---
source: thedugout.football
generated: 2026-06-09T17:20:35.032Z
data_provider: API-Football
canonical: https://thedugout.football/clubs/leeds-united/news/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubGVlZHMtbGl2ZS5jby51ay9zcG9ydC9sZWVkcy11bml0ZWQvc291dGhhbXB0b24tY2VvLXdyb25nLWNvbXBhcmUtbGVlZHMtMzM5ODYwNDc
---

# Why Southampton CEO is wrong to compare Leeds spygate case amid key difference

- **Source:** 
- **Club:** Leeds United
- **Original URL:** https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/southampton-ceo-wrong-compare-leeds-33986047

While not hiding from the fact his club had done wrong, he claimed the sanction “bears no proportion to the offence”, hence the decision to appeal - which has since been rejected.

Parsons had added: “Whereas Leeds United was fined £200,000 for a similar offence, Southampton has been denied the opportunity to compete in a game worth more than £200 million and one which means so much to our staff, players and supporters.”

There is a lot that can be retorted to this statement but the crux of it is that the two Spygate cases have two important differences. The first is that Southampton were competing in the play-offs and not the regular season, like when Leeds were caught, which made deliberations far more complex.

But the main reason for the severity of the punishment compared to the one United received is down to the rulebook. As Marcelo Bielsa said at the time of the 2019 espionage on Derby County: “Regarding what I’ve done it is not illegal. It’s not specified, described or restrained. It’s not seen as a good thing but it is not a violation of the law.”

Leeds were slapped with a £200,000 fine for breaching ‘good faith’ as per regulation 3.4 but the English Football League could do no more given there was no law specially prohibiting spying, despite Bielsa admitting he had sent staff to watch every other Championship rival train that season.

In the summer of 2019, in the wake of the spygate case, the EFL moved to tweak the regulations to make them more specific and encompass illegality of spying.

Regulation 3.4, for nearly seven years now, has read: "Without prejudice to the requirements of regulation 3.4 (that each club shall behave towards each other club with the utmost good faith), no club shall directly or indirectly observe (or attempt to observe) another club's training session in the period of 72 hours prior to any match scheduled to be played between those respective clubs."

Southampton have admitted a lesser three occasions of spying - also peeping in on Oxford United and Ipswich Town sessions - yet have been expelled from the play-off final against Hull City, with Middlesbrough reinstated. And why? Because they knew the rules and willingly broke them.

As Bielsa himself admitted, Leeds might not have been moral in spying but they were not contravening the laws of the time. Southampton, whose staff will remember the 2019 spygate case, did under manager Tonda Eckert, with all three spying cases coming after his appointment.

And an EFL independent commission has moved with devastating conclusion. Southampton will also start next season with a four-point deduction amid reports that players are looking into taking legal action.

Bending, or bypassing, rules is not the same as breaking them, and Southampton have found out the hard way. Parsons using Leeds’ case as a 'similar' comparison therefore seemed like a clutching of straws.

FOLLOW OUR LUFC FACEBOOK PAGE! Latest news, analysis and more on our Leeds United FB page