The inside story of ‘Spygate’ – featuring a pine tree, disguises, damning WhatsApps and a sport in shock

It all started behind a pine tree.

The setting was Middlesbrough’s Rockliffe Park training ground, two days before the club were due to meet Southampton in the Championship play-off semi-finals.

Will Salt, a first-team performance analyst intern working for Southampton, had travelled north to gather intelligence on the club’s opponents as they trained a few metres away beyond a metal fence. He stationed himself behind the tree and got out his mobile phone to record Middlesbrough’s players, hoping he would go unnoticed.

It didn’t work. Salt was spotted and, while he quickly made his escape, he had sparked into motion a story which must now rank as one of the most extraordinary in the history of the English Football League.

The view Will Salt had from behind the pine tree outside Middlesbrough’s training ground (Phil Buckingham/The Athletic)

It culminated on Tuesday with Southampton being expelled from the Championship play-off final. Middlesbrough, who they defeated in the semi-final, will now play Hull City on Saturday in a match worth around £200million, the rough value of a place in the Premier League.

After they admitted to spying on Middlesbrough, as well as Oxford United and Ipswich Town earlier in the season, Southampton were also given a four-point deduction that applies to next season in the Championship. The club has lodged an appeal, which will be heard by one senior judge today. The panel’s decision could yet be reversed.

It has also emerged that:

• Incriminating WhatsApp messages to Southampton’s analysts from head coach Tonda Eckert were revealed in the hearing, with the German now potentially facing his own serious Football Association charges
• Southampton had initially planned for Salt to go back and spy on Middlesbrough for a second day
• When Southampton spied on Ipswich, the operation involved dressing in Eastleigh kit as a disguise
• Southampton’s players have been left furious and are exploring legal options, including possible class action, if the verdict is upheld
• Hull City are also deeply unhappy, as their preparations have been thrown into disarray, having spent four training sessions focusing on playing Southampton.

Sources at Southampton said the club were blindsided by last night’s decision, which they consider disproportionate and unprecedented. They are continuing to prepare for Saturday’s final as planned and are confident of overturning the decision. Middlesbrough, meanwhile, welcomed what they called “a clear message for the future of our game regarding sporting integrity and conduct” in a statement on their website.

The Athletic has spoken to multiple sources with knowledge of the situation, all of whom asked to remain anonymous to protect their positions, to piece together the inside story of ‘Spygate’, one of football’s most incendiary stories — and one which is not over yet.

Tuesday’s hearing was conducted remotely but featured all the drama of a classic courtroom thriller.

Southampton were represented by Kate Gallafent KC, an experienced lawyer who has worked with the FA on multiple occasions; the EFL was represented by Brendan Kelly KC, a criminal barrister with a formidable reputation in cross-examination.

One of the key revelations at Tuesday’s hearing was the WhatsApp messages sent by Eckert to his analysts that people with knowledge of proceedings said were particularly damaging to Southampton’s case.

Two of the club’s analysts gave evidence at the hearing in which they expressed remorse for their actions but said they were pushed into the spying trips. In his evidence, Eckert — who has spent most of his coaching career in Germany — claimed he was not aware that such behaviour was against the rules in England as it was widespread in European football.

The hearing was told that Eckert had sent people to spy on fellow Championship sides Oxford and Ipswich, but had been displeased with the quality of their findings. In the case of Ipswich, the subterfuge extended to using kit worn by Eastleigh, whose Hampshire training ground was hosting Southampton’s opponents.

Southampton lost 2-1 away at Oxford and drew 2-2 at home to Ipswich.

Salt is captured recording Middlesbrough’s session (The Athletic)

After qualifying for the play-offs, Southampton booked Salt to stay for two nights in Middlesbrough and the plan was for him to go back to the training ground for a second day until he was spotted, confronted and ran from the premises.

Eckert could now face charges, too. The FA was not commenting on possible action last night but there is precedent in football. At the 2024 Olympic Games, Canada used a drone to spy on New Zealand, their upcoming opponents in the women’s football. In that case, Canada lost six points, while their coach, Bev Priestman, along with analyst Joseph Lombardi and assistant coach Jasmine Mander, were handed a one-year ban from football by FIFA.

The Athletic has been told that a key point in the EFL’s argument was for the play-offs to be regarded as a separate knockout competition, distinct from the league season. That helps explain the two separate punishments: expulsion from the play-offs and a points deduction for next season’s league campaign.

Southampton’s squad, who had been given a few days off after their second-leg win, had largely been kept away from the affair, with only the basic details communicated to them by the club.

Following Tuesday night’s news, players were understandably angry — only finding out via a text message sent by the club at the same time as the news broke more widely.

