| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph 21:32 - Sep 28 with 98987 views | gobbles |
The Telegraph â€@Telegraph 1m1 minute ago
Latest #football4sale allegations concern Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink at QPR, Tommy Wright of Barnsley and Leeds' Massimo Cellino |  | | |  |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:59 - Sep 30 with 2825 views | daveB |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:55 - Sep 30 by stevec |
Precisely, and the way FFP has remained unresolved you suspect the Club is less than trusted.
Tony needs to show this club is whiter than white now, far too much seems to get swept under the carpet for too many years. |
The irony of it all is the actual dodgy deals are going to remain under the carpet and the one thrown under the bus won't really have done anything wrong |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:14 - Sep 30 with 2721 views | Konk |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:52 - Sep 30 by GloryHunter |
I wonder where Scott McGarvey is now? He won't have made himself very popular within the game. |
He's probably in a conference room in a Singapore hotel, setting up the laptop, checking the projector works, printing out name badges and organising bourbons and custard creams on a dinner plate. In about ten minutes he'll go down to reception and ask if any English football managers or Far Eastern investors have been asking for him. [Post edited 30 Sep 2016 11:15]
|  |
| Fulham FC: It's the taking part that counts |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:24 - Sep 30 with 2639 views | TacticalR |
There was only one thing said about JFH on the Guardian podcast, by Simon Burnton:
'I have to say I feel a bit sorry for him reading today's Telegraph. He is guilty of arranging a couple of meetings with people who he couldn't be sure about, obviously, because one of them was an undercover reporter, and he also seems guilty of an element of greed. They offered him money to make a speech and he tried to build up the amount of money he would get, but I didn't see anything particularly incriminating in their article. In the meantime a grainy picture of Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink is occupying half the front page of the Telegraph and it is extremely damaging to his reputation, even the association with this scandal, which many people will know only superficial amounts of detail of. Just by putting his photo on the front page of a major national newspaper, even if there's very limited actual incriminating detail, will significantly damage his reputation in the country, and I think they needed a bit more than they have got to do that to him.'
https://www.theguardian.com/football/audio/2016/sep/29/big-sam-pays-the-price-fo |  |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:26 - Sep 30 with 2623 views | Lblock |
Childish nicknames occupy childish minds...... leave me happy in my own playpen and use the ignore swtich.
Why is Les a mate of ODH? Well because he said they know each other of old and coupled with the tone he said that in during an interview I saw 10 months ago, I'd say they were friends.
Of course I could cut two eye holes in my pillow case, stick in on my head and march to Craven Cottage with a burning cross if that would suit your insinuations and agenda on this? Let me know as I'm at home today and have a couple of spare bits of sawn tantalized in the shed plus the missus is out and I wouldn't get bollocked about the pillow case until Sunday at the earliest. [Post edited 30 Sep 2016 11:30]
|  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:31 - Sep 30 with 2594 views | baz_qpr |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 07:38 - Sep 30 by NW5Hoop |
I don't think, on its own, they would have run this story. It's part of a series, and that's the only way it stands up as worthwhile. But the words of the headline were true: he's willing to accept money from a firm that wants to sell him players. It's not a grey area, it's all backed up by what he said. Seriously, the legal costs and potential damages from any of this that didn't stand up would be colossal. My bet would be that they have much worse stuff on all their targets, but containing enough ambivalence that the lawyers wouldn't let it through. When a story has been heavily legalled, you're usually seeing a much less provocative version than the original draft. |
Depends on your definition of true.
So he is willing to accept money for a speech. Full stop new paragraph end of video edit.
