Big Sam 'worried' over BBC Panorama Probe

Sam worry over BBC probe Irish Indo

BOLTON manager Sam Allardyce has admitted his family are "concerned" about possible allegations in the BBC's Panorama investigation into football to be screened tomorrow.

Allardyce and his agent son Craig are understood to have been among those investigated by the programme.

The Bolton boss said: "We are concerned but at the moment, because I am linked with it, from a legal point of view, I cannot say any more than that.

"I will take a view after the programme has come out because I do not know what is in it."

The full allegations to be made in the programme, to be shown on BBC1 at 9pm tomorrow, are still unknown - indeed BBC lawyers are still poring over the footage.

What is definite is that Luton manager Mike Newell will name the agents he claims offered him a bung.

The Panorama investigation, called 'Undercover: Football's Dirty Secrets', is also set to make damaging allegations about at least one Premiership manager.

The programme will also show football agent Charles Collymore being secretly filmed telling investigators that "six to eight managers" who would be "definitely up for a bung" and he goes on to name managers and clubs - though it is not definite as to whether Panorama will publicise those names.

Portsmouth boss Harry Redknapp has already insisted he has nothing to fear from the programme, for which he was secretly filmed as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joeSoap

[B]
The programme will also show football agent Charles Collymore being secretly filmed telling investigators that "six to eight managers" who would be "definitely up for a bung" and he goes on to name managers and clubs - though it is not definite as to whether Panorama will publicise those names.

---

I don't think it will rock anyone's world if it does show that bit. It sounds like it is his opinion and he is hardly likely to have any evidence of such. Still, might watch it.

A proper stitch-up job on Fat Sam. Good to see one of football's more odious characters get his comeuppance. He should do the decent thing and resign.

:ball: PP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsBohsBohs

I hope you're never on a jury if you can judge someone with no evidence.

---

I saw enough in that programme to convince me and I know enough about libel laws in the UK to know that the BBC would never have gone ahead in naming the fat **** without incontrovertible evidence. Add to the fact that Allardyce jnr suddenly returned his agent's licence to FIFA at the turn of this year. In the face of all that are you seriously defending Allardyce snr from the allegations? :confused:

:ball: PP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsBohsBohs

Funny thing they didn't include any evidence against him in the 60 minutes broadcast then :rolleyes:

---

Then why splash his name all over it in such an overt fashion? Sorry, I don't buy that, because he wasn't filmed stuffing fifty pound notes into his pocket, he's not guilty. I imagine the football authorities might well take a dim view too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohsBohsBohs

A lot of people like you will be easily taken in by what was tabloid journalism at its worst.

---

Could you be any more patronising in your tone? :rolleyes: Like I said earlier, the BBC clearly would never have gone to broadcast without proper backing. In case it needs spelling out for you, the UK is home to among the world's toughest libel laws and such identification, whether directly (as in this case) or by implication would soon have m'learned friends reaching for their pens. There simply is no way that he would have been named were there no evidence to substantiate the claim. I guess we'll see for sure in the days and weeks to come.

:ball: PP

I think it looks fairly bad for Sam.

I think Chelsea can expect to need to pick up three more points than they'd planned on and I think Liverpool are heading for the same yellow card Chelsea are currently on for 'Tapping up' ...maybe Newcastle too if they (Panorama) have more than yer man just claiming he'd the Middlesboro kids parents 'round his house to meet Newcastle United people.

I have to say that some of the conclusions drawn in that programme were a bit tenuous. For example, the reporter phoned Allardyce's son asking if Big Sam knew about all the dealings he had ever done at Bolton and he said "yes". Then they proved he had been involved with dodgy dealings and shot straight to the conclusion that Allardyce was, because of his son's comments, aware of these dealings. As a maths graduate, I see a massive hole in that logic. I'm not defending Sam but there was an element of shoddy journalism in that program

Certainly no smoking run for Harry & just a little bit for Big Sam.

The BBC obviously had to be careful what they broadcast & was interesting that i think they had people say that a lot of Premiership managers were corrupt. Clearly the opinion of one person was not enough to broadcast without proof.

