Telegraph Investigations Megathread - Sam Allardyce resigns as England Manager

Kerrydude1981

Jimmy Floyd is a gas man

£30 -35k = meh

£50 - 55k = your getting warmer

Dots1982

Jimmy floyd should be alright. Just "clay davising" them. Not promising to do anything corrupt or agreeing in the slightest to facilitate them from what I've read.

Skylinehead

Jimmy Fraud Piggybank?

blueser

Jimmy Floyd Cashinthebank?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Lord TSC wrote: »

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.

Dots1982

Skylinehead wrote: »

Jimmy Fraud Piggybank?

If everyone who is getting paid to make a speech is to lose their job there won't be many left

Beefy78

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.

What is this based on? I assume it isn't based on all of the England U21 matches you've been watching? Or Southgate's England team from Toulon?

Southgate will be fine for games against such mighty footballing nations as Malta and Scotland.

Ulysses Gaze

The Honey Monster wrote: »

And yet Cellino passed the fit and proper persons test that the FA has set up?

ahlookit

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

And yet Cellino passed the fit and proper persons test that the FA has set up?

They couldn't find one fit & proper manager for their national team, never mind 92 owners for their league clubs.

You can't beat a bit of light touch regulation.

K-9

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Caught doing though?

Really it's for saying things he shouldn't be saying if not 100% sure it wouldn't be public.

It's like if someone catches you on camera down the pub after a bad week having a rant about your boss and the inefficient outdated structures at work, and then shows the video to your boss. Probably enough to get the sack for, but is there really any righteous act done? Any grave ill defeated?

Listen, I've no major problem with the Woy stuff or taking the piss about Wembley.

I think he could have got out of the 400k thing as he said he'd ask for permission.

The I know how to get around the third party rules my employers introduced, is were he steps over moral line.

If he'd said it as Sunderland boss, he might get away with it though it would be controversial in another way, the question would be why is a club manager telling investors that there are ways to get around rules.

Telling investors how to make money skirting rules, and him England manager? Morally suspect.

K-9

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Poor Sam.

It's not me, it's you

It's not entrapment or scum journalism either.

Loads of PL and by the looks of it Championships managers got targeted because the issue was to see how prevalent dodgy payments are in football.

How do you see how common dodgy payments are in football? By offering bait to them all.

Ideally we'd have a whistleblower prepared to go public and tape actual contract and agent talks, but we don't seem to have that.

The proverbial dog on the street knows it goes on, the Telegraph just eavesdropped on what we all already know, and it seems nobody is prepared to go public on.

Scum journalism would be hacking private phone calls, Hillsborough, a sex story etc.

WinnyThePoo

K-9 wrote: »

Listen, I've no major problem with the Woy stuff or taking the piss about Wembley.

I think he could have got out of the 400k thing as he said he'd ask for permission.

The I know how to get around the third party rules my employers introduced, is were he steps over moral line.

If he'd said it as Sunderland boss, he might get away with it though it would be controversial in another way, the question would be why is a club manager telling investors that there are ways to get around rules.

Telling investors how to make money skirting rules, and him England manager? Morally suspect.

This

This thread has been baffling. With a lot of posters thinking he's been sacked for entertaining key note speaches or talking about roy hodgson.

Hes been sacked for telling people how to skirt his employers lines.

weldoninhio

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

This

This thread has been baffling. With a lot of posters thinking he's been sacked for entertaining key note speaches or talking about roy hodgson.

Hes been sacked for telling people how to skirt his employers lines.

Exactly, I can't believe I've been sacked as head of Sky in Ireland. Some fecker down the pub got me chatting and recorded me saying that it's easy to get movies, football and tv shows without using sky by buying an android box.

~Rebel~

K-9 wrote: »

Listen, I've no major problem with the Woy stuff or taking the piss about Wembley.

I think he could have got out of the 400k thing as he said he'd ask for permission.

The I know how to get around the third party rules my employers introduced, is were he steps over moral line.

If he'd said it as Sunderland boss, he might get away with it though it would be controversial in another way, the question would be why is a club manager telling investors that there are ways to get around rules.

Telling investors how to make money skirting rules, and him England manager? Morally suspect.

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

This

This thread has been baffling. With a lot of posters thinking he's been sacked for entertaining key note speaches or talking about roy hodgson.

Hes been sacked for telling people how to skirt his employers lines.

And this is exactly where I have my problem with this whole style of reporting. They frame it in that way, chopping up the video and including their great big captions over it, but at no point in the conversation they've given us so far does he say anything about how to get around it in England.

