Still taking no responsibility


Status
Not open for further replies.
@janey hell on if @Jocky posted this
They are the same poster,two different log ins,IIRC
clear.png
clear.png
 
It was entrapment. He didn't actually do anything other than say some common sense stuff about Wembley and the England team that embarrassed his bosses when the journo leaked what was clearly a private conversation. As Matthew Syed said in his column today, nothing that Allardyce said hasn't been said to him 'off the record' by dozens of other managers/people in football.
Looking forward to him suing the Telegraph, now that would be fun.
 
He did say he'd first have to run it past his employers, however unlikely it was that they'd agree given what they were wanting to do and given how what he was being asked to do was in the main a front for advising them on various things some of which are against rules the fa put in place.

Even if it were just for a couple of conferences we all know the importance of being relatively clean in regards the England job and how large an impact the press can have and how they'll leave no stone unturned when there's potential to sticking the boot into the fa or especially the England manager, so it was in the main greed which lead him on that path and into that seedy encounter, for a quick little earner.

In some positions you're being well paid and you have to have morals and act with responsibility. being England manager is massively different from being on the after dinner circuit and telling some stories in front of a pissed up audience for a few laughs and a few quid. Literally can't understand how people can't comprehend that.
Still cannot see the problem, providing it was legal and his bosses were happy to give it the green light no problem. If as you say their assent was unlikely to be given, they could simply have said no don't be silly Sam and moved on.
 
Not remotely true to say he's not a popular figure. Whilst many think he's prehistoric or plays bland football Sam is still massively popular because of those exact things you speak of with especially the working classes in a world where much of what comes with modern football is so bland and pre-determined. Living outside of the North East now I've not heard anyone say a bad word about him until now - far from it. People are reacting at the moment to his musconduct and his gross stupidity and greed, don't try to play it out as something else.
All you have to do is look at this place and some of comments towards him over the years before he arrived here and he was far from popular. People I've spoke to about him over the years have like you said been less than complimentary over his style of football (fuck all wrong with it by the way) and his arrogance and self belief.
I've always liked Sam for the reasons you've mentioned and Ones I have but in my experience he's always been a fairly divisive figure.
 
Still cannot see the problem, providing it was legal and his bosses were happy to give it the green light no problem. If as you say their assent was unlikely to be given, they could simply have said no don't be silly Sam and moved on.

Even if he thought it was likely to be granted the opportunity it was still a seedy encounter where the whole premise of it was about advising them on their potential investments, which would center around flaunting FA rules. Jesus Christ man - can you not see what sort of position that puts him in, even if they agree to it on the basis of it being a couple of conferences?

IF he had anything about him he wouldn't have gone near it, nevermind going into dinner with them when he didn't know them from Adam and slagging off all and sundry, including his new employers. Just absolute stupidity.

All you have to do is look at this place and some of comments towards him over the years before he arrived here and he was far from popular. People I've spoke to about him over the years have like you said been less than complimentary over his style of football (fuck all wrong with it by the way) and his arrogance and self belief.
I've always liked Sam for the reasons you've mentioned and Ones I have but in my experience he's always been a fairly divisive figure.

Mixed tbf. Some didn't like him (like myself) many more did. Some of the people that didn't like him and were in the minority probably weren't happy that he screwed us over for a bigger contract at Bolton previously and Quinny had slagged him off at a few talks ins as well - you have to counter that in, remember that Defoe wasn't liked by many on here either - but that was clouded by the Gordon incident. Neither were things that ran particularly deep, just clouded by incidents at the time.

Because he didn't commit a sackable offence, so you have to buy him off

More likely paid till a certain point, rather than drag it through a court

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ger-says-employment-law-experts-a7332991.html
 
Last edited:
Even if he thought it was likely to be granted the opportunity it was still a seedy encounter where the whole premise of it was about advising them on their potential investments, which would center around flaunting FA rules. Jesus Christ man - can you not see what sort of position that puts him in, even if they agree to it on the basis of it being a couple of conferences?

IF he had anything about him he wouldn't have gone near it, nevermind going into dinner with them when he didn't know them from Adam and slagging off all and sundry, including his new employers. Just absolute stupidity.



Mixed tbf. Some didn't like him (like myself) many more did. Some of the people that didn't like him and were in the minority probably weren't happy that he screwed us over for a bigger contract at Bolton previously and Quinny had slagged him off at a few talks ins as well - you have to counter that in, remember that Defoe wasn't liked by many on here either - but that was clouded by the Gordon incident. Neither were things that ran particularly deep, just clouded by incidents at the time.
I saw very few with a good word for the bloke, a lot less than just mixed in my opinion.
Everyone has an opinion on this which would be fine but my issue is that so many won't have even bothered reading the transcripts before going down the 'Sam is dodgy' route.
He's been naive in this instance but for me characters like Sam do a lot more good for the game than bad. He might not be perfect but nobody is despite the way some have reacted to this particular story.
 
I would have hoped that if their were sufficient grounds for dismissal the FA would have fired him. To allow him to leave by mutual consent with a seven figure payout and a confidentiality clause in place makes me think not. If for example the ways of getting round the third party ownership of players is well known within the industry no court is going to regard acknowledging this fact to an outsider as gross misconduct.
 
