Telegraph Investigations Megathread - Sam Allardyce resigns as England Manager

thebaz

Pro. F wrote: »

No, at most his crime was cheating, cheating the regulations on player ownership and transfers that his employers oversee. That's more than bad enough to get the sack for.

no - his crime was talking about cheating on a wine fuelled sting - many people say things when half drunk - I'm sure these moral pure journos , have said many things they too regret - how I love the Irish loving puritanical telegraph

Pro. F

thebaz wrote: »

no - his crime was talking about cheating on a wine fuelled sting - many people say things when half drunk

So that's why I said "at most." Talking about cheating and saying you can help people who clearly want to do it, is extremely close to cheating. It's certainly more than just greed he is guilty of, as you claimed.

thebaz wrote: »

- I'm sure these moral pure jounas , have said many things they too regret -

Irrelevant to the question of whether he should be sacked or not.

thebaz wrote: »

how I love the Irish loving puritanical telegraph

What the fùck are you talking about?

thebaz

Pro. F wrote: »

What the fùck are you talking about?

the telegraph has a history of being anti Irish - thats what the fuc I'm talking about

Dirty Dingus McGee

Billy86 wrote: »

Then why did you even bring West Ham up? That one season is the only season since he left, and yet it doesn't show anything but the 6 games from this year so far do?

I'm not saying he's a bad manager, I'm saying West Ham did better -significantly better- once he left. So bringing them up made no sense on your end.

Because look at how disorganized they are now.

Can't imagine they would be like that with Allardyce. Also Allardyce didn't have Payet in his team, he's the reason they were so good last year.

Lovely Bloke

Pro. F wrote: »

No, at most his crime was cheating, cheating the regulations on player ownership and transfers that his employers oversee. That's more than bad enough to get the sack for.

when did he do those things?

Skylinehead

thebaz wrote: »

the telegraph has a history of being anti Irish - thats what the fuc I'm talking about

How is that even slightly relevant to this story?

Dots1982

ahlookit wrote: »

Ah here, some may have been past their best when he signed them, but at Bolton he managed Eidur Gudjonsson, Youri Djorkaeff, Jayjay Okocha, Fernando Hierro, Gary Speed, Nicolas Anelka.

Are there many in the England squad better than them?

Anelka granted and Gudjonsson was a good player. Most of the rest arrived on a free or for about 1,5 million and were well past it.

To illustrate, the likes of David O'Leary for example would be looked on as a bit of a joke but probably managed a far better calibre of player in his far shorter career.

For every anelka there's about 50 joey o'brien's.

Lovely Bloke

thebaz wrote: »

the telegraph has a history of being anti Irish - thats what the fuc I'm talking about

why is this relevant?

Pro. F

thebaz wrote: »

the telegraph has a history of being anti Irish - thats what the fuc I'm talking about

No shít. And where did you get the daft idea that I love the Telegraph?

thebaz

Pro. F wrote: »

t I love the Telegraph?

that my friend is why I will no longer engage - we are obviously from different planets - good luck

Pro. F

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

when did he do those things?

You know in the video where he was talking to the lads who wanted to get around the third party ownership rules and he said that isn't a problem, that you can get around those rules no problem. And he agreed to take money to work for them. That bit.

Billy86

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Because look at how disorganized they are now.

Can't imagine they would be like that with Allardyce. Also Allardyce didn't have Payet in his team, he's the reason they were so good last year.

Like I said, it's 6 games. It's September. The league runs for 38 games, until May. Given they improved by 18 points last year over their average under Allaryce (or by 15 over his best season), it's still a terrible example to give.

And yes, Payet played a big role. Other managers spotting and buying better players than Allardyce did is not exactly a huge ringing endorsement of him, and claiming one player alone was worth 18 points is quite a stretch.

Pro. F

thebaz wrote: »

that my friend is why I will no longer engage - we are obviously from different planets - good luck

I see what you meant now. Your lack of sentence structure made your post a bit confusing.