An important part of the conversation is;
Sam's Advisors: "You're setting up a fund to buy the economic rights effectively of these players? Third party ownership?"

Sting People; "Certainly in the places we can do that, yeah."

Then the discussion mentions where you can do it - which is everywhere except England and France. Sam says they should employ the agent too to make the most of it. So, he's giving them advice, where it's not against the rules. He never offers any sort of advice or comment for England.

In relation to transfers in England he was asked; "Is that third party ownership a problem though?”

"It’s not a problem… we got Valencia in. He was third party owned when we bought him from Mexico.”

And how did they get him in? By buying his contract up entirely. West Ham took over 100% of his contract. Same as United did with Rojo and Mkhitaryan and other clubs have done with countless other players, as is required by the football laws in England...so again no advice on anything illegal. We're also denied the full framing of the question - because the context the article gives us is that its "getting around" in a dodgey sense, but equally it could be in relation to how complicated it can be, for instance Liverpool have had problems with this in the recent past with guys who were third party owned and found it difficult to gain agreement with both the other club, and the 3rd party owners.

He mentions at one point that [redacted] have been doing it for years...we have no idea from the context of this clip whether this redacted name means clubs, or agents, or managers - and also whether this was the portion of the conversation discussing England or the countries abroad where it's perfectly legal...for instance, if it was Shaktar that were the missing names (or their owners), it's suddenly innocuous, as we know they actively get south american players in with 3rd party ownership so they have a low risk on the outlay, provide a showcase in Europe, and make a tidy profit - like they've done on Fernandinho, Willian, Mkhitaryan and many others.

And that's the biggest issue with the whole thing - it's horribly reported. it's purposefully unclear. Look at the video - if there was really stuff there that hung him, they could just show an actual 2 or 3 minute portion of the conversation, in chronological order and then we know and there's no denying it. Instead, they cut every 5 to 10 seconds, and they move back and forth through time in the conversation as you can see by the placing of the camera. It's clearly edited to push their agenda, and muddy the integrity of the piece.

It's like reality TV, where they take a bunch of footage, and then form whatever narrative they like by shuffling things around in the edit. It's the same in their written article, it's all over the place!

Maybe everything they say is accurate, but if it is, why not present it in a legible, clear manner the way any real newspaper will lay out an investigation so as to make it solid beyond reproach?

K-9

He should say nothing as an English national football team manager.

A journalist asking him "Are there ways around third party rules?"

By all means comment that's exposing morally suspect practices.

An investment firm offering him 400k a year, knowing as a PL manager he'd know how to get around these things? No.

This kind of reminds me of Trump in the debate. Paying no taxes is good business, stiffing subcontractors is fine. Well, loads of people don't live their life by those standards.

Fintan Drury was on OTB again tonight, fantastic work by him, Newtalk, Kilbane et al.

200k a year goes on monitoring this stuff!

1 talented 17 year old gets paid that in a year in 1 PL Club.

What's ironic is Allardyce railing about entrapment and describing his own actions as merely silly.

He wasn't so dismissive about the medium or circumstances when Steve Kean was filmed in a bar calling him a crook.

No, on that occasion Sam had no problem at all with using footage for his purposes.

Again, another wedge of cash for Sam.

dfx-

Dots1982 wrote: »

Jimmy floyd should be alright. Just "clay davising" them. Not promising to do anything corrupt or agreeing in the slightest to facilitate them from what I've read.

the videos on SSN on both Hasselbaink and especially Cellino don't suggest anything. If that's their next big scoop, there may not be much else to the story afterall.

It looks like the reporters were fishing around blind without prior knowledge/tip-offs.

Richard Hillman

This has gotten beyond ludicrous. They are trying to link the speaking payments to the explanation of how bungs work. It's like Homer Simpson on Rock Bottom.

They could have stung anybody on this. Even the cleanest of clean managers.

Richard Hillman

Richard Hillman wrote: »

This has gotten beyond ludicrous. They are trying to link the speaking payments to the explanation of how bungs work. It's like Homer Simpson on Rock Bottom.

They could have stung anybody on this. Even the cleanest of clean managers.

And yet they didn't.

It's almost as if they knew that, wave a wad of cash and you'll get good ol Sam to do impressions of his predecessor, speak about individual players, slate his employers stadium project etc. etc.

Would the Mourinhos, Lows and Klopps do likewise? I'm not so sure.

