If the greedy morons in the game settled themselves with what they earn instead of lining their own pockets then newspapers wouldn't have these stories.

These erseholes are cheating their employers and the fans and yet all we hear are other managers fighting their corner.

Http://www.leedsunited.com/news/article/1qfi9kjm4fbzx12htsv575s2ta

http://www.leedsunited.com/news/article/1qfi9kjm4fbzx12htsv575s2ta

Where there is evidence of corruption then I'm all for it being exposed and then being severely dealt with within the regulatory framework.

There is a concern where stories are being created to trap "perpetrators" and then snippets of the story being released.

Sorry I don't go with that at all.

Greed lured them into this so called trap.

It was mainly for finding a way around 3rd party ownership ffs. A legal argument if you will.

Why would it take £400k to find that out? In cash ffs?

A decent sports lawyer might have charged them £20-30k.

Pure unadulterated greed encouraged him to go to that meeting. Be honest and content with £3m a year and your dream job and he had nothing to worry about.

Accepting stuff like that will eventually ruin your game.

Don't disagree but let's take a more simplistic approach.

You're asked in a meeting if you would drive at 75mph on a motorway and film it on your mobile phone. The journalist pays you £500 to do it.

Outside of HMRC concerns, are you suggesting the police should arrest the driver based on that "evidence" when actually he's not yet committed a crime? Stupid example but the principals apply.

Hmmm. I suppose the argument being that Allardyce showed intent to defraud his employers and that in utiseof is a sackable offence under employment law.

The other is criminal law.

Burden of proof is entirely different.

Intent is a grey area.

I think Allardyce showed moral contempt towards his employers. I've not bothered to drill into the detail but as I see it there was an element of hyperthetical discussion and content where he said he'd need FA permission.

I'm not condoning it. I think Big Sam has been very stupid and probably, on the balance of the debate, had to go.

That about sums it up.

If I had any employee of mine holding clandestine meetings with someone willing to pay them stupid money to get round our company rules, they'd be gone; entrapment or not.

After all the criticism of FIFA, the FA have to be squeaky clean. Allardyce as manager should be well aware of that.

Haha you should work in Financial Services, if you don't already.

We're heavily regulated yet businesses are constantly looking for ways around the system and clandestine meetings where plotters are looking to start new companies or undermine existing ones are commonplace.

What can I say?

Not much!!

I might give the Telegraph a call

I'll make sure it gets through to me

The Execs must be waanking themselves into a Coma

Classic and probably true, just like Telegraph journos.