Jump to content
IGNORED

Sam Allardyce

North London Red

By North London Red
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

RaspberryRed

RaspberryRed

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, spudski said:

where has he given advise on how to do that? He said its possible and that people do it...he hasn't told them how its done.

Surely anyone in his position with 1oz of integrity would have stood up and left as soon as the 'Bungs' question came up?

Sams reaction....................Covers his whole face with a napkin shaking his head and muttering ''No No No No you didnt ask me that''

Greedy, Pathetic and downright corrupt and has previous just to make things worse

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Esmond Million's Bung

Esmond Million's Bung

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, spudski said:

If it say's in his FA contract that he's not allowed to do work for anyone else, then I'd agree...but does it? I very much doubt it. Who else in this world has an employer that bans you from doing other work? As long as what he does doesn't infringe with his FA Work and compromise it, he can do what he wants. Hence him saying he would have to put it past the FA as to whether it contravenes football law.

I agree, but he is ******* stupid in putting himself in that position in the first place, that is my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Esmond Million's Bung

Esmond Million's Bung

Posted
Posted

The story has a very tenuous BCFC link.

SCOTT McGARVEY RELEASES STATEMENT

The lawyer representing Scott McGarvey described the former Manchester United player as “shocked” by the turn of events and adamant that he had not engaged in any impropriety.

McGarvey is thought to have set up the meeting between Sam Allardyce and the Daily Telegraph's undercover reporters, but denies any complicity in the sting operation.

McGarvey's legal representative Graham Small said, in a statement: “Mr McGarvey has admitted being eager to impress what he believed to be prospective employers and, in doing so, had perhaps embellished certain comments made during the meetings in question.

“However, he vehemently denies making remarks which are being attributed to him. Some, including his apparently having done business with certain club managers, are simply not borne out by fact.

“Mr McGarvey had merely helped arrange meetings in good faith to further what he believed to be a legitimate business venture.

“He was so convinced by the job offer made to him that, far from profiting from these exchanges, he even incurred debts trying to support the development of the new project.

“As soon as a series of allegations were put to him, he responded immediately and in full and, furthermore, has made clear his willingness to help those leading the investigation announced by the Football Association establish the truth of what happened.

“Given that he is still involved in the football industry, he is rightly concerned about the possibility of his good name being impugned and he intends to vigorously defend his reputation.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Midlands Robin

Midlands Robin

Posted
Posted

What a stupid, stupid man. The biggest role of his life and he throws it away in a moment of madness.

I'm slightly uneasy about the methods used in these newspaper created stings but as they used to say in the TV program 'Hustle' it's impossible to cheat an honest man. 

While, regarding representing the business interests of this fictional company he repeatedly stated he would gave to run that by the FA, it was his comments about how to circumvent the third party ownership rules that must have done for him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TRL

TRL

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, RichardEdd said:

Eddie Howe is probably the best English candidate at the moment (for me anyway). But seriously lacking in overall experience. Southgate has been pretty much terrible wherever he's been.

 

Does it really  matter who is next? Our game is 20 years behind the top sides and the players are average. You could have the best manager in the world and it will make zero difference

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TRL

TRL

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Midlands Robin said:

What a stupid, stupid man. The biggest role of his life and he throws it away in a moment of madness.

I'm slightly uneasy about the methods used in these newspaper created stings but as they used to say in the TV program 'Hustle' it's impossible to cheat an honest man. 

While, regarding representing the business interests of this fictional company he repeatedly stated he would gave to run that by the FA, it was his comments about how to circumvent the third party ownership rules that must have done for him.

 

He did this month's before the England job became available didn't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Still not really sure what was so terrible.

So he slagged off a bloke who those who stitched up Allardyce wrote far, far worse of. And do we forget the press speak of Allardyce as fat Sam.

Managers speak ill of each other; look at some of the things Mourinho has said, some of the things Wenger said. Nothing too awful in admitting Roy was indecisive and lacked gravitas. Particularly when he's supposed to be having a private conversation. 

Suggested he might be interested in a role but he would need his employer to agree: nothing to see here. How can he ask the FA's permission without knowing the terms of the role? How can the FA decide whether to sanction it without knowing what he might be paid - surely that's a huge point to consider in terms of how much time of his it might take and whether it is so significant to be a real conflict. 

He said you can get around third party ownership in the context of having bought a player off two parties. Was Karen Brady or whoever was in situ at the time - I don't know who was but know she is now - not the brains behind that purchase then and how those rules were circumvented? 

