Hack Watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Good joke: FA dismiss Big Sam for undermining the integrity of the FA. What integrity is that?

Lesser reported bit: Sam apparently said that if he was to be paid 400 grand, he would have to clear it with the FA first. Puts a different angle on it doesn't it? The reporting of the story has surely been to imply that he was going to get 400 grand for showing people how to get round the FA rules. Just what I heard mentioned occasionally under all the sensationalism.

Don't have great sympathy for him and wasn't inspired by his first team selection, but do think the FA really don't have a clue here. Also the Telegraph now saying that there's 8 to 10 (how many is it?) premier managers (or ex-managers - quite a different thing!) who have taken bungs. Either put up or shut up. The more they string this out the more they should be vilified for what this is - all about them and newspaper sales and not about what they have "discovered" (well actually created). They had this story two months ago, why wait until now?

Funny how the biggest corruption stories (the fake Sheikh and Erikson and now this one) have been stories that the papers created. No sign of actual journalism where they have investigated and revealed actual corruption. We all know there are real stories out there, well lets hear them following some proper investigation, not just this lazy sting / entrapment stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redwhiteandermblue
Isn't there some 'agent provocateur' law that make all of this inadmissable in a court of law. If not there should be.

I think BS should have stood his ground and said 'if you want to get rid of me them pay out on my contract and only thenI will resign'. Perhaps that is what they did.
 
vimhawk said:
Funny how the biggest corruption stories (the fake Sheikh and Eriksson and now this one) have been stories that the papers created. No sign of actual journalism where they have investigated and revealed actual corruption. We all know there are real stories out there, well lets hear them following some proper investigation, not just this lazy sting / entrapment stuff.
Click to expand...

Yet "honeypot" journalism probably has a good ROI in terms of targets.
Nothing seems to be easier prey than UK MPs, english football managers etc.
 
Even ignoring the financial irregularity aspect of what Allardyce was willing to share with random new business contacts, I think there is justification in this Telegraph expose as it identifies a number of personal weaknesses that make him unsuitable to be in such a position.
No-one forced him into that meeting and no-one forced him to ridicule his predecessor or the FA. He had been subject to investigation for similar activity before, yet was either naive or stupid enough to fall for the most obvious of traps ON FIRST MEETING!!
At worst he's corrupt and at best an idiot - either way, not someone who should be in charge of the national team IMHO.

For all his failings - and Hodgson clearly had several - honesty and integrity were not amongst them. Hopefully there is still someone left out there who can combine these traits with technical skills.
 
"Thanks for that Brian" said:
"It's been a hugely disappointing couple of days for English football. It's very, very sad what's happened to Sam and it could happen to any of us. Sam innocently has paid the price. Privacy can only be found within the four walls of our own home." Steve McClaren

I have no words.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of words I can think of actually - but I'm bloody sure 'innocent' isn't one of them!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee
I wonder if the timing of Nigel Pearson's suspension is a coincidence?
He's being investigated by Derby, apparently. What's that about?
 
One of the other managers taken in by The Telegraph appears to be Fill Me Void Piggybank. He only wanted £50K+ a time to be a 'complete winker'....sorry, 'keynote speaker ' in Singapore for the fictitious third party owners. He was to be an ambassador for the investors and saw no problem or potential conflict in having QPR buy players upon his recommendation from an organisation paying him such large sums.

Stupid beyond words? Greedy beyond belief? Unemployed beyond tomorrow?
 
Last edited:
I'm underwhelmed by these new allegations. How long will they string out naming the "big names" of these "8 to 10" current or ex premiership managers?

1. How come they don't know how many it is.
2. How long do they get to effectively slander (defamation? never remember the difference) all the innocent mangers by not naming the alleged guilty?
3. How come you never get to hear about "real" corruption, you know, the kind a proper investigation might uncover. We only hear about corruption that the papers have effectively invented?

No sympathy for the guilty, but the longer they delay the "evidence" the more it becomes about the Telegraph and less about public interest.
 
vimhawk said:
I'm underwhelmed by these new allegations. How long will they string out naming the "big names" of these "8 to 10" current or ex premiership managers?

1. How come they don't know how many it is.
2. How long do they get to effectively slander (defamation? never remember the difference) all the innocent mangers by not naming the alleged guilty?
3. How come you never get to hear about "real" corruption, you know, the kind a proper investigation might uncover. We only hear about corruption that the papers have effectively invented?

No sympathy for the guilty, but the longer they delay the "evidence" the more it becomes about the Telegraph and less about public interest.
Click to expand...

I agree. This is not investigative journalism but tricking the stupid and greedy. If they hadn't had this offered to them, is there any evidence that they had or would have done anything wrong? No, there isn't. Once it's done you can't ignore it but does anyone believe that the result would be any different if a similar 'opportunity' was offered to management in any other industry?

It shows no newsworthy story and has no particular application to football. The only reason it's about football is because The Telegraph will sell more copy. So, who's being greedy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back