Ralph Krueger has been right in being seen to be clearly at the helm as Saints sail though some stormy waters and he is right to make sure the club is taking a line that is clear and concise.

There is no one who hates the corruption that seems to surround football these days more than me and I welcome any investigation from the media that helps expose that corruption, yes some would call it entrapment, especially if you are the soon to be ex England manager, but the reality is that an honest man would not be in that room.

Having said that in any newspaper sting such as the Telegraph's there are going to be people who are genuinely in a situation they were not aware of and had no intention of committing anything against the rules.

Put football people together in any situation whether they are Internationals or Sunday pub team players and there will be talk and gossip.

So the media have to tread the fine line between trapping the corrupt and trying to make innocent men look guilty and we all know newspapers sometimes do not let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Now I have not seen footage of the Eric Black situation, I have read the Telegraph article but I'm not sure what Black has done wrong, to talk about others who would perhaps bend rules is not the same as actually breaking the rules yourself, yes in a perfect society Black would be reporting those who are known to take a bug or two, but who do you know in normal life who would do that, would you point out to the driver of a bus that someone has just got on without paying his fare ?

So it is easy in these type of stories to become righteous indignant , however often that can be very hypocritical, but what we should avoid is witch hunts before the entire evidence is to hand.

Saints have therefore taken the right path, after being contacted by the Telegraph they asked the paper to give them the transcription, this request was refused, Saints took the sting out by issuing a statement before the allegations were printed and they are therefore in a position where they have distanced the club, quite rightly so as it is nothing to do with SFC as such but Black as an individual, but more importantly they have established the club's position.

That is one of truth and justice, they make it clear that they are prepared to take the relevant action if necessary, but they will not do so without the full facts available to them.

Some would say that if the Telegraph are not willing to do that, then they have something to hide, that has some truth in that it is the papers ob to make headlines, not print facts.

So Saints must sit and wait for the football authorities to take the relevant action, whilst hearing and reading about those in Professional football and the corruption that is rife is not pleasant we have to look at who are actually guilty of rule breaches and who have done nothing more than gossip about it.

From a Saints perspective we have made our position clear, it is now a case of sitting and waiting for the football authorities to act.

Photo: Action Images

highfield49 added 10:51 - Oct 1 Nick, I think this link gives a pretty good impression of the issues surrounding Eric Black and it's probably the material you are referring to above http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/29/how-southamptons-eric-black-advised-b My first impression was that he should bite the bullet and walk away, to save the club from association with his involvement, but until the Telegraph complies with the request for full disclosure I have some doubts. What was said and in what context and indeed how much editing has taken place are a valid concern and good reason not to jump to conclusions. Whatever the outcome I hope that Eric Black has learnt from this episode and I'm confident that the club will take the right decisions about his future.

0

pintsizedsaint added 12:15 - Oct 1 I don't quite see it in the same light Nick. First, SFC do need to see unedited transcripts and interview EB. That's a given. However, if it doesn't transpire that the quotes are well out of context, then I think EB has to go. Whilst he's not actually instructed others to pay an official for information, he appears to not only recommend an official he feels will be amenable to a banned FA activity, but also refers to paying him. That's a lot different to generally talking about "how others might be doing that" or the situation as a whole. In addition, given RK's clear stance on what he expects from SFC and its values, you would expect EB to be politely reminding these people that they are discussing the act or commission of a banned activity (as opposed to generally talking about its practice) And that he wants no part of it. Whilst this would be a whiter than white approach, technically he should have reminded those present that he is obliged to report this to the FA if they are discussing such activity with the clear inference of asking him to become involved. Yet it appears he doesn't reflect that at all - but joins in on how the banned activity can work in practice. If this is the case (and that's why a full transcript and interview is essential) then his position is untenable.

0

dirk_doone added 12:53 - Oct 1 Nick, even if they'd sacked him, you'd still have said the club was taking the right approach. According to all of your articles, the club always does everything perfectly. With so much perfection in the club, I'm suprised we're not 5 points clear at the top of the Premier League.
-2

ThereIn76 added 13:33 - Oct 1 The fact that the DT refused to provide the transcript shows that it this is all about selling copy rather than tackling corruption in football. I agree with Nick that Ralph K has handled it correctly so far and I do not have the impression that he always says the club has got it right come what may. Nick is critical when he feels the need to be - sometimes with justification but not always in my opinion. Overall his opinion pieces are reasonable and thought through and it's brave to put one's head above the parapet each time something happens. I hope Saints will support Eric Black as an employees pending a proper investigation, as opposed to trial by media.

0

ChristchurchSaint added 14:03 - Oct 1 I agree that Ralph was right with his stance. Until they have genuine material in their hands, SFC cannot do a lot. We all know how photoshop can change pictures, can videos be doctored in the same way, in order to put a totally different view to the matter? Having said that, if the proof is conclusive against EB, then hopefully, as has been suggested, he will resign, and avoid all the hassle of sacking him and still having doubt cast by some people (ie the WUMs)

0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Derby County Polls