hard earned cash at BCFC are requesting that the biggest benefactor in the history of our club and sport in Bristol should wind his neck in. This because he feels, along with a majority of clubs, that a club is cheating when spying at an opponent's  training ground and gathering info about new free kick routines/formations.

Priceless.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

So to summarise:

Some anonymous fans on an anonymous forum who may or may not spend their hard earned cash at BCFC are requesting that the biggest benefactor in the history of our club and sport in Bristol should wind his neck in. This because he feels, along with a majority of clubs, that a club is cheating when spying at an opponent's  training ground and gathering info about new free kick routines/formations.

Priceless.

If we exclude Leeds in this instance for the purposes of balance, then the Championship has 23 sides. 11 clubs have put in the complaint, co-signed the letter etc.

In a division of 24 (23 excluding Leeds), that's not a majority. Just under half.

[Up The City!]

56 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Immediately would weaken a case via conflict of interest concerns.

If this was SL's intent, he has played his hand too early and too openly.

He would still be able to influence things now  before he removes himself from it.

MA is an experienced football person, SL wouldn't have gone on the radio saying all this without MA permission which suggests to me a points deduction is possible as MA will have inside information.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Up The City! said:

He would still be able to influence things now  before he removes himself from it.

MA is an experienced football person, SL wouldn't have gone on the radio saying all this without MA permission which suggests to me a points deduction is possible.

True, but good lawyers would seize upon this for the reasons stated. SL coming out publicly now declaring it doesn't preclude behind closed doors discussions but it weakens the case of the EFL- Leeds lawyers now have something tangible to work with.

If there was a points deduction then I could see it going to the CAS- perhaps further- but the CAS definitely not impossible. If it was codified as an offence then undoubtedly a points deduction would be quite feasible, but as @ScottishRed said you cannot punish retrospectively for an offence that isn't yet officially down on paper if you are the EFL.

[Natchfever]

47 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Thing is Mr P if the EFL introduced a new rule then punished Leeds and Bielsa retrospectively all hell would break loose.

The argument being what is to stop the EFL continuing to introduce new rules when something happens that they don't like and then punish the offenders who committed the act before the rule was in place - absolutely zero chance of that happening.

Very well put.

 

15 minutes ago, downendcity said:

A part of me is thinking " so this is what us flying under the radar really means!".  

On the other hand, Steve has worked all his life in an industry where having "inside information" - shall we call it spying? - and acting on that information to gain an (financial) advantage/benefit, is a criminal offence. In view of this, it would be understandable for him to take a dim view of something similar happening in football, whereby a team seeks to gain advantage by spying on, and gathering "insider" information on the opposition, and reacting vociferously.

The fact that 10 other chairmen/owners off championship clubs have written to the EFL and obviously feel the same as Steve, means he is not a lone voice. Perhaps it might force some sort of change in football rules, although I suspect the creation of a spying offence would be very difficult to police.

I have  visions of club spys dressed in raincoats, false glasses, noses and moustaches and sneaking from tree to tree around training grounds - Carry on Spying!

Were all of the other clubs seeking a points deduction, or expressing concerns about the practice and seeking for action to be taken to prevent it happening  ?

Genuine question as I have only heard of our owner going down this route.

[Natchfever]

6 minutes ago, Up The City! said:

He would still be able to influence things now  before he removes himself from it.

MA is an experienced football person, SL wouldn't have gone on the radio saying all this without MA permission which suggests to me a points deduction is possible as MA will have inside information.

I cannot imagine SL seeking MA's permission on anything to be perfectly honest.

The link with MA will smack of a conflict and if there is any EFL debate over Leeds's fate them I would imagine MA will be removed from it for that reason.

[Shtanley]

Nothing he said I disagree with. 

[bcfcredandwhite]

I guess it depends HOW it was done. 

For example, if a representative of Leeds turns up, introduces himself as a Leeds employee and gains access that way then absolutely fair enough - no rules have been broken and no action should be taken. 

However,

if a paid employee of Leeds gained access by deliberately pretending to be someone else - say a journalist - then that’s industrial espionage which is illegal and should be punished. 

Anyway, I’m assuming the latter was NOT the case, or the FA punishment machine would have already swung into action - so why it’s even getting airtime is beyond me!!!

[maxjak]

January 2019.......and the award for the years biggest sport related non-story is already in the bag.  The media must be desperate for news if they continue to push this non-event, and with all the issues affecting sport and the world in general...........this is just so much pointless hot air, get a life and move on.

[BRISTOL86]

5 hours ago, JonDolman said:

If that's his opinion then fair play to him. I can't see how that will affect our results.

Same here. He’s earned his right to voice his opinion. And he’s not wrong in what he’s saying either. Fair play to him for calling it out and saying it’s not ok, because it’s not. 

[NOTBLUE]

27 minutes ago, bcfcredandwhite said:

I guess it depends HOW it was done. 

For example, if a representative of Leeds turns up, introduces himself as a Leeds employee and gains access that way then absolutely fair enough - no rules have been broken and no action should be taken. 

However,

if a paid employee of Leeds gained access by deliberately pretending to be someone else - say a journalist - then that’s industrial espionage which is illegal and should be punished. 

