Bolton Named in Stevens report

There ARE other teams(we'd have no-one to play otherwise) and here's where all-comers can discuss the wider world of football......

Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em

jetsetwilly
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 515
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:24 pm
Location: Cleckheaton

Post by jetsetwilly » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:23 pm

Well I hope you lot feel stupid now.

'Sam has done nothing wrong blah blah'

The true devil beneath is now starting to emerge. I saw it from day 1.

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12942
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:23 pm

superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
Well, if four of our deals on his watch are dodgy AND there was a conflict of interest with an agent, I'd say he was involved in dodgy dealings, whether or not he is ultimately found innocent.
Thats a bit tenuous. A conflict of interest with his son does not mean he was involved with dodgy dealings.
To me, since he was in charge, it means he was involved in questionable conduct and potentially dodgy deals. It doesn't mean that he is guilty of dodginess himself (and may have acted with probity), but he was nonetheless involved in deals said to be dodgy and had a fairly obvious conflict of interest.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.

superjohnmcginlay
Passionate
Passionate
Posts: 3057
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:21 pm

Post by superjohnmcginlay » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:28 pm

Montreal Wanderer wrote:
superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
Well, if four of our deals on his watch are dodgy AND there was a conflict of interest with an agent, I'd say he was involved in dodgy dealings, whether or not he is ultimately found innocent.
Thats a bit tenuous. A conflict of interest with his son does not mean he was involved with dodgy dealings.
To me, since he was in charge, it means he was involved in questionable conduct and potentially dodgy deals. It doesn't mean that he is guilty of dodginess himself (and may have acted with probity), but he was nonetheless involved in deals said to be dodgy and had a fairly obvious conflict of interest.
There's no basis for that statement. Was he involved? Thats the key. Im sure its been stated before that he didnt get involved in that side of the club.

Key Findings from the report:

Despite his co-operation, the Inquiry has concerns regarding the involvement of Craig Allardyce (at the time a Licensed Agent) in a number of transactions at Bolton Wanderers FC. Mr Gartside and officials currently at the Club have fully co-operated and the Inquiry has found no evidence or suggestion of any irregular payments to them. However, the following three transfers in which Craig Allardyce was involved remain uncleared:

i) Ali Al-Habsi (to Bolton Wanderers FC)
ii) Tal Ben Haim (to Bolton Wanderers FC)
iii) Blessing Kaku (to Bolton Wanderers FC)


In respect of i) above, the Inquiry also has remaining concerns about the involvement of Peter Harrison (LA) and his relationship with Craig Allardyce.

In respect of ii) and iii) above, the Inquiry has remaining, unanswered concerns about the involvement of Jamie Hart (LA) and David Abou (ULA). In the additional transfer of Julio Correia, the Inquiry has remaining, unanswered concerns regarding the involvement of the following agents in this transfer: Mike Morris (FLA), Eugenio Botas (FLA) and Francis Martin (FLA) and the possible involvement of Craig Allardyce.

The Inquiry remains concerned at the conflict of interest that it believes existed between Craig Allardyce, his father Sam Allardyce (the then manager at Bolton Wanderers) and the Club itself.

The Inquiry recommends that The FA continue with their investigation into these matters, assisted by the considerable information gathered by Quest. The Inquiry also understands that the Bolton Chairman, Mr Gartside, is prepared to share the results of the Club's own detailed investigation with the football authorities to assist in this matter. We welcome this development.

User avatar
TANGODANCER
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 43223
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
Location: Between the Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.

Post by TANGODANCER » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:29 pm

SAMHATER wrote:Well I hope you lot feel stupid now.

'Sam has done nothing wrong blah blah'

The true devil beneath is now starting to emerge. I saw it from day 1.
Surprised to see you knocking Big Sam SH. Thought you were a fan. "Horse dead flogging" etc. He's Newcastle's problem now.
Si Deus pro nobis, quis contra nos?

hisroyalgingerness
Icon
Icon
Posts: 5210
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:04 pm

Post by hisroyalgingerness » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:37 pm

Barry Silkman, implicated in Rochemback transfer wrote:It's an absolute, total lie. "A complete lie. Whoever he is, Lord Stevens, he is a liar. The people who have done this are liars. I challenge them now to take me to court and let them say that I've done something wrong in the Fabio Rochemback deal. I promise if they do, I will begin litigation and do everything in my power not just to close them down, but I will discredit them like you cannot believe. They will rue the day they were ever born. They are total liars. Every bit of money I win will go to the NSPCC.
Lawyer of agent Zhavi wrote:My client believes he has been targeted because he is successful and enjoys a high profile in the football world. They could not find any wrong-doing by Mr Zahavi because there is none. If Fifa wish to investigate further he will co-operate fully with them too because he has nothing to hide
A suitably confused Portsmouth wrote:We are not at all surprised that both the club and our officials have been exonerated from the Lord Stevens Quest report.