He is willing to look at a player suggested by the agent (ex man utd footballer Mcgarvey) The linking of those things together is context and there is no context shown in either the video or the transcripts. It could be a minute between those edits or it could be an hour. That's the point they've been very careful in their wording but using the picture and placing it next to a more serious story about another party is the sleight of hand. I've no doubt they can legally defend what they've printed words wise. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:34 - Sep 30 with 2570 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:24 - Sep 30 by TacticalR |
There was only one thing said about JFH on the Guardian podcast, by Simon Burnton:
'I have to say I feel a bit sorry for him reading today's Telegraph. He is guilty of arranging a couple of meetings with people who he couldn't be sure about, obviously, because one of them was an undercover reporter, and he also seems guilty of an element of greed. They offered him money to make a speech and he tried to build up the amount of money he would get, but I didn't see anything particularly incriminating in their article. In the meantime a grainy picture of Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink is occupying half the front page of the Telegraph and it is extremely damaging to his reputation, even the association with this scandal, which many people will know only superficial amounts of detail of. Just by putting his photo on the front page of a major national newspaper, even if there's very limited actual incriminating detail, will significantly damage his reputation in the country, and I think they needed a bit more than they have got to do that to him.'
https://www.theguardian.com/football/audio/2016/sep/29/big-sam-pays-the-price-fo |
Think that's fair. Let's say we had taken the Walsall manager instead of Brentford and he did exactly the same thing - no way his face would have been plastered on the front page like that. |  |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:35 - Sep 30 with 2562 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:26 - Sep 30 by Lblock |
Childish nicknames occupy childish minds...... leave me happy in my own playpen and use the ignore swtich.
Why is Les a mate of ODH? Well because he said they know each other of old and coupled with the tone he said that in during an interview I saw 10 months ago, I'd say they were friends.
Of course I could cut two eye holes in my pillow case, stick in on my head and march to Craven Cottage with a burning cross if that would suit your insinuations and agenda on this? Let me know as I'm at home today and have a couple of spare bits of sawn tantalized in the shed plus the missus is out and I wouldn't get bollocked about the pillow case until Sunday at the earliest. [Post edited 30 Sep 2016 11:30]
|
Les has been in the game for decades mate, he probably has met loads of his contemporaries. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:53 - Sep 30 with 2445 views | A40Bosh |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:52 - Sep 30 by Antti_Heinola |
Agree Paul. Tomorrow will tell us a lot. I suspect Karl won't play - there's a break after this, so no one needs to be saved for another game. I suspect this..
Smithies
Onuoha Caulker Hall Lynch
Borysiuk Luongo
Wszolek Chery Washington/Shodipo
Polter/Sylla
Unless Cousins is fit, in which case he'll start.
But the players attitude will tell us a lot. If they feel he's been stitched up a bit and they go out and give a great performance - or at least a good one - it will be a good sign. If we're 3-0 down by half time as usual, then I don't think he'll survive the int break.
As things stand, I think the club will stick by him for now. There's not enough there to sack him, it needs to be seen in full context and what happened later.
I don't know the legals but I don't really understand why full files can't be handed to the FA, us or Southampton. It's not like we can delete it and essentially we (should) be on their side in rooting out corruption. There's certainly not enough there to prosecute JFH on, either. Puzzling. |
I suppose the statement from the fella working for the Telegraph about "following police advice" hints at them collating and passing evidence to the old bill, evidence that may be later passed on to the CPS to see if there is enough evidence to charge some of the "stung" individuals for illegal or fraudulent activities and therefore as this evidence might be used at a later date by the prosecution that the old bill want to keep it to themselves for as long as possible before having to share it with any defense counsel. If not then it is them not wanting to be found out that it is all bull5hit.
Otherwise how the bloody hell can a paper in this day and age create a sting and secretly film and record an interview people without prior knowledge and consent from the attending parties on the premise that they were investigating illegal activities when the whole scenario they were describing was fictitious to start off with and then only release an edited version that appears to be damning.
 |  |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:54 - Sep 30 with 2437 views | PinnerPaul |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:33 - Sep 30 by stevec |
I'm surprised anyone expects the Telegraph to release anything directly to the clubs, anything fraudulent should be in the hands of the Police.
