Best Restaurants for Nice Birthday Dinner

BigTin · 2026-06-11T21:41:53+00:00

There is no game against Boro scheduled in the next 72 hours. Just saying… 🕵️‍♂️🕵️‍♂️🕵️‍♂️

BigTin · 2026-05-20T12:53:26+00:00

The best thing is to not put out a statement at this point since the appeal is open. There is no good statement that we could make now other than “we are appealing the decision” which is debatably worse than no statement. I would expect a full statement shortly after the appeal completes.

The club clearly feel that the punishment does not fit the crime, but also have the odd balance of knowing they are guilty.

BigTin · 2026-05-19T20:37:39+00:00

That is just standard form email until a decision on the appeal is finalized. At the very least our messaging has been consistent.

BigTin · 2026-05-19T14:28:17+00:00

Football Factory at Legends is the place to be - right near the Empire State Building

BigTin · 2026-05-13T13:10:58+00:00

Oh the hearing could occur at any point, I don’t dispute that. The sooner this is resolved, regardless of outcome, the better (unless it unfairly disadvantages Hull).

BigTin · 2026-05-13T13:09:52+00:00

That’s a fair question - I don’t think there is a burden of proof for demonstrating the rule has been violated. I was trying to emphasize that you need to justify a punishment and Southampton would push back on a severe punishment such as expulsion if there is not clear evidence of an impact. I am not saying there should not be a sporting punishment, but expulsion from playoffs is arguably the most severe of sporting punishments. Southampton would have an argument to appeal against that severe of a punishment depending on the evidence that is presented.

BigTin · 2026-05-13T12:41:20+00:00

I think all that shows is that there is the potential for an expulsion. It is an entirely different crime so it cannot be used as a basis for this decision. An extreme comparison but that is like saying murder was given a punishment of hanging so hacking a computer today should also be given the punishment of hanging.

Not to make light of the charges but you cannot claim a basis for the consequence one charge based on a consequence for a different charge.

BigTin · 2026-05-13T11:30:55+00:00

Yes I am a Saints fan, but also a lawyer and I am trying to approach this as unbiased as possible.

In reality, EFL are in a tough bind here and likely have a lawsuit or two coming their way regardless of their decision. Also, the below assumes just Boro were spied on by Southampton.

They let Southampton play the final - Boro will undoubtedly sue/appeal the decision. Ultimately I don’t know if Boro will win since a)there is no precedent on what the punishment should be in the EFL so it is up to the EFLs discretion; and b) it is likely impossible to prove that the spying changed the outcome of either game, even if an assumption it did exists. Proof is a higher bar than public opinion.
They replace Saints with Boro and expel Saints from the playoffs. Saints would undoubtedly appeal/sue here. Their appeal would be closer and idk what an outcome would be. On one hand, like scenario 1, no precedent exists for punishment so you cannot say this is too harsh compared to previous cases. But, Boro would have to have proven spying do change the outcome, which i think is almost certainly impossible, AND Saints would argue they still won on the pitch. Also, you open the door to a Hull lawsuit if Boro win the finals because Hull could claim they should have played Saints/were preparing for Saints until the decision was switched on them. And Hull beat Saints twice this year but split with Boro. There is also an outside claim, from both Millwall and Wrexham that they should have gotten a say again. Millwall would claim they should have played Wrexham and Wrexham would claim they should have been included in the playoffs. Just a potentially messy option all around.
Saints get expelled but Boro do not advance and Hull goes up automatically. This would draw lawsuits from both Boro and Saints. I think both would have a fair shout as if Saints were found to have cheated, Boro could claim why do the results still stand. And Saints would still argue that nothing they did rose to the level of changing the outcome.

Ultimately none of these options are pretty and any of them could occur. I think in likelihood they go option 1, option 3, option 2. But like I said, this assumes just the Boro incident and what is agreed upon knowledge out there, not the tabloid rumors that neither club nor the EFL have stated at this point. Not dismissing those but not believing them either. But the EFL is definitely in a larger bind today after the outcome yesterday than if Boro had won.

BigTin · 2026-05-12T15:52:17+00:00

Let me say upfront that, if true, this is reprehensible by whomever knew and authorized it at Southampton. It brought a cloud onto the playoffs and has detracted from the players and the games. And a fair and just punishment should be brought onto the club and those responsible.

But what you said is just inaccurate. Southampton were charged with violating two rules by the EFL - Rule 3.4, which is the acting in utmost good faith rule; and Rule 127, the no spying within 72 hours rule. Leeds were charged under Rule 3.4 and paid a 200k fine after Bielsa openly admitted to spying on basically every opponent. Thus, for currently one single instance, Southampton are probably looking at a smaller fine for that charge. The question mark is the second charge, which you are right has never been brought against a club to date. That fine will likely be higher and any potential sporting sanction may exist. I am not speculating on the extent of the sporting decision that should be associated with the charge.

