Stevens Inquiry

[superjohnmcginlay]

Dont know which forum to put this in. Theyre supposed to be coming up with some names this afternoon occording to some of the papers.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.j ... fro115.xml

I've got a feeling we're gonna be on that list.

[hisroyalgingerness]

It is understood that, along with the agents, at least one big-name manager could be charged..

fingers crossed eh

[superjohnmcginlay]

It is understood that, along with the agents, at least one big-name manager could be charged..

fingers crossed eh

Not sure how I'd feel if that happened. Only a few months back most of us were defending Big Sam over this malarky.

[hisroyalgingerness]

It is understood that, along with the agents, at least one big-name manager could be charged..

fingers crossed eh

Not sure how I'd feel if that happened. Only a few months back most of us were defending Big Sam over this malarky.

yes, and others were saying sensible things like "if Sam drags this football clubs name through the mud then can we back him"

[CrazyHorse]

It is understood that, along with the agents, at least one big-name manager could be charged..

fingers crossed eh

Not sure how I'd feel if that happened. Only a few months back most of us were defending Big Sam over this malarky.

Screw him! The dodgy get deserves everything he gets...

Seriously, I can't help but wonder if his sudden departure from us was something to do with the inquiry.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

My question is....

Lets say BS did a couple of dodgy deals that the club were unaware of. Should the club be penalised or just BS?

On 1 hand you could argue Bolton benefited by getting the player due to the dodgy deal and therefore we should be punished. on the other hand it could be the player was crap and wouldn't have been signed without a bung and therefore only BS benefited - BS only to be punished.

Fingers crossed we are clear, but most importantly any mud doesn't stick to the club and only to BS!

[chris]

My question is....

Lets say BS did a couple of dodgy deals that the club were unaware of. Should the club be penalised or just BS?

On 1 hand you could argue Bolton benefited by getting the player due to the dodgy deal and therefore we should be punished. on the other hand it could be the player was crap and wouldn't have been signed without a bung and therefore only BS benefited - BS only to be punished.

Fingers crossed we are clear, but most importantly any mud doesn't stick to the club and only to BS!

Unfortunately, I don't think the media would see it like that.
I do think we will be involved though - I just hope any punishment doesn't involve points.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Unfortunately, I don't think the media would see it like that.
I do think we will be involved though - I just hope any punishment doesn't involve points.

Given our popularity I can see an even bigger campaign against us than Wet Spam

[TANGODANCER]

Unfortunately, I don't think the media would see it like that.
I do think we will be involved though - I just hope any punishment doesn't involve points.

Given our popularity I can see an even bigger campaign against us than Wet Spam

Let's see Bolton or SA in print first before we start axe-weilding hey?

[Montreal Wanderer]

The potential shame is the one silver lining in Sam dumping us unceremoniously with two games left and joining the Toon (which seemed very odd to me at the time). I doubt BWFC would face heavy sanctions if we were unaware of Sam taking bungs and, should that be the conclusion, we no longer have to support him right or wrong. If Stevens handed in his report 'weeks ago' I assume Phil has been tipped off as to contents. Possibly he asked Sam to resign, but I'm not sure we will ever know the full story.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

If only our chairman was a powerbroker on the FA Council.

[superjohnmcginlay]

I dont trust the Mirror at all but:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... -19300180/

[communistworkethic]

I dont trust the Mirror at all but:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... -19300180/

No formal charges will be brought today, but the Premier League will announce a joint inquiry with the FA, whose compliance unit will head the next stage of the process.

hmm yeah, 2 and a bit years and they need another enquiry. Who says Lord Stevens' team haven't been effective?

[TANGODANCER]

I dont trust the Mirror at all but:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/ ... -19300180/

No formal charges will be brought today, but the Premier League will announce a joint inquiry with the FA, whose compliance unit will head the next stage of the process.

hmm yeah, 2 and a bit years and they need another enquiry. Who says Lord Stevens' team haven't been effective?

And probably charged a bloody fortune for being so.

[blurred]

Breaking on SSN now...

Apparently Cech and Drogba's transfers were iffy.

Craig Allardyce implicated.

Pompey, Boro, Chelsea and Newcastle under Souness all have iffy transfers that need looking into.

[TANGODANCER]

Apparently Cech and Drogba's transfers were iffy.

Craig Allardyce implicated.

Pompey, Boro, Chelsea and Newcastle under Souness all have iffy transfers that need looking into.

Source?

[blurred]

Sky Sports News - my mate's telling me about it on MSN (also getting posted on RAWK).

Apparently the Drogba and Cech ones are more to do with Pini Zahavi not being cooperative with Lord Stevens.

[Marshall]

Apparently 4 transfers of ours are dodgy, Blessing Kaku, Al-Habsi, Ben Haim...and a name I honestly have heard....

[blurred]

Seventeen transfers and five clubs have been named in Lord Stevens' findings from his inquiry into alleged illegal payments by Premier League clubs.
Chelsea, Newcastle, Bolton, Portsmouth and Middlesbrough were all named as having breached transfer regulations.

The clubs face a further investigation from the Football Association but it is understood Newcastle and Bolton are viewed as the most serious miscreants.

Stevens has also expressed concern about 15 agents and two managers.

One is Newcastle boss Sam Allardyce, and a conflict of interest with his former agent son Craig and Bolton Wanderers.

The other is Graeme Souness, with with Stevens reporting "inconsistencies in evidence" provided by the former Newcastle manager and Kenneth Shepherd, son of Magpies chairman Freddy Shepherd.

Of the 17 transfers, four relate to Newcastle signings (Emre Belozoglu, Jean Alain Boumsong, Amady Faye, Albert Luque), four to Bolton (Ali Al-Habsi, Tal Ben Haim, Blessing Kaku, Julio Correia), three to Chelsea (Didier Drogba, Petr Cech, Michael Essien), three to Portsmouth (Collins Mbesuma, Benjani Mwaruwari, Aliou Cisse) and two to Middlesbrough (Aiyegbeni Yakubu and Fabio Rochemback) while one transfer has not been disclosed.

Lord Stevens said in a statement: "Many lessons have been learned and strict adherence to and enforcement of the recommendations should ensure that the game and the transfer market can proceed in an untainted and transparent manner."

The Premier League will now send the findings to the FA and Fifa.

An FA spokesman said: "Following the final report of the Premier League's Quest Inquiry, the FA will give full consideration to its contents and the documentation that is due to be passed on by the Premier League and Quest.

"The FA has provided full co-operation and support to the Premier League and Quest and will now go through their information as part of our governance and regulation process. This will determine what action is required."

[superjohnmcginlay]

Oh dear.