ButtersSuki

theoneeyedman wrote: »

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

Step forward, Sir Harry of Rednapp

More like there's only only one man who can make Big Scam look whiter than white...

cj maxx

Shock , horror. England manager set up / exposed by newspaper. . Fake business men / Arabs etc who want to give him loadsa dosh for their expertise.
Not a huge surprise is it ?

gillamandango

https://mobile.twitter.com/FromTStands/status/781599026986807296

Agent Coulson

Southampton assistant manager Eric Black tonight's name.

~Rebel~

gillamandango wrote: »

https://mobile.twitter.com/FromTStands/status/781599026986807296

Tweet's already been deleted, so guessing that list wasn't accurate.

nullzero

cjmc wrote: »

Shock , horror. England manager set up / exposed by newspaper. . Fake business men / Arabs etc who want to give him loadsa dosh for their expertise.
Not a huge surprise is it ?

Tabloids reporting his "explosive tell all" book is on the way this morning, another huge surprise.

greendom

Think it's all a bit of a damp squib tbh. Ok Allardyce was a big fish, but it's all been little tiddlers since.

Either there's not really that much corruption around or the Telegraph didn't do a very good job in exposing it.

inforfun

Omerta.

They depended on some drunk blabbermouth for this one. Not all of them involved are that stupid.

Lovely Bloke

Even the "drunk blabbermouth" had the cop-on to absolutely shut down the conversation when it went down the very dark alley they really wanted it to go.

I'm still of the opinion that Sam didn't say or do much wrong, and he's only lost his job because of window dressing at the FA.

ahlookit

Lovely Bloke wrote: »

Even the "drunk blabbermouth" had the cop-on to absolutely shut down the conversation when it went down the very dark alley they really wanted it to go.

I'm still of the opinion that Sam didn't say or do much wrong, and he's only lost his job because of window dressing at the FA.

Pat Nevin made an interesting point the other evening on five live

He reckons Sam walking away without creating a scene has made him more employable to clubs in future. He also reckoned that if Allardyce was the boss of a club rather than the national team when this story broke he'd have kept his job. As the FA have to appear to be the moral guardians of football they decided to ditch him, even though none of the things he said were sackable offences.

Some club chairman will take a punt on him before too long... I'd be surprised if he's not up to his neck in a relegation battle in 6 months time.

eagle eye

Of course he will get a job and sooner rather than later. He knows how to keep teams up and any club owner/chairman would prefer to stay in the Premier league and have a dodgy transfer or two than go down to the Championship.

Could be a job at Sunderland soon the ways things are going.

Would probably suit both parties

Agent Coulson

Sam walked away with a check for a £1m as well that's not bad going for one game.

He will get a blank check from whichever club blinks first in the relegation fight this season as well as they don;'t want to lose the tv money.

He lost his dream job over £400k but will make tens times that now from whichever club blinks first.

thebaz

the agent at the centre of the scandal now says he lied - Why am I not surprised ?

~Rebel~

thebaz wrote: »

the agent at the centre of the scandal now says he lied - Why am I not surprised ?

Just more rubbish reporting from the Telegraph too...getting someone saying someone else takes bungs should be step one of the investigation - you then look for proof, or at very very least a second corroborating source on each case, and when you have those, you tell your story.

Instead they just took that first snippet, and vomited it out there into the world.

But then again, they're not trying to reveal or expose anything, they just want clicks. And obviously they've succeeded in that.

~Rebel~

~Rebel~ wrote: »

But then again, they're not trying to reveal or expose anything, they just want clicks. And obviously they've succeeded in that.

I think they have done football a service, I'd imagine the practice of players agents making payments to managers if players are used etc. was not known to many - I hadn't heard of that anyway. They have raised a lot of controversy about the role of agents, with a club owner saying the clubs should unite to cap agency fees, and it has dominated sports coverage in recent days.

I'd imagine in future managers will be far more cagey about the prospect of entering any agreement involving bungs and kickbacks.

Lovely Bloke

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd imagine in future managers will be far more cagey about the prospect of entering any agreement involving bungs and kickbacks.

:pac:

Sure they will.

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote: »

I think they have done football a service, I'd imagine the practice of players agents making payments to managers if players are used etc. was not known to many - I hadn't heard of that anyway. They have raised a lot of controversy about the role of agents, with a club owner saying the clubs should unite to cap agency fees, and it has dominated sports coverage in recent days.

I'd imagine in future managers will be far more cagey about the prospect of entering any agreement involving bungs and kickbacks.

You are very naive if you believe the last line of your post.