There was an added factor, as players who had taken 40 per cent pay cuts after suffering relegation from the top flight year were due to have that reinstated in the event of promotion. They will train on Wednesday as planned but multiple players are understood to be exploring their legal options, including possible class action, if the verdict is upheld.

The Athletic has contacted Southampton for comment.

It may have ended in a virtual hearing, but ‘Spygate’ began at Rockliffe Park, an unlikely backdrop for industrial espionage.

Set in the County Durham countryside, Middlesbrough’s training ground nestles between a golf course and hotel on one side and a cricket club on the other, all contained in a gentle horseshoe bend of the River Tees.

Salt’s chosen vantage point, with a clear view of the two first-team pitches 100 or so yards away, was next to a road that snakes down from the five-star Rockliffe Hall hotel to the golf course’s clubhouse. A metal farm gate next to the tree Salt hid behind carries the sign “Private property, authorised personnel only” but there is little privacy. No high fences or hedges. A clear, unbroken view.

All of the land — training ground, hotel and golf course — belongs to Middlesbrough owner Steve Gibson and his Bulkhaul business partner Mike O’Neill, but its public nature, welcoming hundreds of guests each day, allowed Salt access to the area where he was photographed.

The golf course where Salt fled after being caught spying (Phil Buckingham/The Athletic)

The image of Salt, obtained by The Athletic and other media outlets, showed him half-hidden by the tree, holding up his mobile phone while wearing wireless headphones. Middlesbrough staff are known to have approached Salt as he filmed but he soon left the scene, heading to the golf course clubhouse a short distance away.

It is alleged he changed his clothes in the wood-panelled locker room in the clubhouse before leaving the scene on foot.

Middlesbrough quickly lodged a complaint with the EFL, and Southampton were duly charged the following day with two breaches of their regulations, with the case being referred to an Independent Disciplinary Commission.

The play-off semi-final first leg ended goalless. Some fans made light of the affair by dressing in camouflage and holding up binoculars and one source told The Athletic that Phil Parsons, Southampton’s CEO, had a conciliatory conversation with Gibson at the Riverside stadium.

A Middlesbrough fan makes his point to Southampton before the play-off semi-final first leg (Ed Sykes/Getty Images)

Even so, tensions behind the scenes were beginning to bubble up. In the post-match press conference, Eckert and the club’s head of communications, Jordan Sibley, walked out after refusing to answer any further questions relating to spying.

Meanwhile, Middlesbrough head coach Kim Hellberg didn’t hold back in his post-match press conference, accusing Southampton of cheating. “Every team in the Championship should be angry. It is wrong, it is wrong,” he told reporters.

Middlesbrough, meanwhile, had started to compile a dossier of evidence and hired high-profile sports lawyer Nick De Marco KC to build their case.

The club trawled their records to find details of a credit card used by Salt at the golf club. They also said they had a written statement from a former Southampton employee which alleged the Middlesbrough spying incident was far from a one-off.

The Athletic had been told by multiple sources that Southampton had attempted to spy on Oxford at their training centre on Christmas Eve, before the clubs’ meeting at the Kassam Stadium on Boxing Day. Oxford had sacked Gary Rowett, their head coach, on December 23, which meant Craig Short led the side on an interim basis for that Southampton game — potentially prompting a change of tactics.

In the EFL statement last night, it was confirmed that Southampton had admitted to the hearing that they had spied on Oxford, as well as on Ipswich in April 2026.

Barring a short statement acknowledging their charge, Southampton kept their counsel, only going public on May 12, the day of the semi-final second leg at St Mary’s, when Parsons issued a statement, saying the club was “fully cooperating with the EFL and the Disciplinary Commission, whilst also undertaking an internal review to ensure that all facts and context are properly understood”.

Southampton admitted to spying on Oxford before this game on Boxing Day (Bradley Collyer/PA Images via Getty Images)

The second leg was even more bad-tempered than the first. Southampton fans threw missiles at Middlesbrough’s team coach as it arrived at the stadium and the game itself was marred by a confrontation between the visitors’ Luke Ayling and Southampton’s Taylor Harwood-Bellis, with the latter allegedly making reference to the Middlesbrough defender’s speech impediment.

When Southampton scored their late winner from Shea Charles, Harwood-Bellis celebrated with a binoculars gesture in front of Middlesbrough’s Aidan Morris.

In the press conferences that followed, Eckert again walked out early with their head of communications when a reporter asked, “Are you a cheat?” In response, the head of communications told the reporter: “Let’s show some respect.”

Hellberg was visibly emotional after the defeat, describing the situation as “disgraceful” adding that it “breaks my heart.”

