Beth, you could be correct. This could turn out to be a very long saga similiar to the "Faurlin" and "John Terry-Ferdinand" situations, and put the club in a very difficult situation. Perhaps I am not yet fully up to speed and fully briefied, however I do see a major disconnect between the respective statements. The Telegraph implies "player ownership" issues and JFH's stance is that he was discussing retainers for "speaking" at conferecnes, etc. I am sure that it will clarrify in the near future.
As Carrai says, he's done nothing wrong. Morally, he's being a greedy bugger but that's not a hanging offence. Far easier to lose at Fulham and then sack him for boring us witless...
The evidence seems pretty damning to me. Seems he was prepared to accept £55k to act in a position which would have given rise to a serious conflict of interest. Furthermore, JFH's excuse that he was to be paid the £55k for a speech is hardly credible. The man can barely string a cogent sentence together in the few excerpts where I have seen him interviewed. You can certainly hire a very good and eloquent sports celebrity speaker for a lot less than £55k too. That JFH could not go through with the deal is irrelevant, the intention was clearly there. Surely, he has to go.
Newspapers making their own stories is a sad reflection of the times Such is the modern desire for drama I suggest we all step away from it and laugh. I get minimal exposure to it in France and can report that after a year here it cleans the soul
JFH will fight the issue and it puts the club in a real dilemma. After a perusal over morning coffee, I believe the correct thing to do in this situation is for JFH himself to propose that he goes on "gardening leave" until the issue is fully resolved in the courts. This would allow the Club to support him until there is a legal verdict, plus it would take the sting out of the daily tension in the Club with the media focus, etc. Not to mention, it would give JFH time to fully dedicate concentration on his defence of his name and reputation. At the end of the day, the Club need to focus on the football team. It would be both "honourable" solution and would create if not a "win-win" solution, at least a "not lose-not lose" solution.
Who would manage the team during this gardening leave period? Who would fund the costs of bringing in a new temporary/locum manager? A protracted period of gardening leave and the on-going uncertainty that would bring is the very last thing we need.
Don't know which BBC you were watching, but they've certainly mentioned him on breakfast. I see little difference between what Sam did and what JFH is accused of. Presumably those who think he has done nothing wrong also believe that Sam shouldn't have been sacked? I liken this situation to the MPs taking expenses..... Everyone does it so it must be ok and becomes the norm.
There's a big difference in their reactions though. Alardyce wasnt really sacked, he offered his resignation and the FA agreed and accepted it . So far Jimmy says he has done nothing wrong.
Totally this. Are there any on here who REALLY believe Jimmy was asking for that kind of money for a speech ? Has Jimmy got previous 'speeches' to his name and is he well known for being a 'key-note' speaker ? English football is obviously rotton to the core and if people can't now see that then it's a sad place we're at. If you are that gullible please could you PM me your bank account details so I can deposit a huge sum that was left to me by an ex-African dictator that I used to know.
Now read the Telegraph and looked at the clips......On everything I have to hand.....he has done nothing wrong. Anyone (who is greedy) would push up their fee to lecture...( I have been asked by a mildly famous Oxford scientist for £2500 to talk at our departmental day...no travelling and food and accomodation included). The comment about the player..."we can get you a player"..."get me a good one"..."we need a centre forward"...were off the cuff remarks, and really do not sound like serious intent...and on the clip released...The Telegraph bring up the topic and incit him to respond...I would suggest that is "entrapment". Unless there is more...the club will defend him and as 'Ski says "This could turn out to be a very long saga similiar to the "Faurlin" and "John Terry-Ferdinand" situations, and put the club in a very difficult situation."
Yes Staines......I can believe that...see my comment re the Oxford Scientist...that sort of money is freely available for that sort of thing. The guy who sits behind me was paid £10,000 to give an hour talk in China (all other expenses paid too)
Sam told them "he knew how to get round the rules"and he he slagged off Hodgson, Neville and the Royal family (the latter is a capital offence!!) Jimmy when asked if he wanted a player said "get me a good one"
Does not look good JFH picture and name is on the front page of Telegraph. Looks very dodgy. Can't believe club sponsors will be happy.
""""Hasselbaink 'devastated' by allegations and insists he his innocent By SSN HQ Last Updated: 29/09/16 8:22am please log in to view this image QPR manager Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink insists he has done nothing wrong Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink is devastated by the latest footage released by the Daily Telegraph and insists he is totally innocent of any wrongdoing, according to Sky sources. Hasselbaink is alleged to have negotiated a £55,000 fee to fly to the Far East and speak to investors in a fictitious firm, which the newspaper says made clear it was interested in getting involved in player transfers. QPR issued a statement in response promising "a thorough internal investigation" and said: "We have every confidence in our manager and the robust systems and processes the club has in place." Sky Sports News HQ understands the QPR boss was close to tears on Wednesday evening as he believes everything he has worked for in the game has been destroyed by footage he says has been edited to make him look bad. please log in to view this image Hasselbaink under investigation Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink, Tommy Wright allegations in latest Telegraph report Hasselbaink insists he was only discussing being paid to speak in the Far East on a day off from QPR - something that is sanctioned by a clause in his contract with the club - and that he has no control over transfers, which are handled by director of football Les Ferdinand and the QPR board. His lawyers are now examining what The Daily Telegraph has printed to determine if there are grounds for legal action and he has given all the text messages involved in setting up the meeting to QPR as he believes they prove his innocence. please log in to view this image The Telegraph has published video footage of Hasselbaink, Tommy Wright and Massimo Cellino as part of its latest report into alleged corruption in football. All three deny any wrong-doing It is understood Hasselbaink was contacted by more than 50 agents during the summer, with none of them offering him a bribe or bung. """"""
I agree, he was offered a sum and then was purely haggling it up. The link to bringing in players had nothing of the 'if you do this we will do that' they were saying we have some players we want to talk to you about (remember the guy is an agent) so for Jimmy to say yes get me a good striker is working the agent. Ok add the 2 things together and can link conflict but not taking a bung. As for comparison to Allardyce -difference is he was caught specifically explaining how to get round rules.
I'm disappointed at how easily some of you are swayed by such a shoddy piece of work. The only purpose behind it is to make money. If the paper really wanted to change corrupt practises that make a difference to you and me they wouldn't be picking on football, would they? They'd be picking on themselves. Support JFH and the club until there's proof connecting the things that are currently just "inferred by association" and clever editing. He's entitled to accept an offer of a fee for some public speaking. He's entitled to ask an agent he's never met if he represents players he's never heard of before that might be good for the club. The Allardyce situation is different. He got caught saying things in private that he shouldn't be saying at all as the England manager - poor judgement.
Beth, a capital offence is one punishable by the death penalty - which was abolished over 50 years ago - it would only have applied for high treason against the crown i.e. attempt to kill a monarch etc. Pretty sure calling them names e.g. "Balding, adulterous, jug-eared, deathwatch cockwomble" is fine!