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12942
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:39 pm

superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
superjohnmcginlay wrote:
Montreal Wanderer wrote:
Well, if four of our deals on his watch are dodgy AND there was a conflict of interest with an agent, I'd say he was involved in dodgy dealings, whether or not he is ultimately found innocent.
Thats a bit tenuous. A conflict of interest with his son does not mean he was involved with dodgy dealings.
To me, since he was in charge, it means he was involved in questionable conduct and potentially dodgy deals. It doesn't mean that he is guilty of dodginess himself (and may have acted with probity), but he was nonetheless involved in deals said to be dodgy and had a fairly obvious conflict of interest.
There's no basis for that statement. Was he involved? Thats the key. Im sure its been stated before that he didnt get involved in that side of the club.
I think we only have a semantic difficulty, superjohn, on the definition of 'involve' - I used it the sense of 'connected with' or, as the OED defines it, "To include within its folds or ramifications". You used it in the sense of "implicated in" or, again according to the OED, "To implicate in a charge or crime; to cause or prove (a person) to be concerned in it." Using the latter definition I accept what you say. :wink:
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.

communistworkethic
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7404
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
Location: in your wife's dreams
Contact:

Post by communistworkethic » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:43 pm

SAMHATER wrote:Well I hope you lot feel stupid now.

'Sam has done nothing wrong blah blah'

The true devil beneath is now starting to emerge. I saw it from day 1.
Come on then Mr Fisher, how? The only question over him is the involvemnet of his retard offspring and there's no question of impropriaty on the part of the club.
Last edited by communistworkethic on Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Milky_Joe
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 58
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 8:11 pm
Location: North Stand Lower

Post by Milky_Joe » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:52 pm

BOLTON WANDERERS Football Club have issued the following statement in relation to the Quest enquiry:

Bolton Wanderers are pleased to receive the news that the Quest enquiry has exonerated the club and officials still employed by the club in its extensive enquiry into transfers and illegal payments.

We have cooperated fully with the enquiry team and are now prepared to share the findings of our own independent internal enquiry to help conclude the matter.

We have always maintained that the club has acted in a professional and responsible manner and feel this closes a very difficult chapter.

The club will make no further statements on this matter.

Dr.Karl
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: The Gun Capital/The Pastie Capital
Contact:

Post by Dr.Karl » Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:56 pm

Milky_Joe wrote:BOLTON WANDERERS Football Club have issued the following statement in relation to the Quest enquiry:

Bolton Wanderers are pleased to receive the news that the Quest enquiry has exonerated the club and officials still employed by the club in its extensive enquiry into transfers and illegal payments.

We have cooperated fully with the enquiry team and are now prepared to share the findings of our own independent internal enquiry to help conclude the matter.

We have always maintained that the club has acted in a professional and responsible manner and feel this closes a very difficult chapter.

The club will make no further statements on this matter.
Wonder what that means?
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind - Gandhi

A cynic is man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing - Wilde

I have a fax in my pocket - Gartside

User avatar
Montreal Wanderer
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 12942
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 12:45 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

Post by Montreal Wanderer » Fri Jun 15, 2007 5:00 pm

Dr.Karl wrote:
Milky_Joe wrote:BOLTON WANDERERS Football Club have issued the following statement in relation to the Quest enquiry:

Bolton Wanderers are pleased to receive the news that the Quest enquiry has exonerated the club and officials still employed by the club in its extensive enquiry into transfers and illegal payments.

We have cooperated fully with the enquiry team and are now prepared to share the findings of our own independent internal enquiry to help conclude the matter.

We have always maintained that the club has acted in a professional and responsible manner and feel this closes a very difficult chapter.

The club will make no further statements on this matter.
Wonder what that means?
Along with "officials still employed by the club" it might be interpreted as they looked into it and may have asked Sam to go, promising to keep the inquiry under wraps until after the Stevens report was published. On the other hand it could mean nothing of the sort. I still feel Sam's departure was a little odd as to timing, so perhaps I'm looking for a conspiracy.
"If you cannot answer a man's argument, all it not lost; you can still call him vile names. " Elbert Hubbard.