I think the programme suggested enough to say that more people corrupt than not in football. I don't expect the FA to do much eventhough it deserves a criminal investigation for fraud or at the very least tax fraud.

No doubt that it raises suspicions that only idiots didn't have. But any conclusive proof? Nope

I reckon there was footage which wasn't shown for legality purposes and will be sent on to the FA?! :confused: ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

I think it looks fairly bad for Sam.

I think Chelsea can expect to need to pick up three more points than they'd planned on and I think Liverpool are heading for the same yellow card Chelsea are currently on for 'Tapping up'

---

According to that waste of an hour last night, neither club did anything wrong. An Agent touted a player behind Boro's back, Liverpool and Chelsea have nothing to fear.

It was interesting but I saw nothing in there that could be viewed as "damning".

Certainly showed Big Sam up to look like he is dodgy. I was expecting Harry Redknapp to be made to look bad but he did nothing wrong except say that he would take Andy Todd of Blackburn. Going by the letter of the law it's against the rules but surely the F.A. don't think that other players are not mentioned by managers and agents alike??

How else do transfers come about!

Rednapp actually came across as a friendly down to earth bloke although the phone call with Kevin Bond sounded well dodgey.I thought what the programme showed was the kind of Goldrush, grab it while its going culture
which exists in a barely regulated market, bit like the property markket here.
The problem is not just with illegal bungs but an industry which attracts hordes of chancers who take money of supporters and out of the game.Legal does not mean ethical and the whole thing needs changing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roadend

According to that waste of an hour last night, neither club did anything wrong. An Agent touted a player behind Boro's back, Liverpool and Chelsea have nothing to fear.

---

The dutch guy -an employee of Chelsea (academy manger?) who appears to have executive officer status -talked sums with an agent about a player he knew to be on Boro's books. it's against the rules.

Load of over-hyped sh!t really, I thought it was funny at the end when the reporter thought he was rumbled when the agent said somethin like "look at your button its gone all funny and red!" - pointing at the "hidden" camera.

Stupid cnut.

They only need worry if the Revenue decide to go after them for tax evasion. Otherwise the clubs will do nothing and who could blame them. Like him or not, Allardyce has done an excellent job at Bolton on limited resources.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by padzer

Load of over-hyped sh!t really, I thought it was funny at the end when the reporter thought he was rumbled when the agent said somethin like "look at your button its gone all funny and red!" - pointing at the "hidden" camera.

Stupid cnut.

---

Indeed what clown :rolleyes: :D

I heard they had to take out some of the 'evidence' as it was wanted by the FA committee investigating bung charges, so I assume some of this has to do with Big Sam, who was the only one really named last night. As for the others:

We saw Harry Redknapp agree to a free holiday so he can talk to an agent about a few players (big deal)

Chelsea may be hit with a fine for offering cash for the player upfront alright, but thats all

Liverpool have nothing to fear, all they did was say that when the player turns pro they would be interested in talking to him and possibly signing him.

So really Big Sam is the only one that they have anything on, even though it isn't proof, having 3 agents, including your son, naming you as someone who has and will take bungs will rattle the Bolton managers cages. Maybe we could sound him out about a return to Limerick FC?? :D

Oh and did anyone else audible groan when their deal to get a manager accepting money from them fell apart at the last minute? Kind of lost interest after that to be honest

Got to agree with the majority on here, over-hyped waste of an hour. No evidence other than a few small fry agents blowing their own trumpets about who they know in the game, possibly to impress Knut ( there's an anagram in the waiting) to get in with the imaginary big fish. No bank account details, no cash changing hands no anything worth commenting on. The suspicions and hear say are still there, but without proof that’s what they remain. I would be amazed if Sam A resigned.
Didn't Fergie have a similar arrangement with his son at Man U ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jjppc

Got to agree with the majority on here, over-hyped waste of an hour. ?

---

Exactly. It was rubbish.

I was hoping that they were going to nail fathead but it was all tittle tattle nonsense really, well most of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

I think it looks fairly bad for Sam.

