Eric Black named in Telegraph investigation

Lol at some 'new' posters coming on here to tell us how absolutely awful it is for the club. I would predict a large amount of Pompey fans will be descending on the board to try and point out their grubby little club isn't quite as bad after all, which is bolocks as they robbed charities after buying a trophy, a little bit different to finding your new translator had his hand in the till at another employer.

 

Black hasn't been at Southampton for more than a few months, yes the media line will be to connect us with him in soundbites, because it sounds better than upsetting other more 'popular' clubs.

 

In truth, Black will be out the door whether its by a firing or 'mutual consent' and ironically we may have to pay the bastard off if there is not enough proof, but we cant be connected to him any longer even if just allegations, our club doesn't operate this way and publicly we should be thanking the telegraph for letting us know the meeting took place. Ralph has done absolutely nothing wrong by his statement but needs to take some action as a priority not wait until we are told what to do.

I wouldn't pay him a penny. Let him sue if he wants.

What list of names are appearing on twitter?

All this clamour to say he should be sacked. What about innocent until proven guilty?

Not saying it's right for Black to leave, but rather than this knee jerk reaction maybe we should wait and see what he's actually supposed to have done and whether there's any proper evidence.

Is what he's done illegal? Would there be a police investigation?

Lee Barnard was retained after his arrest for GBH as was Guly after being convicted of drink driving - arguably both more serious crimes.

I think QPR's approach of waiting until The Telegraph have handed over all their evidence before investigating the matter themselves seems like a measured response.

well this certainly puts a Black mark over the club

All this clamour to say he should be sacked. What about innocent until proven guilty?

Not saying it's right/wrong for Black to leave, but rather than this knee jerk reaction maybe we should wait and see what he's actually supposed to have done and whether there's any proper evidence.

Is what he's done illegal? Would there be a police investigation?

Lee Barnard was retained after his arrest for GBH as was Guly after being convicted of drink driving - arguably both more serious crimes.

I think QPR's approach of waiting until The Telegraph have handed over all their evidence before investigating the matter themselves seems like a measured response.

I wonder if they'll support any of the new allegations with actual evidence of corruption. Because they've disclosed precious little of that so far, if they've actually got any.

Actually, 4 with a Saints connection too.

Makes you wonder who's next on the Telegraph's list, they've been drip feeding different people all week, started with Allardyce to whet everyones appetite, then slowly moving up the food chain, with Championship assitants, then a well known manager, then a premier league assistant, wonder what the Saturday and Sunday papers will bring, can imagine there are going to be some pretty big, household names about to come out.

Presume Sunday will be the big one. The day when there are a lot of idle people otherwise unengaged around.

From what I can see from the video and transcripts this is what we're faced with.

EB goes to a meeting with an agent (a mate) and meets a woman reporter from the Telegraph who tells him she wants to set up an agency that represents talented footy players from the far east or some form of training school. She wants to know how to get people at clubs in England interested. Someone suggests coach X and EB knows him and his situation and can comment. He can also comment generally on the wages people at that level in a club and in the football pyramid earn (£40-£60k per annum). He indicates that if an individual were approached to suggest to their club that they look at this pool of talented players a form of payment could be offered were either the recommendation to take place - so money for old rope - or the player signed by the club. So presumably the club would decide if the player was Ali Dia or Messi and act accordingly. Again, money for old rope. The only suggestion of wrongdoing might be were it the case that the recipient of the money to take it cash in hand and declare it and/or if by so doing they broke FA rules (as I believe is the case) in which case it's not a criminal matter but one where someone ought to get the boot from football-related activities.

As so much of choosing a player is now done by a committee this approach seems rather stupid as it guarantees nothing. As others have said it does smack somewhat of alcohol-fuelled bombast. Which isn't to say that there wasn't and isn't a great deal of dodgy dealing going on; there probably is (as DT said - David Luiz - ????).

I looked at the Cellino piece because I thought if anyone was 'dodgy', given he's been convicted of offences in Italy then there might be a case. Apparently he said to the reporters if their group bought a part of LUFC they could share in any profits made. Corrupt? How? So far this 'investigation' has more holes than it has genuinely worthy evidence from what I've seen and I think all of it should be released to the public at some time. In hindsight, I think they went for BFS because he had the weakest position: he had to be whiter than white in his position and he didn't actually 'advise' anyone. He just told them how the matter could be done and probably anyone who looked into it enough could work that out. There is also the report from the ex-Palace chairman on his views on TP ownership that was reported on the BBC. If, as he says, this is essentially someone signing away their image rights, then .... pfft, who cares? It would be better that no such thing existed and the likes of Zlatan shut his gob and just gave any money earned from mad Swedes buying mugs with his mug on to charity.