We constantly moan about the greed and avarice of football then do our level best to 'protect' those responsible. Fraud investigations should be carried out, agents forced to hand over their bank accounts, investigate where the money goes. There will be a paper trail and that will indict the guilty within the clubs themselves.
In JFH case, he hasn't actually carried out anything fraudulent but you can't help wonder whether there was intent, in which case, is he to be trusted? |
Police only involved if JFH charged with anything.
Struggling to find an offence he has committed on what has been released. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:56 - Sep 30 with 2422 views | PinnerPaul |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:35 - Sep 30 by rsonist |
Rumsby works for the Telegraph. What on earth is he talking about? |
Nonsense I agree.
What possible offence is JFH supposed to have committed here? | | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:57 - Sep 30 with 2415 views | PinnerPaul |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:35 - Sep 30 by davman |
Not sure that this is "fair enough" as I think that this shows big naivety on the part of our board. The Telegraph are not going to show their hand so quickly and easily on this one. If they are comfortable with what they have, let Jimmy's Lawyers challenge them and then let it all come out in court.
Why should they show their hand now just in case it does hang them?They are more than likely to play the waiting game to see if JFH feels strongly enough to take this to court. If he does feel strong enough to risk all there, then bring it on.
If they want this resolved quickly, then waiting for full disclosure is NOT the right way to go. Potentially, this has the same legs as the bloody FFP allegations that still remain unresolved. |
I say again "in court"?
How? Why? | | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:57 - Sep 30 with 2412 views | LongsufferingR |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:54 - Sep 30 by PinnerPaul |
Police only involved if JFH charged with anything.
Struggling to find an offence he has committed on what has been released. |
Chatting without due care and attention. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:00 - Sep 30 with 2391 views | PinnerPaul |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:38 - Sep 30 by paulparker |
Be interesting to see if he actually goes for it for once considering he needs a result and a performance , added incentive that we win a derby match , he could really get the fans back on side here
if he goes with karl henry, a central midfielder on the wing and one up top then the bloke really should be shown the door
also worth noting if the team is behind him or not judging the first 10 minutes of the game |
95% of HR article in Standard yesterday was his usual garbage but THIS was spot on:-
He said players don't care, they just want to be in the 1st team. Used Derby as an example - Pearson suspended, Derby go and win.
Doubt the players affected in any way by this - much to most's disappointment.
After all they've hardly being pulling up tress recently in any case! | | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:18 - Sep 30 with 2296 views | TacticalR |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:00 - Sep 30 by PinnerPaul |
95% of HR article in Standard yesterday was his usual garbage but THIS was spot on:-
He said players don't care, they just want to be in the 1st team. Used Derby as an example - Pearson suspended, Derby go and win.
Doubt the players affected in any way by this - much to most's disappointment.
After all they've hardly being pulling up tress recently in any case! |
He is the Standard's expert on not caring. | |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:28 - Sep 30 with 2224 views | Monkey_Roots |
From SSN:
Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink has vehemently denied requesting a fee of £55,000 to work for a fake Far Eastern firm seeking to sell players to Queens Park Rangers, but does admit he was naive.
Hasselbaink was caught up in the Daily Telegraph's "Football for Sale" scandal, which has rocked English football this week.
Secretly-filmed footage of Sam Allardyce appearing to make a variety of controversial comments cost him the England job after just 67 days, while QPR boss Hasselbaink is among other figures to have been filmed by undercover reporters as part of the investigation.
The Dutchman is alleged to have negotiated the fee to fly to the Far East and speak to investors in what proved to be a fictitious firm, which the newspaper says made clear it was interested in getting involved in player transfers.
When asked in an exclusive interview with Sky Sports News HQ whether he had regrets, Hasselbaink said: "Big time. Big time. You know you reflect, you think back and you criticise yourself and you must say, that I have been naive. I have been naive.
"But then with everything with it, I have never asked for money for myself to take a player or to bring a player to the club. I would never do that.