Billy86

thebaz wrote: »

my friend will no longer engage different planets

I know that No Man's Sky was supposed to be a bit of a let down, but he shouldn't take it so harshly.

See how much fun selective quoting is?

thebaz

Pro. F wrote: »

I see what you meant now. Your lack of sentence structure made your post a bit confusing.

if i say something I will get ****ing banned - so Good ****ing bye and keep reading the telegraph

Shanotheslayer

thebaz wrote: »

if i say something I will get ****ing banned - so Good ****ing bye and keep reading the telegraph

Holy mother.That escalated very quickly.

Pro. F

thebaz wrote: »

if i say something I will get ****ing banned - so Good ****ing bye and keep reading the telegraph

I don't read the Telegraph. Well no more than you, since we are both aware of this story.

Lovely Bloke

Pro. F wrote: »

You know in the video where he was talking to the lads who wanted to get around the third party ownership rules and he said that isn't a problem, that you can get around those rules no problem. And he agreed to take money to work for them. That bit.

That's not cheating, nor close to cheating.

Here, is it possible to get around Speed Cameras? Yes it is, it isn't a problem.

Should I get penalty points now?

It absolutely IS possible to get around the 3rd Party wenership rules, as the very public Paul Pogba transfer of the summer demonstrates.

Sam Allardyce saying so doesn't make him a cheat.

Bizarre reasoning.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Billy86 wrote: »

Like I said, it's 6 games. It's September. The league runs for 38 games, until May. Given they improved by 18 points last year over their average under Allaryce (or by 15 over his best season), it's still a terrible example to give.

And yes, Payet played a big role. Other managers spotting and buying better players than Allardyce did is not exactly a huge ringing endorsement of him, and claiming one player alone was worth 18 points is quite a stretch.

Fair enough probably is a bad example but I have a feeling West Ham could be in for a rough enough season considering the extremely poor nature of their performances so far.


He has a great record of improving and stabilizing lower level teams in the premier league.

Pro. F

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

That's not cheating, nor close to cheating.

Here, is is possible to get around Speed Cameras? Yes it is, it isn't a problem.

Should I get penalty points now?

It absolutely IS possible to get around the 3rd Party wenership rules, as the very public Paul Pogba transfer of the summer demonstrates.

Sam Allardyce saying so doesn't make him a cheat.

Bizarre reasoning.

Dodgy Dudes: "Hi, we are working to set up a company that will make money by helping people avoid penalty points while speeding. Will you do a bit of work with my company and talk to investors?"

Some high profile chump who is employed very high up in the relevant national body: "Yeah, great."

Dodgey Dudes: "And are speed cameras a problem, can they be got around?"

Chump: "Ah yeah, they're no problem. Don't worry about that. You can definitely get around them."

Should the chump get penalty points? No, obviously not. That would be stupid. Should the chump be sacked? Yes, obviously. Was the chump heavily implicated in the scheme to get around penalty points? Yes.

Billy86

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Fair enough probably is a bad example but I have a feeling West Ham could be in for a rough enough season considering the extremely poor nature of their performances so far.


He has a great record of improving and stabilizing lower level teams in the premier league.

Ah, don't get me wrong - he's a good manager and as you said is excellent at stabilising smaller or disorganised teams. I just feel he is the type who can bring a team forward -- to a point. I just don't have much confidence that for example, he would be able to push an Everton or (pre Pochettino) Spurs into the top 4 or whatnot. Once the scandal blows over, there are a number of teams that should be looking at him. I think the most interesting might be if he sits out the year, Villa don't achieve promotion, and he goes there to build up. Not sure why, Villa and Allardyce just seem a good fit for me.

West Ham could do either way, I reckon we're still well within the timeframe where 2-3 wins on the bounce could send them into a good run of form and back on track.

IamtheWalrus

I feel sorry for Big Sam.

thebaz

thebaz wrote: »

no - his crime was talking about cheating on a wine fuelled sting - many people say things when half drunk - I'm sure these moral pure journos , have said many things they too regret - how I love the Irish loving puritanical telegraph

If an employee of mine was talking about me, other staff, clients etc. to complete strangers and sucking up to them for cash, he would be in serious trouble. Drinking is no excuse. And the suggestion that people say things they regret is no defence.