Seems to me attempted entrapment by an odious press showing extremely odious practices. There's investigative journalism and then there is falsely offering someone £400k to try to tempt them to say the wrong thing. Absolutely detestable. 

I genuinely hope the LMA encourage all of their members to absolutely shun the telegraph and all of their reporters and the same reporters in whichever role they turn up in future. Don't have a strong opinion on Sam, but hate a complete stitch up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRed

RumRed

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, spudski said:

If it say's in his FA contract that he's not allowed to do work for anyone else, then I'd agree...but does it? I very much doubt it. Who else in this world has an employer that bans you from doing other work? As long as what he does doesn't infringe with his FA Work and compromise it, he can do what he wants. Hence him saying he would have to put it past the FA as to whether it contravenes football law.

Most people I should think, I certainly have done in my contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strictly Obi

Strictly Obi

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, 29AR said:

Still not really sure what was so terrible.

So he slagged off a bloke who those who stitched up Allardyce wrote far, far worse of. And do we forget the press speak of Allardyce as fat Sam.

Managers speak ill of each other; look at some of the things Mourinho has said, some of the things Wenger said. Nothing too awful in admitting Roy was indecisive and lacked gravitas. Particularly when he's supposed to be having a private conversation. 

Suggested he might be interested in a role but he would need his employer to agree: nothing to see here. How can he ask the FA's permission without knowing the terms of the role? How can the FA decide whether to sanction it without knowing what he might be paid - surely that's a huge point to consider in terms of how much time of his it might take and whether it is so significant to be a real conflict. 

He said you can get around third party ownership in the context of having bought a player off two parties. Was Karen Brady or whoever was in situ at the time - I don't know who was but know she is now - not the brains behind that purchase then and how those rules were circumvented? 

Seems to me attempted entrapment by an odious press showing extremely odious practices. There's investigative journalism and then there is falsely offering someone £400k to try to tempt them to say the wrong thing. Absolutely detestable. 

I genuinely hope the LMA encourage all of their members to absolutely shun the telegraph and all of their reporters and the same reporters in whichever role they turn up in future. Don't have a strong opinion on Sam, but hate a complete stitch up. 

I suppose you feels sorry for Sep Blatter as well?  I mean,  he didn't do anything wrong either really . Perhaps being greedy and dishonest should be a prerequisite for the top England job too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, john from high littleton said:

I suppose you feels sorry for Sep Blatter as well?  I mean,  he didn't do anything wrong either really . Perhaps being greedy and dishonest should be a prerequisite for the top England job too. 

Completely miss the point. Get them for what they have done, not for the carrot you have contrived. I doubt there's many a man who can't get put in to a fictitious situation and come out less than rosey. Lots of sanctimonious folk as always who claim their above purchase. However they've never had the carrot dangled. Sorry, I think everyone is fallable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Strictly Obi

Strictly Obi

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, 29AR said:

Completely miss the point. Get them for what they have done, not for the carrot you have contrived. I doubt there's many a man who can't get put in to a fictitious situation and come out less than rosey. Lots of sanctimonious folk as always who claim their above purchase. However they've never had the carrot dangled. Sorry, I think everyone is fallable.  

 

Sorry but yer wrong,  not everyone's dishonest.  Many people are sensible enough to follow they're moral compass.  Roy Hodgson would never have been caught out in this way. Alardyce  has been exposed for the person he is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, john from high littleton said:
38 minutes ago, 29AR said:

Completely miss the point. Get them for what they have done, not for the carrot you have contrived. I doubt there's many a man who can't get put in to a fictitious situation and come out less than rosey. Lots of sanctimonious folk as always who claim their above purchase. However they've never had the carrot dangled. Sorry, I think everyone is fallable.  

 

Sorry but yer wrong,  not everyone's dishonest.  Many people are sensible enough to follow they're moral compass.  Roy Hodgson would never have been caught out in this way. Alardyce  has been exposed for the person he is. 

Where's the moral compass pointing in finding it remotely acceptable that some bloke was sat in an office on Fleet St and thought 'I'll try and catch this bloke out; if he passes the test we will not release it, if he doesn't we might sell a few more papers [except we won't, because no-one buys papers]'?

That's a damn strange moral compass in my view. 

I may be wrong, and we can certainly agree to disagree, but I'm yet to meet a man who hasn't given in to temptation at some point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...