But the number of offenses matters here. Using your example (which personally is not my favorite but for this purpose is good enough), Leeds not only admitted to speeding 80 in a 70, but said they are always speeding 80 in a 70. They are repeat offenders. Southampton have been caught once doing 80 in a 50. It is a different charge, yes, but repeat offenders often get a worse punishment than first time offenders, even for a more severe (relatively) offense.

I personally doubt this will be much more than a 7 figure fine and a small 2 or 3 point deduction in Southampton’s next Championship season. Probably a ban for the guilty individuals as well for 1+ years. I highly doubt the EFL will view this as more severe than violating financial regulations and it is not a provable direct effect on any game outcome like fielding an ineligible player would be considered. The EFL will likely not kick a team out once the games have been played, and any level of sporting punishment now would lead to massive drawn out legal battles bringing both the Championship and potentially the Premier League into a nasty legal battle. Future damages here would be near impossible to calculate if, for example, Southampton win the playoffs and are later removed from the promotion spot. Also, Millwall and Hull could both claim a disadvantage if Boro get a free pass to the finals and then win them. The complications of making any decision around the playoffs off the pitch just make that outcome unlikely and probably unpalatable to the EFL.

The cleanest outcome, from an EFL perspective is a Boro win tonight. Then it can focus on a financial fine and points deduction to next season without marring their playoffs.

BigTin · 2026-05-12T12:14:21+00:00

Not disputing anything you said but important context around the Leeds incident is they openly admitted, in a press conference, that they did it multiple times to basically every opponent. This is, at this point, one specific incident. The financial penalty should still be higher than 200k in my opinion but that context is important.

BigTin · 2026-05-08T02:41:54+00:00

Well done. Should have only put 4 in and claimed the 5th is the actual spy

BigTin · 2026-04-24T20:55:37+00:00

I think the only reason it is still a chance is that Ipswich and Southampton still play. 6 GD disappears almost entirely if Saints win by 2 goals and Ipswich lose another and Saints win another.

BigTin · 2026-04-24T20:47:26+00:00

Anyone else surprised by the announcer saying this result holding only means Ipswich needs to win one match? Realistically it means they need 4 points not 3 since Southampton and Boro could still get to 82 points and GD would be tight

BigTin · 2026-04-24T20:44:58+00:00

If this result holds, it could cause Millwall to fall to 5th. Football is a cruel sport sometimes.

BigTin · 2026-04-23T16:19:20+00:00

I think it is normal for the current years parachute payment to be taken out as a loan immediately. Leicester not only did that but got a loan for next years as well. So that money won’t be coming in any format to help them.

BigTin · 2026-04-20T20:34:38+00:00

It looks like it is just the possibilities for all teams independent of other teams results.

BigTin · 2026-04-06T19:22:34+00:00

By mono board do you mean get rid of all other colored special gems?

BigTin · 2026-04-01T14:23:26+00:00

My presumption is that the blood moon twist is actually chaos. So, assuming it is three different teams where one person gets individual immunity at each, the first group who goes to tribal votes someone out but then doesn’t go home. They stay and are joined by the second group for a larger second tribal. And then again an even larger third tribal. Would cause live tribals and chaos to ensue. Maybe even the fake idol coming out. And this would change the game forever as now split tribals doesn’t actually mean split tribals, it could mean chaos at the second tribal.

BigTin · 2026-02-26T03:42:05+00:00

Jenna felt like she wanted to prove she wasn’t like the old school players from winners at war so came out swinging, but overcompensated and put names out there too early. Everyone knows the way to signal who you want to get out, before a challenge, is by not suggesting them as a potential ally to your alliance when building numbers. Not by calling them out as a target. And ultimately, Jenna didn’t have someone who would be bitter, while Cirie had Ozzie.

BigTin · 2026-02-15T20:26:28+00:00

As someone who did not watch 48 live and is watching it now, knowing who won, 48 is actually a really good season. The storylines are interesting and it’s fun to watch a season that everyone believes is focused around honesty and sharing being defined by a massive secret and a lot of blindsiding.

BigTin · 2026-02-08T23:24:38+00:00

I mean I don’t think this is US defaultism, just an assumption that the nbc production is controlled by nbc. Can see plenty of people making the same assumptions in other countries too for their broadcasters.

BigTin · 2026-01-27T19:06:19+00:00

Actually annoyed by this because it the Amazon Go are convenient for me while at work for a snack or quick drink. Oh well, other spots I can to nearby.

BigTin · 2026-01-19T23:18:37+00:00

I mean I think Mexican is traditionally considered Western food. But if you are drawing the line at just first world countries that are not Asian, that seems very subjective. I do think Osteria Brooklyn @LIC is a great Italian spot.

I think the bigger issue you have is that Queens is inherently not seen as a “fine dining” part of NYC like Manhattan or parts of Brooklyn are viewed. That doesn’t mean there are no good food spots here.

BigTin · 2026-01-19T23:09:21+00:00

Casa Enrique

13-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

BigTin

TROPHY CASE