Semantics though really, in his position he shouldn't have even been having that conversation with a bunch of strangers over a pint of wine.


The thing for me is that he shouldn't have put himself in that position.
I and many other people would have been in bother if we'd been caught telling people how to break our employers laws or even suggested it was possible. If he'd not been where he was he wouldn't have been caught.
It's just my opinion but he was a sitting duck waiting to be shot and his arrogance and greed allowed the bullets to be fired. And while saying he regrets it he's still trying to deflect responsibility for his actions on to others.

totally agree

I wonder what that meeting was set up as, but he was a fool to go to it

when we look at others caught out, platini, blatter and even the MP's in expences fiddles all came out with the same drivel initially
 
I saw very few with a good word for the bloke, a lot less than just mixed in my opinion.
Everyone has an opinion on this which would be fine but my issue is that so many won't have even bothered reading the transcripts before going down the 'Sam is dodgy' route.
He's been naive in this instance but for me characters like Sam do a lot more good for the game than bad. He might not be perfect but nobody is despite the way some have reacted to this particular story.

I think there were some who were against him because of the mundane football tag (I didn't like him but thought he was the perfect choice leading up to his appointment) but it was certainly the minority on here, maybe a vocal one, but still a minority.

We all know he is a touch dodgy tbf though. He was involved with the Panorama stuff years ago and his sons involvement in that working on deals with alleged bungs and working on deals for Bolton whilst being contractually banned from working on deals for Bolton, quite possibly cost him the England job back then (and Craig Allardyce has not worked as an agent since). He's continually kept bad company frequently using agents like Willie McKay in many (or most) of his transfer deals, who himself has been involved in all sorts of allegations, been arrested for some and banned for a while and now it's came to light he was quite happy to advise on getting around FA rules for a few quid in his sky rocket. I actually warmed to the bloke whilst he was here, didn't blame him for leaving (though as usual with him, the way he left was a bit untoward) but it surely cannot suprise anyone he's been caught up in stuff like this given his history?
 
He deserves everything he gets the greedy bastard, even though he's probably not broken any laws.
The thing that bugs me though, is when you see the dodgy dealings and corruption at the very top in this country on a monumental scale, The Telegraph chooses to go after football.
We can't have working class fuckers making a dodgy coin can we.
I'd agree with you to some extent, but it's also the working class supporters who are being shafted by those creaming the reddies off the top. There'll always be greedy bastards from every walk of life, and they have no excuses for their behaviour from me.
 
I would have hoped that if their were sufficient grounds for dismissal the FA would have fired him. To allow him to leave by mutual consent with a seven figure payout and a confidentiality clause in place makes me think not. If for example the ways of getting round the third party ownership of players is well known within the industry no court is going to regard acknowledging this fact to an outsider as gross misconduct.

As the article above says it could quite easily be done on "undermining the trust and confidence" between him and the governing body.

The FA let Hoddle leave by mutual consent too, so was he not sackable either?? That's clearly just the way they work, they're not going to be seen 'firing' anybody.
 
I think there were some who were against him because of the mundane football tag (I didn't like him but thought he was the perfect choice leading up to his appointment) but it was certainly the minority on here, maybe a vocal one, but still a minority.

We all know he is a touch dodgy tbf though. He was involved with the Panorama stuff years ago and his sons involvement in that working on deals with alleged bungs and working on deals for Bolton whilst being contractually banned from working on deals for Bolton, quite possibly cost him the England job back then (and Craig Allardyce has not worked as an agent since). He's continually kept bad company frequently using agents like Willie McKay in many (or most) of his transfer deals, who himself has been involved in all sorts of allegations, been arrested for some and banned for a while and now it's came to light he was quite happy to advise on getting around FA rules for a few quid in his sky rocket. I actually warmed to the bloke whilst he was here, didn't blame him for leaving (though as usual with him, the way he left was a bit untoward) but it surely cannot suprise anyone he's been caught up in stuff like this given his history?
Well I would say it was certainly the majority so we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
As far as I'm aware Sam has never been found guilty of any wrongdoing in regards to bungs, backhanders etc has he? This particular instance has nothing to do with shady dealings either.
As for the way he left I fail to see what else he could've done. The FA pissed about but Allardyce was hardly going to leave a job without knowing he had a new one to walk into. Nobody in right mind would do that.
 
Well I would say it was certainly the majority so we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
As far as I'm aware Sam has never been found guilty of any wrongdoing in regards to bungs, backhanders etc has he? This particular instance has nothing to do with shady dealings either.
As for the way he left I fail to see what else he could've done. The FA pissed about but Allardyce was hardly going to leave a job without knowing he had a new one to walk into. Nobody in right mind would do that.
Some people retire.
 
I would have hoped that if their were sufficient grounds for dismissal the FA would have fired him. To allow him to leave by mutual consent with a seven figure payout and a confidentiality clause in place makes me think not. If for example the ways of getting round the third party ownership of players is well known within the industry no court is going to regard acknowledging this fact to an outsider as gross misconduct.
He's done nothing legally wrong, he's facing no misconduct charge, he didn't create any loophole, he's just made an arse of himself & the FA.
 