POKERKING

Good article with Daniel Taylor that i agree with, worth a read:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/sep/27/sam-allardyce-arrogant-clot-england-manager

Laois_Man

Pro. F wrote: »

Dodgy Dudes: "Hi, we are working to set up a company that will make money by helping people avoid penalty points while speeding. Will you do a bit of work with my company and talk to investors?"

Some high profile chump who is employed very high up in the relevant national body: "Yeah, great."

Dodgey Dudes: "And are speed cameras a problem, can they be got around?"

Chump: "Ah yeah, they're no problem. Don't worry about that. You can definitely get around them."

Should the chump get penalty points? No, obviously not. That would be stupid. Should the chump be sacked? Yes, obviously. Was the chump heavily implicated in the scheme to get around penalty points? Yes.

Aren't you forgetting the bit where the high profile chump tells the Dodgey Dudes that any arrangement would have to be cleared by the chumps employers?

POKERKING

POKERKING wrote: »

Good article with Daniel Taylor that i agree with, worth a read:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2016/sep/27/sam-allardyce-arrogant-clot-england-manager

I agree it may be standard pub talk. Or at least the level of discourse, criticising others and sneering at them, is standard. It's his job and his targets that made it inappropriate, his employers, his colleagues etc. Just not good enough.

Not a huge wrong, granted. But he was getting paid 3 million to rise above the level of standard pub talk. He should have exercised discretion, to judge when a conversation swings to comments about his employer or his colleagues that he should have said "I can't go there". That's when respect, judgement, integrity etc. went out the window.

eagle eye

The one thing I have to say is that while I do believe that Sam Allardyce should lose his job over this I also think that he should have been left in charge while they looked for his replacement.

The FA don't seem to ever consider the national team when they make their decisions. Gareth Southgate is a hopeless case and he should never be in charge of the England senior national team.

Pro. F

Laois_Man wrote: »

Aren't you forgetting the bit where the high profile chump tells the Dodgey Dudes that any arrangement would have to be cleared by the chumps employers?

Yeah I suppose I forgot that bit.

Chump: "I'll have to clear this all with my employers."

Employers (after the chump tells them what he wants to do): "Lol no. You're fired."

ahlookit

Now Ravel Morrison is hardly the most reliable of witnesses, but his claims seem a bit more plausible now...

http://www.themag.co.uk/2016/09/ravel-morrison-killer-comment-sam-allardyce-newcastle-united-west-ham-england/

Also seems Cardiff thought there was something fishy when Morrison joined them on loan from West Ham

Sam Allardyce could face a second investigation after it emerged that Cardiff City discovered evidence of unexplained payments regarding the loan move of Ravel Morrison from West Ham in 2014, when Allardyce was still manager of the Premier League club.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/sam-allardyce-fa-investigation-ravel-morrison-west-ham-cardiff-transfer-payment-a7334381.html

Dirty Dingus McGee

eagle eye wrote: »

The one thing I have to say is that while I do believe that Sam Allardyce should lose his job over this I also think that he should have been left in charge while they looked for his replacement.

The FA don't seem to ever consider the national team when they make their decisions. Gareth Southgate is a hopeless case and he should never be in charge of the England senior national team.

That's a terrible idea.

What incentive would he have to do a good job, and if he was really pissed off there is always the potential (however unlikely) for him to deliberately sabotage things.

mikeym

Poor old Greedy Sam.

My heart bleeds for him :rolleyes:

Lets see what happens with the dodgy agents.

~Rebel~

Deleted User wrote: »

Think the FA statement sums it up pretty well.

Inappropriate conduct...a significant error of judgement...need to protect wider interests of the game and maintain highest standards of conduct...integrity at all times etc.

All of which is accepted by Allardyce. And so he has blown the highest paid job in international football. There is an irony that his own greed for even more money was his downfall.