Presume Sunday will be the big one. The day when there are a lot of idle people otherwise unengaged around.

 

 

From what I can see from the video and transcripts this is what we're faced with.

 

EB goes to a meeting with an agent (a mate) and meets a woman reporter from the Telegraph who tells him she wants to set up an agency that represents talented footy players from the far east or some form of training school. She wants to know how to get people at clubs in England interested. Someone suggests coach X and EB knows him and his situation and can comment. He can also comment generally on the wages people at that level in a club and in the football pyramid earn (£40-£60k per annum). He indicates that if an individual were approached to suggest to their club that they look at this pool of talented players a form of payment could be offered were either the recommendation to take place - so money for old rope - or the player signed by the club. So presumably the club would decide if the player was Ali Dia or Messi and act accordingly. Again, money for old rope. The only suggestion of wrongdoing might be were it the case that the recipient of the money to take it cash in hand and declare it and/or if by so doing they broke FA rules (as I believe is the case) in which case it's not a criminal matter but one where someone ought to get the boot from football-related activities.

 

As so much of choosing a player is now done by a committee this approach seems rather stupid as it guarantees nothing. As others have said it does smack somewhat of alcohol-fuelled bombast. Which isn't to say that there wasn't and isn't a great deal of dodgy dealing going on; there probably is (as DT said - David Luiz - ????).

 

I looked at the Cellino piece because I thought if anyone was 'dodgy', given he's been convicted of offences in Italy then there might be a case. Apparently he said to the reporters if their group bought a part of LUFC they could share in any profits made. Corrupt? How? So far this 'investigation' has more holes than it has genuinely worthy evidence from what I've seen and I think all of it should be released to the public at some time. In hindsight, I think they went for BFS because he had the weakest position: he had to be whiter than white in his position and he didn't actually 'advise' anyone. He just told them how the matter could be done and probably anyone who looked into it enough could work that out. There is also the report from the ex-Palace chairman on his views on TP ownership that was reported on the BBC. If, as he says, this is essentially someone signing away their image rights, then .... pfft, who cares? It would be better that no such thing existed and the likes of Zlatan shut his gob and just gave any money earned from mad Swedes buying mugs with his mug on to charity.

Exemplary grammar and punctuation

Les Reed in "due diligence" shocker anyone?

well this certainly puts a Black mark over the club

The bits I'm hearing is Black has already been suspended.

Ralph's statements earlier this week have really left the club no choice at all but to sack him - you can't come out with that kind of commentary on the whole corruption piece (unprompted as well, a fair amount of egg on the club's face given what has happened the next day!) and then back one of your own when he's involved, whatever he has/hasn't done.

How many players have the club categorically stated they aren't selling because we're going for Champions League, and then sold them a week or so later?

The bits I'm hearing is Black has already been suspended.

Which is the correct action at this time.

The bits I'm hearing is Black has already been suspended.

Would make sense at this stage.

Perhaps in phase 2 of its investigation, the Telegraph could turn its investigative attention to all the journalists who print lies in the papers designed to unsettle or tap up players at smaller clubs, at the behest of larger clubs. If they are so interested in keeping things clean in English football, that is.

Many journalists are part of the problem and it really irritates me to see the Telegraph get all self-righteous about their journalistic role in uncovering malpractice, when so many other journalists are part of the great crap-churning machine that is the player transfer system in football.

Actually, 4 with a Saints connection too.

5...

I would also not be surprised if the suspension suggestion is true. That action wouldn't imply a conclusion had been reached, only that both the club and Eric Black can deal with the matter without the day-to-day job getting in the way. Black is hardly likely to be able to function properly in his coaching role with this hanging over him.

On the issue itself, it may not be illegal to tell people how they can get around the rules governing relationships in football but if that is what he did, I doubt that Southampton would want to keep him on as it appears to be a willingness to condone corrupt activities, even if not actually undertaking them.

Perhaps in phase 2 of its investigation, the Telegraph could turn its investigative attention to all the journalists who print lies in the papers designed to unsettle or tap up players at smaller clubs, at the behest of larger clubs. If they are so interested in keeping things clean in English football, that is.

 

Many journalists are part of the problem and it really irritates me to see the Telegraph get all self-righteous about their journalistic role in uncovering malpractice, when so many other journalists are part of the great crap-churning machine that is the player transfer system in football.