Fact of the matter is that this whole fiasco has led to very little happening. All that has happened is that a few guys have fallen on their swords to protect the many.

ahlookit

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd imagine in future managers will be far more cagey about the prospect of entering any agreement involving bungs and kickbacks.

managers and agents will be hugging each other and checking for wires like they're in The Sopranos

~Rebel~

ahlookit wrote: »

managers and agents will be hugging each other and checking for wires like they're in The Sopranos

All meetings taking place in bathrooms with the shower and taps running. Rise of the Valkyries blaring from a stereo outside the door.

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

You are very naive if you believe the last line of your post.

Fact of the matter is that this whole fiasco has led to very little happening. All that has happened is that a few guys have fallen on their swords to protect the many.

Did you really think the culture would change in 3 or 4 days? There's your naive, right there.

Some people said it was a non story from the off. Then the England manager lost his job. That's something happening. Some would think it pretty big.

Then other mangers were implicated, stories about Warnock resurfaced, Hasselbaink, assistants at Barnsley and Southampton. I think it may lead to change, not because of the morality, but because of more Puncheons and Ravel Morrisons going to the media and the media seeing the interest in it.

Lord TSC

In a revelation that will shock no one, Harry Redknap is tonight's named manager.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/30/exclusive-harry-redknapp-reveals-how-his-players-illicitly-gambl/

Nothing criminal. He knew players were betting on their own matches (to win) and didn't report them to the FA.

ahlookit

Lord TSC wrote: »

In a revelation that will shock no one, Harry Redknap is tonight's named manager.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/30/exclusive-harry-redknapp-reveals-how-his-players-illicitly-gambl/

Nothing criminal. He knew players were betting on their own matches (to win) and didn't report them to the FA.

The big question is, was Harrys dog getting a cut?

Speaking of Harry, his players, and bookies, heard him tell this story about Paul Merson on a Graham Hunter podcast...

http://www.espnfc.com/blog/the-toe-poke/65/post/1850892/toe-poke-harry-redknapp-once-hid-players-30,000-pounds-in-trousers

Dempsey

The papers seem happy just to be catching people talking **** at dinner tables through entrapment. Wave 400k at most people and they will tell you what you want to hear to get that money off you.

I dont see much pressure on the FA and their poor governance of the industry. If Sam knows an actual workaround to 3rd party ownership, you can be sure that they all do.

thebaz

Lord TSC wrote: »

In a revelation that will shock no one, Harry Redknap is tonight's named manager.

shock horror - next they'll roll out El 'Tel - get a wire on Bertie - and Gary Linekar with more high horse tut tuting - every industry has its old rogues

Underground

That video a few years back with Steve Kean calling Allardyce a fcucking crook seems a bit more apt now.

BMMachine

I actually love the England national team. bloody Harchester United International

eagle eye

Underground wrote: »

That video a few years back with Steve Kean calling Allardyce a fcucking crook seems a bit more apt now.

Steve Kean was a twit. If Allardyce was rubbing the bung money in my face I'd still hire him to manage my football club before Steve Kean. I'd take any of the 'crooks' over Kean.

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote: »

Did you really think the culture would change in 3 or 4 days? There's your naive, right there.

Some people said it was a non story from the off. Then the England manager lost his job. That's something happening. Some would think it pretty big.

Then other mangers were implicated, stories about Warnock resurfaced, Hasselbaink, assistants at Barnsley and Southampton. I think it may lead to change, not because of the morality, but because of more Puncheons and Ravel Morrisons going to the media and the media seeing the interest in it.

What has happened is the England manager got drunk, said some stupid things and because the FA want to look whiter than white they fired him.

The other stuff that has happened is only trivial. They'll all be back in jobs inside the next six months and we move along.

The FA have allocated £200,000 to their corruption investigation department. I think that tells you exactly how much they care. They spend a couple of million every year investigating PEDs but only 200k on corruption. There isn't a serious PEDs issue in the game and they spend way more investigating it.

There will always be a Ravel Morrison and people like that in the game. All that happens there is they made a mistake and thought the player wouldn't care or was too stupid to realise what was going on.

This is not going to change things at all apart from maybe making those involved in dodgy dealings a bit more careful.

redzerdrog

I'd be shocked if there wasn't a serious PED issue in the game

Billy86

eagle eye wrote: »

Steve Kean was a twit. If Allardyce was rubbing the bung money in my face I'd still hire him to manage my football club before Steve Kean. I'd take any of the 'crooks' over Kean.

Are you related to Sam?