Those are the judgments of his actions - not a review of his actions themselves. What i'm saying, is that fundamentally he didn't do anything more wrong than being his private self in what has turned into a public setting.

And I agree that's enough for him to lose his job - he should hold himself to a higher standard in mixed company while he's England manager. What I hate is that that's not what's being pushed. Instead it's all greed, and crook, and scam. None of that is true.

It's not greed that has taken him down - had he concluded that deal without actually talking, everything would have been fine. The deal was fine. Deliver a few anecdotes for 15 minutes. Klopp's a figurehead for Opal. Mourinho is for Jaguar. Both speak at events for which they've been paid. Nigh on every previous England manager has given after dinner speeches for money during the off season. Allardyce has been taken down for being loose with his words on unrelated subjects. And that's been enough to lose his job, which again is fine, but that's what I want the reporting to actually just say.

I know I keep banging on about it in this thread, but I hate the way this has been reported - and is continuing to be reported. Headline "Council house boy who was doomed by his insatiable greed" Are you ****ing serious like? Jesus christ we're a horrible species.

Lord TSC

Sitting here now, waiting for 10pm to roll round for the next part of this story...

Leroy42

@~Rebel~, but it was greed that led him into the situation in the first place.

Why did need an extra gig, he had his dream job. Its not as if the pay was bad (although its all relative) but instead of being happy with getting his ultimate goal at last he couldn't help himself but go for more.

Remember, this isn't him doing work for a friend, these were people he had never met before and he was willing to be part of whatever they were doing in order to get some extra cash.

Lovely Bloke

Lord TSC wrote: »

Sitting here now, waiting for 10pm to roll round for the next part of this story...

there's a few matches on you could watch

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

@~Rebel~, but it was greed that led him into the situation in the first place.

Why did need an extra gig, he had his dream job. Its not as if the pay was bad (although its all relative) but instead of being happy with getting his ultimate goal at last he couldn't help himself but go for more.

Remember, this isn't him doing work for a friend, these were people he had never met before and he was willing to be part of whatever they were doing in order to get some extra cash.

He has previous too.

Up to his neck

eagle eye

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

That's a terrible idea.

What incentive would he have to do a good job, and if he was really pissed off there is always the potential (however unlikely) for him to deliberately sabotage things.

It gives him a chance to go out of the job with a little bit of respect from a purely football management perspective. He will want to go manage a team again and doing a good job there would aid his chances of securing one.

He was part of the BBC Panorama documentary a good few years ago and it's not like the FA didn't know about that before they hired him. The instant dismissal is just them trying to look like they are above reproach when it's clear they are just turning a blind eye to it all for many years now.

At his worst he'd do a better job than Gareth Southgate.

SantryRed

eagle eye wrote: »

It gives him a chance to go out of the job with a little bit of respect from a purely football management perspective. He will want to go manage a team again and doing a good job there would aid his chances of securing one.

He was part of the BBC Panorama documentary a good few years ago and it's not like the FA didn't know about that before they hired him. The instant dismissal is just them trying to look like they are above reproach when it's clear they are just turning a blind eye to it all for many years now.

At his worst he'd do a better job than Gareth Southgate.

But if your position is deemed untenable, it's deemed untenable straight away! You can't remove someone due to an ethical situation but keep in on for a while. It has to be one or the other.

~Rebel~

Leroy42 wrote: »

@~Rebel~, but it was greed that led him into the situation in the first place.

Why did need an extra gig, he had his dream job. Its not as if the pay was bad (although its all relative) but instead of being happy with getting his ultimate goal at last he couldn't help himself but go for more.

Remember, this isn't him doing work for a friend, these were people he had never met before and he was willing to be part of whatever they were doing in order to get some extra cash.

IMO that's a cheap way of looking at it. I have a job I quite like. But if someone offers me 10% of my annual income to do a small side job that doesn't interfere with my normal job, and which my normal job will be made aware of - i'll do it. So is he more wrong because the figures are an order of magnitude higher? Why? What makes him worse than me - or I daresay anyone here - for working in a higher level of business than we are?