It's true that the media add to the problems in football but its entirely mistaken to be critical of a newspaper for doing what the football authorities should be doing. If the FA, the Premier League and the EFL were taking proper action against the corrupt practices, there would be no gap for the press to step into. As it is, we should be glad that the Telegraph has exposed some of the sickness in the game.

The other things that Saint Albert is concerned about are matters that the football authorities should deal with and if they fail, perhaps the Government should impose a legal requirement for proper governance of the game.

Thierry Henif youere y, loves Puel, speaks French, coaches. Problem solSundayQUOTE]

Thats actually a good suggestion, although it may curtail his SS punditry, if we are playing on a Sunday

The bits I'm hearing is Black has already been suspended.

I presume the club have a code of conduct which all employees agree to and would cover bribery and bungs and such like?

Which is the correct action at this time.

The bits I'm hearing is Black has already been suspended.

35,000 feet over the Mediterranean. That'll teach him.

I presume the club have a code of conduct which all employees agree to and would cover bribery and bungs and such like?

Except from what I can work out no money has actually changed hands and there is no suggestion Black received any money or bribed anyone. As I said earlier Black comes out of this looking more foolish than corrupt.

Which is normal I suppose until everything comes out. It seems the Telegraph are quick to expose snippets but when clubs are asking for the full footage they are holding back.

Yeah they don't seem to interested in letting the FA or the club see all the footage they took which is interesting.

Except from what I can work out no money has actually changed hands and there is no suggestion Black received any money or bribed anyone. As I said earlier Black comes out of this looking more foolish than corrupt.

That's my take on it too. He's an idiot.

Not sure the Telegraph have proved anything other than people in football are greedy B'stards. If we get rid of all the greedy B'stards in football then Matt Le Tissier will still be playing for us.

Not sure the Telegraph have proved anything other than people in football are greedy B'stards. If we get rid of all the greedy B'stards in football then Matt Le Tissier will still be playing for us.

and he was up for a bit on in-game spot betting...or what ever it was

QPR have put their investigation on hold as the Telegraph are refusing to let them see their evidence.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37518589

Well the Telegraph are clearly holding stuff to eek this out slowly and sell more papers.

Dunno about Black, I didn't particularly think what Fat Sam had done was that bad, stupid yes, but not hat bad. As far as I can tell with Black again been a bit silly and bit too forthcoming to total strangers but very debatable if he's actually done something wrong and a giant leap to corrupt. Need more information IMO to properly assess this and what QPR are doing is sensible.

Except from what I can work out no money has actually changed hands and there is no suggestion Black received any money or bribed anyone. As I said earlier Black comes out of this looking more foolish than corrupt.

As far as I can see, he actually has done nothing wrong. But he has shown that there are ways and means around the rules, with the implication that he could do it or could have done it himself. What is really needed is to find some evidence that someone has actually worked around the rules, that is the real goal here. Black has done nothing more than condone the practice. He is a fool, like BFS, but he is not as far as we know either a criminal or corrupt.

There was some speculation that they might have been slapped with an injunction or two (super or otherwise).

and he was up for a bit on in-game spot betting...or what ever it was

Oh ye I'd forgotten that. There's no hope then, the game's doomed.

These are the names on twitter that are allegedly going to be exposed by the Telegraph.

 

Steve Bruce, Alan Pardew, Mark Hughes, Ryan Giggs, Erik Black, Harry Redknapp, David Moyes

I cannot believe 'Arry could be involved in something like this! WTF?

Haha

As far as I can see, he actually has done nothing wrong. But he has shown that there are ways and means around the rules, with the implication that he could do it or could have done it himself. What is really needed is to find some evidence that someone has actually worked around the rules, that is the real goal here. Black has done nothing more than condone the practice. He is a fool, like BFS, but he is not as far as we know either a criminal or corrupt.

Do you really believe that Fat Sam & Black were whiter than white until the nasty press set them up .

The Telegraph were acting on information received . Information that will not stand up in a court , and will be one mans word against another . The set up a sting on certain people because they know these people are dodgy . The information they received has turned out to be right in the case of Black & Fat Sam. They are greedy , shady & dodgy . What have they got up to amongst close friends and off camera if they're like this with people they've just met .

Except from what I can work out no money has actually changed hands and there is no suggestion Black received any money or bribed anyone. As I said earlier Black comes out of this looking more foolish than corrupt.

I have to say only having watched that once, he says what could be done not what he can do for the folks scamming him.......... or facilitate it for a fee

I don't want this dragged out personally. IMO there's enough evidence to sack this idiot so they should just get on with it followed by a brief statement upholding our values, condemning Blacks actions and stating our commitment to doing things properly. The longer we drag our heels the worse it looks.

