[Archived] Big Sam

[blueboy3333]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/sep/28/sam-allardyce-sting-agent-mark-curtis-controversy

Interesting article on Sam's agent and fellow candid camera star. Nothing to see here though cos he's not been charged by the police

[JHRover]

QPR might see this as a good opportunity to get rid of Hasselbaink without the need for compensation after their recent form....

[Stuart]

Don't be obtuse Stuart, he was planning to advise people how to get around 3rd party ownership which is illegal in the UK and within the UEFA area

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

[Dunnfc]

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

This!

[yoda]

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

Well I bet the FA took legal advice before potting him

[47er]

No crime that we know of. However he will forever be tainted.

But I never brought up the criminal angle I thought he was rightly dispensed with based on the meeting revelations alone. Having my suspicions about has no bearing on the events. He did wrong and paid the price. Reputation in tatters

Time to retire like he kept threatening when he was here?

He's said he's going back to club management. I don't see anyone in UK would take him.

[ABBEY]

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

Why haven't venkys

[blueboy3333]

,

[Rover_Shaun]

Entrapment? Don't be gullible.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/no-sam-allardyce-entrapment-hasnt-8935050

[ABBEY]

By venkys I mean every parasite connected with them

[47er]

No just in UK law you must be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

That's only the case in criminal law, it's not true of civil law where the burden of proof is "on the balance of probabilities".It is not as strict a test.

Rovers fans investigating Venkys really need to know this if they don't already.If they make allegations against Venkys and Venkys sue, this is the burden of proof which applies. Fans and media would have to show that, on the balance of probabilities, what they published was more likely to be true than untrue. They do not have to prove it "beyond reasonable doubt."

That should ease the worries when enough dots are linked up.

[RevidgeBlue]

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

Not sure whether you're playing devil's advocate for the sake of it Stuart but you appear to be confusing criminal activity with extremely inappropriate behaviour which makes your position in your place of employment untenable. No-one has suggested Sam be prosecuted at this stage.

There seem to be further suggestions on the radio tonight that Sam was involved with a Property company which had Joe Hart and Wayne Rooney as investors which if true is again not illegal but extremely unwise as it could lead to all sorts of accusations of favouritism.

[Stuart]

Well I bet the FA took legal advice before potting him

They will simply have pressured Allardyce into going. Reputation, disrepute, England manager 'image'. Oh and almost certainly compensation.

The fact it was 'mutual agreement' and not a sacking tells me the grounds are very flimsy indeed - for exactly the reason you suggest.

Not sure whether you're playing devil's advocate for the sake of it Stuart but you appear to be confusing criminal activity with extremely inappropriate behaviour which makes your position in your place of employment untenable. No-one has suggested Sam be prosecuted at this stage.

There seem to be further suggestions on the radio tonight that Sam was involved with a Property company which had Joe Hart and Wayne Rooney as investors which if true is again not illegal but extremely unwise as it could lead to all sorts of accusations of favouritism.

Read the post that mine was in response to and try again.

[Batman.]

So why hasn't he been prosecuted? Be careful to use 'allegedly' in your posts where you can't substantiate.

Allardyce's lawyers would argue otherwise. Saying "Yes, the rules can be got around" is not the same thing as planning to do so.

I think Allardyce was sacked more for the parts where he was sat sipping a pint whilst slagging off his new employers. Had it just have been the third party ownership issue, I think he would have just about clung on.

[davulsukur]

QPR might see this as a good opportunity to get rid of Hasselbaink without the need for compensation after their recent form....

Let's hope Coyle is next in the Telegraphs crosshairs

[den]

They will simply have pressured Allardyce into going. Reputation, disrepute, England manager 'image'. Oh and almost certainly compensation.

The fact it was 'mutual agreement' and not a sacking tells me the grounds are very flimsy indeed - for exactly the reason you suggest.

Yes, I think you're right Stuart.

I think the FA's position would have run along the lines of "what you've done Sam makes your position as England manager untenable. Although you've done nothing illegal, what you have done makes it impossible for you to lead the England team. It's best for us and for you if you leave. We can't sack you, so we're prepared to make a payment in return for an NDA, which will forbid either party to go to court".

