Southampton have been kicked out of Saturday’s Championship playoff final and docked four points for the 2026-27 season after admitting to spying on three different opponents during the course of the season.
The extraordinary Spygate row that has engulfed the EFL has not yet reached a definitive conclusion with Southampton understood to be ready to appeal the punishment that has been meted out on them after they admitted that they had not only spied against playoff semifinal opponents Middlesbrough but also Ipswich Town and Oxford United during the season.
Subject to that appeal, the status of which is due to be resolved on Wednesday, May 20, it is Middlesbrough who will take Southampton’s place in the Wembley final, facing off against Hull City for the near $300 million prize of promotion to the Premier League.
Given their impending appeal, Southampton are expected to argue that the punishment meted out by the independent disciplinary commission is too severe. The EFL has said that they and the other parties involved “are working to try and resolve any appeal on Wednesday 20 May”. That outcome “could result in a further change to Saturday’s fixture,” the richest match in the game with the prize a chance to join Coventry City and Ipswich in next season’s Premier League.
For now, it is Middlesbrough who will be facing Hull City with that prize on the line. Boro players returned to training on May 18, six days after what appeared to be their elimination, and will now be favorites to return to the Premier League for the first time since 2017. The club welcomed their involvement in the final in a statement, saying: “We believe this sends out a clear message for the future of our game regarding sporting integrity and conduct. As a club, we are now focused on our game against Hull City at Wembley on Saturday.”
Boro made a formal complaint to the EFL on May 7, alleging that they had spotted a member of Southampton staff at their training ground three days out from the first leg of the semifinal. Pictures subsequently emerged the following week that showed an analyst with his phone, seemingly recording Middlesbrough’s session, immediately casting into doubt the 2-1 aggregate win for Tonda Eckert’s side.
Eckert’s record at Southampton will surely now come under scrutiny, given that the first admitted case of spying came less than two months after he took the job following the sacking of Will Still. At the time of his appointment, the Saints were 21st in the Championship and only three points separated them from the relegation zone. The 72 points Southampton won under Eckert were five more than any team in the English second tier during the same time period, enough to secure them fourth place in the division.
Of the three games that Southampton admitted to spying before, they won none, losing at Oxford and drawing against Ipswich Town and Middlesbrough. The inevitable outcome of admitting to breaches of regulations that require clubs to “act with the utmost good faith” is to bring with it questions as to which other opponents might have had their training sessions monitored by Southampton eyes.