Do you really believe that Fat Sam & Black were whiter than white until the nasty press set them up .

 

The Telegraph were acting on information received . Information that will not stand up in a court , and will be one mans word against another . The set up a sting on certain people because they know these people are dodgy . The information they received has turned out to be right in the case of Black & Fat Sam. They are greedy , shady & dodgy . What have they got up to amongst close friends and off camera if they're like this with people they've just met .

The 'i' newspaper has a piece today reminding of the Stevens enquiry in 2004-ish, that concluded that 17 transfers needed further investigation. 4 of them were to Bolton whilst Allardyce was manager. Several others were to Portsmouth whilst Redknapp was there. The FA and FIFA bottled out of a proper investigation.

FIFA bottled out of a proper investigation.

I wonder why....

they might hold out on sacking him if they can't replace him before the Leicester game. as said before tho jaidi might get the nod?

The 'i' newspaper has a piece today reminding of the Stevens enquiry in 2004-ish, that concluded that 17 transfers needed further investigation. 4 of them were to Bolton whilst Allardyce was manager. Several others were to Portsmouth whilst Redknapp was there. The FA and FIFA bottled out of a proper investigation.

This seems to confirm that it is the weakness of the football authorities that has made people think corruption isn't something to be discouraged.

doddisalegend was quite right in saying there is no suggestion that Black took any money or bribed anyone but if Black was explaining how it can be done for the benefit of people he thought wanted to do it, that might suggest his morals fall short of the honesty level that Southampton FC require. Coaching someone how to commit a crime is different to carrying it out and might not land you in court but would the club have given him the job if at that time there had been doubts over his morals? If the answer to that is 'no' he might not survive.

Do you really believe that Fat Sam & Black were whiter than white until the nasty press set them up .

 

 

 

 

 

The Telegraph were acting on information received . Information that will not stand up in a court , and will be one mans word against another . The set up a sting on certain people because they know these people are dodgy . The information they received has turned out to be right in the case of Black & Fat Sam. They are greedy , shady & dodgy . What have they got up to amongst close friends and off camera if they're like this with people they've just met .

I assume by greedy you mean Black had extra pudding during the lunch meeting?

Of all those so far exposed by the Telegraph he is the only one who didn't ask for or was offered any money, no money changed hands at this meeting or at any other time. Black might be a giant plonker but greed he certainly doesn't appear to be.

Les Reed in "due diligence" shocker anyone?

...except that.... (according to something I saw published in the summer)

....Claude Puel knew EB from his time in France, and knowing that Black was bi-lingual asked him to consider working for him... if / when... he ever managed in England.

I can understand due diligence on players etc, but hiring a new manager .....and then refusing to employ his choice of assistant......is sailing a bit close to the wind.

I assume by greedy you mean

Black had extra pudding during the

lunch meeting?

 

Of all those so far exposed by the Telegraph he is the only one who didn't ask for or was offered any money, no money changed hands at this meeting or at any other time. Black might be a giant plonker but greed he certainly doesn't appear to be.

If course he's not going to ask for or accept money from people he's just met , but make no mistake had he developed a long term relationship with these people that would have been the outcome . Why do you think he met them ? Out of the goodness of his heart . Clearly an agent or someone in the game have told the telegraph a list of people they know accept bungs or provide information for a fee . The paper then set out to trap these people . It's a bit more sophisticated than strangers offering Black a bribe and him then taking it .

Won't happen of course but to see Harry behind bars would be sweet, sweet karma. I do hold grudges but am more than happy to play the long game, a very long game indeed.

5...

I wasn't including Black as he wasn't one of the new names. So 4

Everyone seems keen to find someone guilty on this thread without any actual evidence . Seems you all want a lynching regardless of any facts just like the old days or all those countrys where you just have to accuse someone of something for them to be killed .

Except from what I can work out no money has actually changed hands and there is no suggestion Black received any money or bribed anyone. As I said earlier Black comes out of this looking more foolish than corrupt.

It depends on the content of the code. If it's anything like the one where I work, he could be out having had discussions or not reporting it through the appropriate channels. Not until the full transcript is made available can a judgement be made.

Update from club - quite strong and I'd say 60/40 in blacks favour.

https://southamptonfc.com/news/2016-09-30/club-statement-eric-black

I think it's fair comment

Everyone seems keen to find someone guilty on this thread without any actual evidence . Seems you all want a lynching regardless of any facts just like the old days or all those countrys where you just have to accuse someone of something for them to be killed .

Telling people how to bribe officials at other clubs doesn't strike you as a bit dodgy? What I don't get is why was he there in the first place?