Hasselbaink denies any wrongdoing after being named in a Daily Telegraph investigation
Hasselbaink denies any wrongdoing after being named in a Daily Telegraph investigation
"That is the painful thing about it. The painful thing about it is that I take my job very serious. Very, very, very serious and I want to succeed in this business.
"I can't speak for others, I can only speak for me and this, taking money, is not what I stand for. It is not what I stand for, I have never done it and I would never do it just to get a player to the club so I can benefit from that. No."
Hasselbaink is equally emphatic when questioned on whether he had in any way ever been offered money to ensure a player signs for a club he was managing.
"No, never," he said. "I have never been offered any money and I would never entertain that."
QPR urge Telegraph disclosure
QPR urge Daily Telegraph to disclose all information relating to Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink
Hasselbaink insists he was only discussing being paid to speak in the Far East on a day off from QPR - something that is sanctioned by a clause in his contract with the club - and that he has no control over transfers, which are handled by Les Ferdinand and the QPR board.
He also rejected the idea that the proposed fee of £55,000 was disproportionately high for a mere speaking engagement, explaining that type of figure is not uncommon in football.
Hasselbaink said: "I understand for the English public, or whatever public, that £55,000 is a lot of money. And it is a lot of money. But in the industry that I am in I am fortunate that I can make those kinds of figures.
"I was negotiating to go Singapore for a speech. That's it. That's it. No favouritism, no strings attached. What I would never ever do. Never ever do. I would not put myself in that position." |  |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:31 - Sep 30 with 2197 views | BklynRanger |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:35 - Sep 30 by davman |
Not sure that this is "fair enough" as I think that this shows big naivety on the part of our board. The Telegraph are not going to show their hand so quickly and easily on this one. If they are comfortable with what they have, let Jimmy's Lawyers challenge them and then let it all come out in court.
Why should they show their hand now just in case it does hang them?They are more than likely to play the waiting game to see if JFH feels strongly enough to take this to court. If he does feel strong enough to risk all there, then bring it on.
If they want this resolved quickly, then waiting for full disclosure is NOT the right way to go. Potentially, this has the same legs as the bloody FFP allegations that still remain unresolved. |
There's a lot of truth in that - more than one reason why the Telegraph might choose not to cooperate. At the same time though if they've started down the path of needing to review the whole tape before they make a decision then they need stick with it until they figure something else out. They can't say they want to see the tape on Thursday and then on Friday say they couldn't actually see the tape so they've suspended Jimmy anyway. I'd rather they were consistent and forthright about it at this point, even if that may have them bordering on the naive. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:38 - Sep 30 with 2132 views | simmo |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:24 - Sep 30 by TacticalR |
There was only one thing said about JFH on the Guardian podcast, by Simon Burnton:
'I have to say I feel a bit sorry for him reading today's Telegraph. He is guilty of arranging a couple of meetings with people who he couldn't be sure about, obviously, because one of them was an undercover reporter, and he also seems guilty of an element of greed. They offered him money to make a speech and he tried to build up the amount of money he would get, but I didn't see anything particularly incriminating in their article. In the meantime a grainy picture of Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink is occupying half the front page of the Telegraph and it is extremely damaging to his reputation, even the association with this scandal, which many people will know only superficial amounts of detail of. Just by putting his photo on the front page of a major national newspaper, even if there's very limited actual incriminating detail, will significantly damage his reputation in the country, and I think they needed a bit more than they have got to do that to him.'
https://www.theguardian.com/football/audio/2016/sep/29/big-sam-pays-the-price-fo |
This is spot on, for me. They haven't got anywhere near as much as I suspect they thought they would get, but they need results so have pushed ahead with framing the little they have in a way that sensationalises things. It's grossly unfair considering as things stand there's no hard evidence he has actually done anything corrupt. |  |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:43 - Sep 30 with 2094 views | Lblock |
"You know you reflect, you think back and you criticise yourself and you must say, that I have been naive. I have been naive."