The row even went political when Andy McDonald, the Member of Parliament for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East, called for Southampton to lose their spot in the play-off final.

The most dramatic twist yet, however, came the next day, Wednesday, May 13, when the photograph of Salt emerged, initially via the Daily Mail. It underlined that far from being an act of sophisticated subterfuge, it was the most basic of operations, leading many to wonder just how much value his intelligence could have added to Southampton’s preparations.

Until then, Salt had only once been pictured on Southampton’s website, as part of an image of Eckert and his staff celebrating a manager of the month award, but now he found himself at the centre of a storm.

He had returned to work at Southampton’s Staplewood training ground that same day after being given a few days off, with sources describing him as being quiet and keeping his head down. His phone had been examined by Southampton’s lawyers as they sifted through evidence.

The EFL confirmed that the independent hearing would be heard by Tuesday (May 19), but behind the scenes, there were convoluted negotiations taking place around who could contribute to it and how.

While the case itself was between Southampton and the EFL, Middlesbrough were adamant they wanted to be in the room to make their case through De Marco. From the start, Boro wanted to pursue a sporting sanction against Southampton — namely, ejection from the play-offs, a point they made in a public statement on the Friday night.

The EFL, meanwhile, was resistant to any notion that the play-off final could be delayed. It was wary of being seen to ‘pre-judge’ the outcome of the case if it pushed back the game, while postponing would also present a raft of broadcasting, commercial and logistical problems.

Southampton head coach Tonda Eckert may face his own disciplinary action (Jasper Wax/Getty Images)

Boro were ultimately denied the right to attend the hearing but were permitted to make a written submission as an interested party. While they did not have the right to appeal the decision, they would have been able to pursue compensation from Southampton. In the meantime, the club went about business as usual, with players reporting back for training on May 18 to prepare for a possible play-off final.

Southampton, for their part, were not denying that spying had taken place but were growing increasingly concerned about what they perceived as due process not being followed. The club felt that such cases would routinely see clubs offered 14 days to answer a charge.

Club sources told The Athletic that they felt the hearing should have taken place after the final, rather than being expedited by the EFL. They thought there were too many rules that had no defined sanctions, which left too much open to interpretation, and if the rules had been clearer, the incident would have been resolved more speedily.

They pointed out that Southampton put in one of their worst performances in recent months against Middlesbrough in the first leg — especially in the first half — which suggested that no sporting advantage had been gained.

They also made the point that the most obvious precedent, when Leeds United were caught spying on Derby County in 2019, had resulted in the Yorkshire club being fined £200,000.

There was, of course, another team caught in the middle of the spat: Hull City.

After defeating Millwall 2-0 at The Den on May 11 to book their place at Wembley, the East Yorkshire club found themselves not knowing for sure which team they should be preparing to face at Wembley.

In an interview with The Athletic, Hull head coach Sergej Jakirovic warned against his side becoming “collateral damage”, but acknowledged that he had been preparing to meet Southampton.

They have now completed four training sessions, preparing for Southampton, only to find themselves having to switch opponents less than four days before the final. Hull’s players and backroom staff are due to travel south to London tomorrow. Defeat at Wembley could provoke more recriminations.

Hull have been expecting to play Southampton (Tony King/Getty Images)

Away from the football, Hull have been left unhappy at the handling of the situation. Although sympathetic to the EFL’s position initially, the continued uncertainty over the date of the game has made planning difficult for the club’s supporters, who are yet to sell their full allocation. Southampton had already sold out their 37,000 share which will now need to be refunded, presenting another logistical headache.

In a statement on Friday, the Hull City official supporters’ club said the EFL “could and should have had a more robust system in place to deal with this eventuality, one that does not punish innocent fans who should be enjoying contemplating seeing their club play at the national stadium”.

The judgment, when it was announced at 6:45pm on Tuesday, sent shockwaves through the sport — probably best summarised by Steve Parish, the Crystal Palace chairman, who posted an exploding head emoji on X.

Others revelled in Southampton’s misery, with local rivals Portsmouth posting a message saying the south coast derby was ‘coming soon’. Meanwhile, on Google Maps, an aerial image of Middlesbrough’s training ground now comes with an added feature: Tonda Eckert Bush.

Yet there could still be a sting in the tail, in the shape of Southampton’s appeal. That will be heard on Wednesday afternoon, with the verdict expected to be delivered in the evening.

Both sides are confident that their argument will prevail, yet the truth is this is unprecedented territory. What happens next could shape not just the make-up of next season’s Premier League, but football’s legal foundations.

Additional reporting: Michael Walker, David Ornstein, Adam Crafton