User avatar
Hoboh
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 13310
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 8:19 am

Post by Hoboh » Fri Jun 15, 2007 5:00 pm

Milky_Joe wrote:BOLTON WANDERERS Football Club have issued the following statement in relation to the Quest enquiry:

Bolton Wanderers are pleased to receive the news that the Quest enquiry has exonerated the club and officials still employed by the club in its extensive enquiry into transfers and illegal payments.
We have cooperated fully with the enquiry team and are now prepared to share the findings of our own independent internal enquiry to help conclude the matter.

We have always maintained that the club has acted in a professional and responsible manner and feel this closes a very difficult chapter.

The club will make no further statements on this matter.
Interesting that first bit of the statement

CrazyHorse
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 10572
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Up above the streets and houses

Post by CrazyHorse » Fri Jun 15, 2007 5:31 pm

FaninOz wrote:Why is this in Other Footy, surely it should be in The Trotters where I put it?

Not the Sam references of course but the basic thread is about Bolton for god's sake!

We could lose points next season if the FA and Premiership take a strong lead following the Tevez debacle!!
:conf:
You didn't even start the thread....
Businesswoman of the year.

bobo the clown
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 19597
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
Contact:

Post by bobo the clown » Fri Jun 15, 2007 5:34 pm

TANGODANCER wrote:Are we talking about Sam Allardyce? You know, Newcastle's manager. Sometimes things work out for the best in the long run. :mrgreen:
An absolute disgrace,

Newcastle must be relegated IMMEDIATELY and their manager, a Mr Allardyce, sacked, charged, jaied & quite possibly executed.
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".

Soldier_Of_The_White_Army
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7042
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:36 am
Location: HULL, BABY!
Contact:

Post by Soldier_Of_The_White_Army » Fri Jun 15, 2007 5:37 pm

And yet I still haven't seen one smidgen of proof!
YOU CLIMB OBSTACLES LIKE OLD PEOPLE FXCK!!!!!!!!!!!

James B
Dedicated
Dedicated
Posts: 1439
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:50 pm

Post by James B » Fri Jun 15, 2007 6:33 pm

always suspected allardyce wasn't clean of any impropriety but didn't really care anyway

Dartisan
Promising
Promising
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 2:14 pm
Location: Walking in a K./M./S./E. Davies wonderland
Contact:

Post by Dartisan » Fri Jun 15, 2007 8:18 pm

Soldier_Of_The_White_Army wrote:And yet I still haven't seen one smidgen of proof!
Indeed. Regarding our position this report doesn't actually say anything we didn't already know. We knew there were grounds for criticizing Sam and Craig for the blatant conflicts of interest. We knew there were umpteen dodgy agent involved in 3 or 4 particular transfers. We already knew who the players were, and who the agents were. There's still been nothing directly demonstrating payments involving Big Sam or Craig... still, it's nice to know that the club's been fully exonerated. If they do ever actually have anything to show it'll be for the Toon to deal with, mwahaha.
Everything but the game: Because it's not just a game, it's a way of life.

Whookam
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 5:59 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

Post by Whookam » Fri Jun 15, 2007 8:44 pm

Excellent news :D

Dr.Karl
Reliable
Reliable
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 10:58 pm
Location: The Gun Capital/The Pastie Capital
Contact:

Post by Dr.Karl » Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:24 am

superjohnmcginlay wrote:
CrazyHorse wrote:
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.
One transfer has not been disclosed? wtf is that all about? Why name and shame 16 players but not the 17th one?

Tevez??
There was an arrest made last week relating to the bung probe, probably the reason why that transfer hasn't been disclosed. The arrest was made in Manchester btw.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind - Gandhi

A cynic is man who knows the price of everything but the value of nothing - Wilde

I have a fax in my pocket - Gartside

boltonswede
Hopeful
Hopeful
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:43 pm
Location: Tel-Aviv

Post by boltonswede » Sat Jun 16, 2007 5:55 pm

Danny, instead of checking the boards ; check ur fecking messages :whack:
Gerroff moi laaaaaaaaaaaaaand !!! Before i kick y'arses !!!!

User avatar
officer_dibble
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 13945
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:33 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by officer_dibble » Sun Jun 17, 2007 3:16 pm

I dunno about all this really but that Allardyce geezer sounds well dodgy, ban him from football :wink:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 107 guests