Well I would say it was certainly the majority so we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
As far as I'm aware Sam has never been found guilty of any wrongdoing in regards to bungs, backhanders etc has he? This particular instance has nothing to do with shady dealings either.
As for the way he left I fail to see what else he could've done. The FA pissed about but Allardyce was hardly going to leave a job without knowing he had a new one to walk into. Nobody in right mind would do that.

He was clearly at least involved at Bolton given the Craig Allardyce ones centered around transfers at Bolton that both will have been involved in, Craig was alleged to have taken bungs and was also working on transfer for Bolton, whilst contractually banned from doing so. Unless you think he had no knowledge of his son being involved in transfers with players to Bolton when he was Bolton manager... No one was found guilty of anything, though after the accusations Allardyce vowed to sue the broadcaster and never did.

I guess in your mind factually nothing happened, but generally you're the first to talk about no smoke without fire.

As for this case having nothing to do with shady dealings, the whole premise is of a far eastern group basically paying him to advise them on getting around FA rules and him hiding that behind some supposed conferences etc and dressing it up as 'advising them'.
 
He was clearly at least involved at Bolton given the Craig Allardyce ones centered around transfers at Bolton that both will have been involved in, Craig was alleged to have taken bungs and was also working on transfer for Bolton, whilst contractually banned from doing so. Unless you think he had no knowledge of his son being involved in transfers with players to Bolton when he was Bolton manager... No one was found guilty of anything, though after the accusations Allardyce vowed to sue the broadcaster and never did.

I guess in your mind factually nothing happened, but generally you're the first to talk about no smoke without fire.

As for this case having nothing to do with shady dealings, the whole premise is of a far eastern group basically paying him to advise them on getting around FA rules and him hiding that behind some supposed conferences etc and dressing it up as 'advising them'.
Look I'm not daft and not saying Sam is an angel but if things were as black and white as some people make out in regards to his dealings he'd most likely been out of football a long time ago.
Well given it was something he'd have had to run past his employers should be have taken up the 'advisory' role I don't think it was too shady mind.
 
I shouldn't have done it BUT I was doing a friend a favour. I shouldn't have done it BUT it was entrapment.
Seriously there is nothing the matter with me and I heard perfectly well.
If he was taking responsibility there would have been no BUTs. It would have been I shouldn't have done it and I apologise
If he wasn't chasing even more money, he would quickly have recognised the tone of the exchanges and politely reminded them he was England manager and declined to comment, but instead he had to be the big man and let his mouth go.

Entrapment or not, anyone who genuinely respects the position of authority they have would not have conducted themselves in that way.

Stupid fella. Nearly £6m down the swanny!
 
Look I'm not daft and not saying Sam is an angel but if things were as black and white as some people make out in regards to his dealings he'd most likely been out of football a long time ago.
Well given it was something he'd have had to run past his employers should be have taken up the 'advisory' role I don't think it was too shady mind.

That Bolton Wanderers manager Sam Allardyce, and his agent son Craig were alleged to have accepted "bungs" (bribes) from agents for signing certain players. Two agents, Teni Yerima and Peter Harrison, were secretly filmed, each separately claiming that they had paid Allardyce through his son. Allardyce denies ever taking, or asking for, a bung.[4]

Agent Peter Harrison told the undercover reporter that, to secure transfer deals with Bolton, he bribed Sam Allardyce by offering to pay his son Craig. Harrison is a FIFA-listed agent, who is based in the north-east of England.

That three different Bolton transfer signings involved secret payments from agents to Craig Allardyce, some when he was contractually banned from doing any Bolton deals. Panorama alleged Bolton's transfer signings of defender Tal Ben Haim, midfielder Hidetoshi Nakata and goalkeeper Ali Al Habsi involved secret payments from agents to Craig Allardyce. Allardyce's son quit the agency business in summer 2006, and has admitted in newspaper interviews that his working as an agent might have cost his father the chance of becoming England manager.

Sam Allardyce: said that he had placed the matter in the hands of his lawyers.[9] He also confessed: “As a father it is painful to watch your son talk tall and exaggerate his influence for financial gain.”[10] On 25 September he announced that after lengthy discussions his lawyers had advised that "I have a very strong case in relation to the programme, and I am planning to sue the BBC over the false and highly damaging allegations. I have therefore instructed my lawyers to prepare my case against the BBC." Allardyce added that he would discuss the matter with Bolton chairman, Phil Gartside, as well as his wife before he took any final decision.[11] Allardyce has not yet filed any legal action against the BBC, meaning the allegations remain legally unchallenged.

Surely though given what's available in the transcript seems to suggest he was telling the FA he was doing a couple of conferences in the far east as an advisor. However at least one of the things what he was actually doing was advising on loop holes and ways around rules set out by his employer and as such looking likely he'd have been in part deceiving the FA or at least advising on how to flaunter their rules means in fact it was potentially very shady?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top