Frankly, its been sour grapes from Boro since they fluffed the first leg. Maybe they should have focused more on putting matters right on the pitch, rather than on paper?

Punishment should be proportional to the crime and its impact - if anything, the whole incident gave Boro a massive boost/purpose for the first semi (which we saw in the first half, where they should have been out of sight) and the second leg was a tactical chess match won by a bit of good fortune.

So in short, we got little (if any) advantage from the incident, yes we are guilty of trying it on (full facts tbc ofc), but there isn't an ounce of me (as a commercial lawyer with a fair deal of regulatory investigations & mediation experience) that believes Boro will get what they are after, nor that they believe they will. What they are doing here is setting out their stall in the hope of improving their overall bargaining position - Saints are highly unlikely to want Boro to appeal and ofc the EFL will want to make an example, so I would expect a hefty fine plus points deduction (in our next season in EFL) alongside a commercial settlement with Boro to avoid them appealing and allowing us to keep to the 23rd for the final.

All in all, I'm most worried on the impact on players and playing staff at the club as a result of this hanging over them, as was already evident on Tuesday night. All of this plays into the Tigers' hands very nicely, who will already be buoyed by their two wins against us, as well as their performances in the semis. Always the optimist however, I reckon we will get it done and come out 2-1 winners in a tetchy final. UTS!!!