Anyway, I’m assuming the latter was NOT the case, or the FA punishment machine would have already swung into action - so why it’s even getting airtime is beyond me!!!

Well,the bloke doing the spying was wearing a Mac and trilby hat with a card saying PRESS tucked into the hatband.

[downendcity]

57 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If we exclude Leeds in this instance for the purposes of balance, then the Championship has 23 sides. 11 clubs have put in the complaint, co-signed the letter etc.

In a division of 24 (23 excluding Leeds), that's not a majority. Just under half.

Dianne has calculated it to be a clear majority, and if that's good enough for Jeremy...............................!
 

[exAtyeoMax]

https://talksport.com/football/efl/481747/marcelo-bielsa-leeds-united-deducted-points-spygate-bristol-city/

[Up The City!]

1 hour ago, Loon plage said:

I cannot imagine SL seeking MA's permission on anything to be perfectly honest.

The link with MA will smack of a conflict and if there is any EFL debate over Leeds's fate them I would imagine MA will be removed from it for that reason.

Ok maybe permission was the wrong word, but SL would certainly not have done it had MA said not to.

[Nbafc]

1 hour ago, Loon plage said:

Very well put.

 

Were all of the other clubs seeking a points deduction, or expressing concerns about the practice and seeking for action to be taken to prevent it happening  ?

Genuine question as I have only heard of our owner going down this route.

I believe the clubs' co-signed letter was asking for details of what was done, when and how rather than asking for a specific punishment. So the beginning of something rather than wrapping it up. 

[redrob]

7 hours ago, ScottishRed said:

This Spygate thing has been done to death now. You can question the 'morals' - not that there are many of those left in the game.

But at our level most clubs have teams of analysts who not only go to games (plural) to watch opposition sides prior to actually playing them but also the video analysis is poured over by coaches and players.

Turning up at a training ground and 'spying' is not likely to shed much more light on what is going to happen when you play them the following Saturday! 

Would we have scored 'the weasel' if Palace had been spying before the 2008 play off semifinal? 

[BS4 on Tour...]

7 hours ago, Badger08 said:

I'll tell you what the problem is, its because its Steve Landsdown...

It’s Lansdown...

[BS4 on Tour...]

2 hours ago, Up The City! said:

Ok maybe permission was the wrong word, but SL would certainly not have done it had MA said not to.

I don’t think that’s true...the Head of Communications would have either proactively set up the radio interview or responded to an approach from the radio show. Media requests (both ways) do not go through the CEO....the decision as to whether Steve went ahead with this interview or not would have had nothing to do with MA in my opinion....

[Natchfever]

5 hours ago, Nbafc said:

I believe the clubs' co-signed letter was asking for details of what was done, when and how rather than asking for a specific punishment. So the beginning of something rather than wrapping it up. 

So SL is on his own then ? 

Odd approach.

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

8 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If we exclude Leeds in this instance for the purposes of balance, then the Championship has 23 sides. 11 clubs have put in the complaint, co-signed the letter etc.

In a division of 24 (23 excluding Leeds), that's not a majority. Just under half.

Whatever.

Boo to SL

[JamesBCFC]

15 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

All the money in the world but can’t keep his mouth shut. Every time he opens his mouth it brings unwanted attention and expectation to the club. Why oh why can’t we let the football do the talking. 

I know he spoke well and was informative but someone said at the time Mark Ashton was on the radio oh herecomes MA while we are 7-8 unbeaten. It never fails. Never hear a word when we are scraping by or struggling. A few wins and we have one of the most vocal boardrooms in the world. Just stop PLEASE

Mark Ashton does interviews around the transfer windows, consistently- even when we were on the LJ winless run.

 

Not a big fan of Ashton, but these 'OTIB "facts"' really need to stop being repeated when patently untrue.

[downendcity]

4 hours ago, JamesBCFC said:

Mark Ashton does interviews around the transfer windows, consistently- even when we were on the LJ winless run.

 

Not a big fan of Ashton, but these 'OTIB "facts"' really need to stop being repeated when patently untrue.

Now you're just being a spoilsport.

[Juan Domingo Roldan]

The bloke is wallowing in his own sanctimonious piety.

Fool.

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 hours ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Whatever.

Boo to SL

Makes a big difference actually.

If e.g. EFL is majority rule- don't know the voting structure and 11 clubs want a points deduction or deem it an issue and 12 don't then you know, a points deduction may not happen.

[Garland-sweden]

On 25/01/2019 at 17:25, Mr Popodopolous said:

The interview now seems to be up on Talksport site if anyone missed it- listening to it now.

https://talksport.com/football/efl/481747/marcelo-bielsa-leeds-united-deducted-points-spygate-bristol-city/

Thanks. Think our boss is wright. The way I see it he speak sence.

[Lanterne Rouge]

I wonder if he has been unofficially asked by the other clubs/chairmen/owners that are unhappy to act as a spokesman for their point of view. I imagine he carries a fair bit of weight in footballing circles due to his wealth but isn`t seen as a man who shoots his mouth off about everything just for the sake of it.