I think Chelsea can expect to need to pick up three more points than they'd planned on and I think Liverpool are heading for the same yellow card Chelsea are currently on for 'Tapping up' ...

---

That's ridiculous! There's no comparison between the two incidents. Chelsea offered hard figures and even talked about the young lads role in the reserve team. Arnesen clearly knew alot about the player and had everything well thought through. It was baltent tapping up, and he's done it to more than a few young Leeds Utd players recently. The book should be thrown at him.

Liverpool on the other hand did nothing wrong. The agent went to them touting his player saying he was unhappy at 'Boro. All Liverpool said was they'd be interested in signing him, but only as a pro when he turns 17. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, and very much by the book. No money was discussed and the Liverpool people showed no real knowledge of the player and no great desire to sign him. The piece on Liverpool was a load of bo||ocks and was more to do with the agent touting the player rather than anything Liverpool had done. The piece on Harry Redknapp was also a load of crap. Again Redknapp did nothing wrong except say he'd be interested in signing Andy Todd, again after he was OFFERED the player! This program was total sh!t and a waste of time... :rolleyes:

Sam Allardyce is clearly corrupt. Harry Redknapp was the guy the agents were talking about when his name kept getting blipped/***** out, so again he's probably corrupt. But the journalistic approach and complete lack of evidence was laughable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

Oh and did anyone else audible groan when their deal to get a manager accepting money from them fell apart at the last minute? Kind of lost interest after that to be honest

---

Exactly, it was too much of a coincidence for me. Disaster of an investigation and a brilliant opportunity to unmask corruption lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionel Ritchie

The dutch guy -an employee of Chelsea (academy manger?) who appears to have executive officer status -talked sums with an agent about a player he knew to be on Boro's books. it's against the rules.

---

Was it Arnesen on the tv footage? If so he screwed & Chelsea should be docked 3 points. No surprise really as Chelsea tapped him up while at Spurs who then went on to basically blackmail Chelsea for some decent cash.

I wonder will RTE copy the BBC? Sure don't the copy everything else. We have enough advisiors & heres the Big Man & the Crafty man :D

I would be goin ballistic if i was harry, they really did the dirt on him without nothing. if i was harry id be gettin someone to pay smartarse knut and that bbc hack a visit some late evening in the winter. Harry and venables i personally wouldnt trust but you cant hang guys out to dry with nothing. and that film had shag all

im delighted, i cant stand that pig Sam A
and harry redknapp

i didnt see the programme but listened to the debates etc on Five Live

a lot of the evidence was kept off the show for legal reasons,

and really if there is any suing to be done, i doubt the BBc would be going to court, wouldnt it be the agents?

bung culture should not be accepted at all

wonder is alex furguson clean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennocelt

wonder is alex furguson clean?

---

I think we all know the answer to that one. Ever wonder why United paid over the odds for Rio, Ronaldo, Carrick etc. Either they're the biggest mugs in the game or there is something crooked going on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

I think we all know the answer to that one. Ever wonder why United paid over the odds for Rio, Ronaldo, Carrick etc. Either they're the biggest mugs in the game or there is something crooked going on

---

That's a pretty big generalisation as English clubs will always have to pay top dollar to take another English clubs best talent but I remember reading that a few months before they actually signed Ronaldo, they had been offered him for approx £4-£5 million less than the £12.75 that they paid.

Always thought that was strange...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drinkfeckarse

That's a pretty big generalisation as English clubs will always have to pay top dollar to take another English clubs best talent but I remember reading that a few months before they actually signed Ronaldo, they had been offered him for approx £4-£5 million less than the £12.75 that they paid.

Always thought that was strange...

---

Heard the same, apparantly a month before United took him for £12.75 Liverpool, Inter and Juventus were amongst others offered him for around the £7 million mark. With Carrick I reckon they could easily have gotten him for at less than they did if they really wanted to. And remember that Leeds were in financial difficulty when they took Rio for £28 million(wasnt it?), whilst Newcastle got equally rated Johnaton Woodgate for £9 million, which sounds more like what I would have been offering for Rio