By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
The Telegraph â€@Telegraph 1m1 minute ago Latest #football4sale allegations concern Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink at QPR, Tommy Wright of Barnsley and Leeds' Massimo Cellino
0
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:29 - Sep 28 with 3630 views
As far as I'm understanding it - he agrees to speak to investors for a fee considered worth his while. Not represent, not act for. Speak. It's free money for him, like the after dinner circuit.
"And obviously you would be able to look at other aspects of our business favourably, that would be appreciated". He responds he doesn't really know what they're even about as he says he hasn't had the time to google them yet. Fob them off, let's have the money mugs.
"What we would like to think... there's no guarantee of anything.... as long as we get the chance of giving you a player as well."
He replies "Give me a fcking player! But it has to be a good player". Now all that really suggests to me is he's cracking a joke, not closing the door on it but not open to it either. If it comes in handy so be it.
Does this really add up to negotiating to "work for an agency who he discusses plans to buy a player from" as Hunterhoop put it? I'm not sure it does.
4
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:29 - Sep 28 with 3629 views
Can't see that he's done anything illegal as of now but what he seems to agree to is a clear conflict of interest. Allardyce couldn't sign players so he was merely giving advice however ill-advised that was. Hasslebaink could sign players, so what he's discussing here is taking money from a firm and then dealing with them afterwards on an issue where his employers would be paying money to that same firm. That distinction is not a small one and to my mind, even allowing for the fact that Hasselbaink only has input rather than control of his club's transfers, makes his position untenable.
He has to go.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
'He was told the Far East firm wanted to become involved in the transfer of players. But the Championship manager saw that as no barrier to working with the firm, and was open to the idea of signing players they represented, despite the apparent conflict of interest with his job at QPR. He would potentially have been spending his club’s money on players represented by a company that was paying him.'
That's the end of him I should think. How can you trust him? Why get involved in this shite stuff?
0
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:31 - Sep 28 with 3591 views
Just seen the video. Not good at all. It looks pretty clear he's negotiating a bung. I was at Burton last night telling anyone who'd listen that we should stick with him. He's got to go now though surely.
0
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:33 - Sep 28 with 3495 views
I think he's stuffed, the conflict of interest angle is going to be overwhelming in this case.
But if he argues; it was a private business arrangement and that any linkage to QPR was so he would get 'good players' and thus, he was putting QPR at the head of the queue and show he hadn't accepted dross, then who knows. However, it's the appearance of conflict and in this post-Allardyce world, he should walk if he has a shrewd of decency about him.
Just how much is enough for these guys?
I suspect more will follow and the market for managers is going to have a lot more buyers than usual as we approach the start of the sacking season.
'
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
As I posted earlier, I think that the club will stick together on this one. The annual stuffing again Fulham will make these revelations moot though...
It really is craaaap supporting our lot, isn't it?
He's been stitched up. I read it as he wanted money from the "firm" to travel to look at their players around the globe. Obviously its money on the side for him but he doesn't have any say in what players we buy. I cant see how this effects the club too much other than he'll be jetting around during international breaks. He's not asking for money to play certain players.. Am I reading it wrong? He is at the very thin end of a massive wedge of corruption in football. Of course his job is on the line now.
I cant believe that there is nothing on Redknapp yet. Maybe he's clean as a whistle after all. Just gutted our clubs name is being dragged through it again.
Occasional providers of half decent House music.
2
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:39 - Sep 28 with 3320 views
There is no suggestion there that he would look more favourably on the agency's players than any other players, let alone profit directly from a future transfer arrangement. The agency offers him the eventuality of taking a look at their players, he doesn't rule it out. Is that a conflict of interest?
More than anything the video gives the impression he's allowing them to think whatever they want to think as long as he can trouser the money. Grubby perhaps - but wrongdoing, not so sure.
I also think the Telegraph throughout these exposes have been selecting from their recorded material very carefully.
[Post edited 28 Sep 2016 22:41]
1
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:39 - Sep 28 with 3317 views
I've just seen the video as well, and I don't think that is clear at all, its heavily edited and no context of conversation either side of the quotes, is there a longer video elsewhere or am I missing something?
2
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:40 - Sep 28 with 3275 views
It's exactly the type of statement the club has to make. They have to be seen to be investigating this properly before taking any action should they wish to do so. If they were to sack him without due process they could be open to a lawsuit from Hasselbaink so I think they're playing this correctly and I wouldn't read any more into it at this stage.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Don't agree with them saying they'll investigate but then in the next sentence say they stand by him. How can they know that until they've completed the investigation?
0
Hasselbaink in the Telegraph on 22:42 - Sep 28 with 3210 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
