The EFL has conceded that the Championship play-off final may have to be moved dependent on the outcome of the ‘Spygate’ hearing in which Southampton are accused of recording Middlesbrough‘s training session.
As revealed by Daily Mail Sport last Thursday, a Southampton first-team analyst was caught allegedly filming Boro’s training from behind a tree ahead of Saturday’s play-off semi-final first leg, which ended goalless. On Friday night, the EFL charged the South Coast club with a breach of their rules.
Saints won the return leg 2-1 to set up a Wembley date versus Hull City, but that is now in doubt, leaving the date of the final and the identity of Hull’s opponents uncertain.
Boro are pushing for Southampton to be expelled and an independent commission will decide on the punishment by next week, leaving the date of the final and the identity of Hull’s opponents in doubt.
An EFL statement read: ‘The EFL can today provide an interim update on the ongoing disciplinary proceedings involving Southampton following Tuesday’s Championship Play-Off Semi-Final Second Leg.
‘The Independent Disciplinary Commission hearing will take place on or before Tuesday 19 May. The exact date remains under discussion and is expected to be confirmed shortly.
‘The Commission will issue its decision as soon as possible following consideration of the relevant submissions and evidence. As the proceedings are being conducted by an Independent Disciplinary Commission, the EFL does not control the proposed timetable.
The Championship play-off final could be postponed dependent on the outcome of the ‘Spygate’ scandal (pictured the alleged Southampton analyst who was accused of spying)
‘Notwithstanding this, the EFL continues to plan on the basis that the Championship Play-Off Final will take place as schedule d on Saturday 23 May, with the kick-off time confirmed as 4.30pm. Supporters should, however, be aware that the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings may yet result in changes to the fixture.
‘The EFL has a number of contingency plans should they be required, which also includes consideration of any appeal process, if required.’