Maybe he didn't need it, but then again, would I need it? I earn far more than I need to survive after all, so is it pure greed on my part to at least enter talks on what is being presented as a perfectly legitimate and very very simple opportunity?

Are footballers just being greedy having image rights deals? Sponsorship deals? They earn a huge wage already after all, so are they horrible greedy guys too? Where's the line? Someone contacted Sam's agent, who thought this was an offer worth at least looking into, so he arranged a meeting with his client at which it was made clear this looked good in principle but would have to be run past the FA. The deal was fine.

There's just a horrible tone to the reporting and commenting on this whole thing imo.

eagle eye

SantryRed wrote: »

But if your position is deemed untenable, it's deemed untenable straight away! You can't remove someone due to an ethical situation but keep in on for a while. It has to be one or the other.

I'd consider putting Gareth Southgate in charge of the England national team a much worse situation, more untenable if you like.

I'd also be of the belief that the position of all those who were involved in deciding to hire Sam Allardyce is untenable.

Dirty Dingus McGee

eagle eye wrote: »

It gives him a chance to go out of the job with a little bit of respect from a purely football management perspective. He will want to go manage a team again and doing a good job there would aid his chances of securing one.

He was part of the BBC Panorama documentary a good few years ago and it's not like the FA didn't know about that before they hired him. The instant dismissal is just them trying to look like they are above reproach when it's clear they are just turning a blind eye to it all for many years now.

At his worst he'd do a better job than Gareth Southgate.

You can't have somebody who has already been fired doing an important job.
It decreases the incentive for him or the players to perform to the maximum in that situation and it would be hard for the players to take him 100% seriously if they knows for certain he's gone, they can't be 100% sure Southgate won't get the job on a permanent basis so they have to take him somewhat seriously.If Allardyce deserved to be fired then he should be out the door immediately not have some ridiculous stay of execution.

Performances in those games won't have any impact on Allardyce getting another job if he does get offers again it'll be based on his work at club level.If I was the Sunderland chairman I'd sack Moyes tonight and bring Allardyce back in.

The FA should be under pressure as well , but the people who made this decision are not going to fire themselves that pressure will have to come from higher up (if anything is above the FA).

theoneeyedman

eagle eye wrote: »

I'd consider putting Gareth Southgate in charge of the England national team a much worse situation, more untenable if you like.

I'd also be of the belief that the position of all those who were involved in deciding to hire Sam Allardyce is untenable.

There is only one man to do the job and restore the pride in Engerland football.

Step forward, Sir Harry of Rednapp

eagle eye

theoneeyedman wrote: »

There is only one man to do the job and restore the pride in Engerland football.

Step forward, Sir Harry of Rednapp

Love it!

Lord TSC

Tonight's revelations.

Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink at QPR, Tommy Wright of Barnsley and Leeds United's Massimo Cellino are named by the Telegraph in their #Football4Sale allegations.

ArmaniJeanss

Shooting fish in a barrel with Cellino surely, I sense they are nearing the end of their revelations.

ahlookit

Cellino? That's hugely surprising....


Here's the front of the Telegraph

http://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/781237242924765184

Is that the Tommy Wright who used to play in goal for Norn Iron?

Paully D

Still no David Moyes revelation.

CSF

Paully D wrote: »

Still no David Moyes revelation.

Feeling the exact same about Di Matteo. Swapsies?

kfallon

ahlookit wrote: »

Is that the Tommy Wright who used to play in goal for Norn Iron?

Isn't he manager of someone now, in Scotland I think? I think there was a Tommy Wright who played for Boro years ago (bit of a winger), it's probably him

ahlookit

kfallon wrote: »

Isn't he manager of someone now, in Scotland I think? I think there was a Tommy Wright who played for Boro years ago (bit of a winger), it's probably him

You're right. It's the former Boro lad

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Wright_(footballer,_born_1966)