I cant make out if he's talking about getting 55 bags for telling a bunch of Far Eastern business men "eet eeeshhh wot eet eeesshhh" or his approach to setting up teams, building a squad and tactics, fitness etc. | |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:52 - Sep 30 with 2025 views | karl |
In terms of corruption i think he is looking more and more innocent but his lack of professionalism is very sad to me. If we were top 6 or thereabouts and he had proven himself to be a capable manager then negotiating a job on the side within the terms of his contract would be totally acceptable. However given our 'fragile' state, regardless of when this was recorded with the new squad we have always been fragile this season, he should only have had thoughts about working with and improving this squad.
Absolute b8ll8cks giving whole squad long break so he can earn, what he appreciates to the supporters is, an unacceptable amount of money. Our team is obviously under coached as he doesn't trust the younger players and fills round holes with older square pegs, if he's exhausted the squad already and they need a break then he's a poor coach.
I'm afraid things will have to improve rapidly for me to change my mind on him, i was prepared for a longer improvement time but this episode tells me he's not got it unfortunately.
I will hopefully be proved wrong and possibly this might even galvanise him to get things moving quicker. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:53 - Sep 30 with 2016 views | BklynRanger |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 12:28 - Sep 30 by Monkey_Roots |
From SSN:
Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink has vehemently denied requesting a fee of £55,000 to work for a fake Far Eastern firm seeking to sell players to Queens Park Rangers, but does admit he was naive.
Hasselbaink was caught up in the Daily Telegraph's "Football for Sale" scandal, which has rocked English football this week.
Secretly-filmed footage of Sam Allardyce appearing to make a variety of controversial comments cost him the England job after just 67 days, while QPR boss Hasselbaink is among other figures to have been filmed by undercover reporters as part of the investigation.
The Dutchman is alleged to have negotiated the fee to fly to the Far East and speak to investors in what proved to be a fictitious firm, which the newspaper says made clear it was interested in getting involved in player transfers.
When asked in an exclusive interview with Sky Sports News HQ whether he had regrets, Hasselbaink said: "Big time. Big time. You know you reflect, you think back and you criticise yourself and you must say, that I have been naive. I have been naive.
"But then with everything with it, I have never asked for money for myself to take a player or to bring a player to the club. I would never do that.
Hasselbaink denies any wrongdoing after being named in a Daily Telegraph investigation
Hasselbaink denies any wrongdoing after being named in a Daily Telegraph investigation
"That is the painful thing about it. The painful thing about it is that I take my job very serious. Very, very, very serious and I want to succeed in this business.
"I can't speak for others, I can only speak for me and this, taking money, is not what I stand for. It is not what I stand for, I have never done it and I would never do it just to get a player to the club so I can benefit from that. No."
Hasselbaink is equally emphatic when questioned on whether he had in any way ever been offered money to ensure a player signs for a club he was managing.
"No, never," he said. "I have never been offered any money and I would never entertain that."
QPR urge Telegraph disclosure
QPR urge Daily Telegraph to disclose all information relating to Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink
Hasselbaink insists he was only discussing being paid to speak in the Far East on a day off from QPR - something that is sanctioned by a clause in his contract with the club - and that he has no control over transfers, which are handled by Les Ferdinand and the QPR board.
He also rejected the idea that the proposed fee of £55,000 was disproportionately high for a mere speaking engagement, explaining that type of figure is not uncommon in football.
Hasselbaink said: "I understand for the English public, or whatever public, that £55,000 is a lot of money. And it is a lot of money. But in the industry that I am in I am fortunate that I can make those kinds of figures.
"I was negotiating to go Singapore for a speech. That's it. That's it. No favouritism, no strings attached. What I would never ever do. Never ever do. I would not put myself in that position." |
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11711/10599356/jimmy-floyd-hasselbaink-ad
The diagram on the wall behind him is 4-4-2! That's quite funny. | | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 13:00 - Sep 30 with 1971 views | Juzzie |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 11:53 - Sep 30 by A40Bosh |
I suppose the statement from the fella working for the Telegraph about "following police advice" hints at them collating and passing evidence to the old bill, evidence that may be later passed on to the CPS to see if there is enough evidence to charge some of the "stung" individuals for illegal or fraudulent activities and therefore as this evidence might be used at a later date by the prosecution that the old bill want to keep it to themselves for as long as possible before having to share it with any defense counsel. If not then it is them not wanting to be found out that it is all bull5hit.