Or something very close to that.

I reckon Sam's taken that as his only real option. I also reckon that Williams/Finn and others left rovers under the same conditions.

[MCMC1875]

Gross misconduct nullifies contracts. No need to pay him anything.

I'm not his best mate, nor related to him, nor on the gravy train. No bother to me he has been potted. No fool like an old fool.

Perfect scenario is he comes back here.

Paid to keep quiet - non-disclosure agreement (NDA).

I'd appreciate it if yourself knew the facts or where competent, maybe even found themselves involved in such a case. I've pointed out both from a criminal perspective i.e zero evidence and from what would be deemed standard employment law doubts over his sacking.

For those interested in disambiguation: http://www.professionalsecurity.co.uk/news/interviews/employment-and-criminal-law/

Without getting to involved Mark you again fail to challenge any point made with substance. So perhaps you could extend on your intial post so i know what your actually challenging.

You are confusing criminal law and employment law.

An employee can be summarily dismissed for gross misconduct for certain breaches of their contract of employment, without any breach of employment law or criminal law.

[blueboy3333]

3rd party ownership has been likened to slavery, which in effect it is, albeit a very well remunerated slavery (for some). The people who Sam met wanted a piece of that slavery pie. Allardyce was potentially offering to advise the potential slave-masters on how to get around the strict anti-3rd party rules, rules imposed by BS's employers. He even suggested the countries were it was easiest to do. He said the rules were 'ludicrous' anyway. Payment was then discusssed and a fee agreed, in exchange for Sam flying out to Singapore 4 times a year. I'd imagine the 'businessman' weren't paying all that money for Sam to highlight the problems inherent in the gegenpress.

All this was done by the England manager. You couldn't make it up, and you don't need to, it's all there on film. He hasn't broken any laws, but then people get sacked for gross misconduct who don't break laws. The fact he hasn't been charged with anything is completely irrelevant. If he's been paid off it's to keep quiet, not because he's been wronged! If they sacked him a messy court case could ensue. The FA don't want this dragging out. They want it to go away as quickly as possible before anything else comes out, and because it just highlights how ineffectual they are as a governing body.

[Leonard Venkhater]

Yes, I think you're right Stuart.

I think the FA's position would have run along the lines of "what you've done Sam makes your position as England manager untenable. Although you've done nothing illegal, what you have done makes it impossible for you to lead the England team. It's best for us and for you if you leave. We can't sack you, so we're prepared to make a payment in return for an NDA, which will forbid either party to go to court".

Or something very close to that.

I reckon Sam's taken that as his only real option. I also reckon that Williams/Finn and others left rovers under the same conditions.

Absolutely.My heart sank at Sam's NDA comments. Just more secrecy etc The powers that be are still only invested in "reputation" and managing the information away from public view. These are the same authorities that studiously avoid lifting the lid at BRFC

[donnermeat]

Won't Venky's love him now they know he's dodgy?

[ABBEY]

They must have that when they fired him

[Amo]

Puts a slightly different edge on Sam & JA not seeing eye-to-eye on player recruitment now.

[Steve Moss]

He was showing intent to aid and abbet to get around the rules of his employer, rules that forbid 3rd party ownership,

Allegedly "getting around the rules" means he's actually read them and knows the path to chart to get to a desired result. That's hardly cheating, if he's working within the rules.

So alleged bungs & finding ways round rules isn't cheating?

There is a fair distance between "alleged cheating" and cheating. I can make a lot of allegations against you, doesn't mean any of it is true.

And exactly how does "alleged bungs" improve his team on the field? If they don't, then he's hardly cheated to improve his win-loss ratio. Which means his win-loss record is honest, even if the rest of it allegedly isn't.

[Jock]

Buckingham Palace official jailed this week for 5 years for taking bungs and those that offered them also jailed.

But still the Police do nothing about ' the beautiful game'.

[Rover_Shaun]

Big Sam quickly packed for a holiday in the Caribbean..........