Otherwise how the bloody hell can a paper in this day and age create a sting and secretly film and record an interview people without prior knowledge and consent from the attending parties on the premise that they were investigating illegal activities when the whole scenario they were describing was fictitious to start off with and then only release an edited version that appears to be damning.
|
If there were any reasons to bring criminal charges then surely by publishing this to the public first has effectively rendered it useless as you simply cannot go public before any case goes to court. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 13:06 - Sep 30 with 1912 views | Brightonhoop |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 10:35 - Sep 30 by davman |
Not sure that this is "fair enough" as I think that this shows big naivety on the part of our board. The Telegraph are not going to show their hand so quickly and easily on this one. If they are comfortable with what they have, let Jimmy's Lawyers challenge them and then let it all come out in court.
Why should they show their hand now just in case it does hang them?They are more than likely to play the waiting game to see if JFH feels strongly enough to take this to court. If he does feel strong enough to risk all there, then bring it on.
If they want this resolved quickly, then waiting for full disclosure is NOT the right way to go. Potentially, this has the same legs as the bloody FFP allegations that still remain unresolved. |
Not sure what more the Board can do in the circumstances. It is pretty low of the Telegraph not to release full details having stuck the knife in. Cowardly and scummy at best.
Yesterday plod said it had met with both Telegraph and FA with no view to prosecutions at this stage. Meaning weak evidence. CPS wouldn't entertain criminal charges on what plod has seen.
Still cannot fathom what JFH was at. Why meet them? Who is advising him? Why not have a third arty negotiate fees for works he is contractually allowed to engage in? Why was it not formalised in writing prior to any meeting? Easy with hindsight you might say but ffs these are simple basic principles and practices. Stupid beyond belief.
Best way forwards I think is for JFH to instruct proceedings for defamation and the club to be ready to do the same. Ball is now in JFH's court, if he is clean he has nothing to fear. Doing nothing at this stage is starting to look worse imho. In the context think Les and Hoos have got this spot on. |  | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 13:07 - Sep 30 with 1905 views | runningman75 |
That is Chery behind Polter. | | | |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 13:13 - Sep 30 with 1860 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 13:06 - Sep 30 by Brightonhoop |
Not sure what more the Board can do in the circumstances. It is pretty low of the Telegraph not to release full details having stuck the knife in. Cowardly and scummy at best.
Yesterday plod said it had met with both Telegraph and FA with no view to prosecutions at this stage. Meaning weak evidence. CPS wouldn't entertain criminal charges on what plod has seen.
Still cannot fathom what JFH was at. Why meet them? Who is advising him? Why not have a third arty negotiate fees for works he is contractually allowed to engage in? Why was it not formalised in writing prior to any meeting? Easy with hindsight you might say but ffs these are simple basic principles and practices. Stupid beyond belief.
Best way forwards I think is for JFH to instruct proceedings for defamation and the club to be ready to do the same. Ball is now in JFH's court, if he is clean he has nothing to fear. Doing nothing at this stage is starting to look worse imho. In the context think Les and Hoos have got this spot on. |
Agree Brighton, but if he knows McGarvey and he's said, will you meet with these people about a potential speaking engagement for a drink... where's the harm? Well, see the harm now, but this sort of thing is not exactly unusual. You get introduced to someone who talks about possible work down the line? There's nothing criminal in that whatsoever and if it had been on the up and up then he may well have said, 'right sort the details out with my agent'. You're effectively saying no person in football should ever meet with anyone they don't know about any business. But I dunno - clearly that's best advice from what we've seen! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
