The Daily Telegraph Corruption Scandal

Very true. Just as sad though is the fact that if that did happen it wouldn't make it into the paper and would be considered un-newsworthy.

The media, as ever, are only really interested in holding up a mirror to society if they are sure that those in it are reflected in the worst light possible. The end effect of which is doom-laden, depressing and ultimately self-fulfilling IMHO..

 

Plus if it was Harry none of you would believe it - would just say he smelt something fishy so declined but is still a crook.

 

Situation 1.

Singapore business to JFH 'we would like to pay you £55K for making a speech in Singapore'.
JFH to Singapore business - Well I am employed by QPR as a football manager but my contract does allow this additional work so OK.
Now JFH has 2 employers , he is a football manager for QPR and a speaker for the Singapore business.... great no conflict of interest, no problem here.

Situation 2.

Singapore business to JFH 'we would like to pay you £55K for making a speech in Singapore'.
JFH to Singapore business - Well I am employed by QPR as a football manager but my contract does allow this additional work so OK.
Singapore business - oh BTW we also represent certain players and would it be possible to discuss player transfers - we would really like to work 'more closely' with you.
JFH - yes OK but the players better be good players
Now JFH has 2 employers , he is a football manager for QPR and a speaker for the Singapore business whose business is representing players...

JFH is now working for QPR who potentially will buy a player and for the Singapore business representing the players being transferred....

Who's interests is he best representing from this point on? Anyone who doesn't think this situation is open to a massive conflict of interest debate is deluded.

The Bribary act has an expectation test, i would suggest it is reasonable for QPR to expect the manager of the club not to be receiving financial payments from a 3rd party that represents the opposite side of a player transfer negotiation. Even if that payment is for activities not directly related to any such negotiations.

The problem with all these cases is simply that JFH et al, are all taking their respective employers money but failing to prioritize their employers interests above their own personal gain. In my company this would be gross misconduct and i would be sacked.

They are all guilty at the very least of greed and naivety. Is that who you want running any organization or business?

 

Exactly that. Beat me to it.

 

Nicely argued that man. I find it hard to disagree with that.

 

The whole business of player ownership, transfers, agents etc stinks.

If a club has to declare its incomings and outgoings for tax purposes why is there so much secrecy around transfer fees? "Undisclosed sum" crops up every transfer window and I've never seen a satisfactory answer as to why this is allowed to continue. Sign the player, say how much you paid for him and if you are worried that others in the team will get to know what his salary is then maybe you need to look closer at your payment policy.

Is it unlawful to accept a fee to go abroad to talk to possible investors? If JFH had said "I want £50k in cash as I won't declare it to the tax man" I could see it being a problem but accepting in principle an invitation like the one he was offered doesn't sound like the crime of the century.

 

Unfortunately you do not know which of those scenarios actually happened in real life

 

How about Situation 3 which is like Situation 2 but JFH passes the details of players who are being suggested to the correct people at QPR to look at and decide whether or not to buy them at some stage

 

He needs to go sharphish

 

http://www.skysports.com/watch/video...er-allegations

 

True. It is a real problem. Perhaps Chris Ramsey, or another stop gap solution as we did with Neil Warnock.

This could be a messy dilemma to resolve. I don't have any better answers, and thankfully, it is not my job to provide them. I can only speculate based upon the very limited knoweldge I have.

 

Fair point. Now I'm just confused.

I guess my worry is that regardless of whether or not he's actually done wrong here this could become a bit of a millstone around his neck and of the club.

 

True.

 

Hoos said we and most Clubs did not disclose because to do so would inform the competition (other Clubs) that, for example, we just sold X for 5 million, and therefore a Club with a player we wanted to buy, could raise their asking price for a player knowing we should have that cash.

 

Still smelly for me... the minute he accepts money from the 3rd party for services provided, i don't know whether he is suggesting them because he genuinely thinks they are good suggestions or because his other employer has asked him to and if he were to refuse it might end his additional revenue stream.

He is the manager of QPR, so ask yourself the question would the 3rd party be offering to pay him for speeches if he wasn't the manager of QPR and could influence player transfer proceedings? If the answer is no then you already know the motivations behind the offer.

 

Who is that talking in this clip?

 

if he has done nothing wrong then he should fight back. the guy in video made some very vaild points

 

Only a £55K speaking engagement says Jimmy.

Now even Barnsley in on the fun.

Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink quizzed by QPR over transfer claim as he remains in job

please log in to view this image

Carry on: Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink will work as usual during the investigation Rex Features

Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink was today quizzed by QPR after he was the latest manager named in an investigation into corruption in football.

The QPR boss was alleged to have negotiated a £55,000 fee to fly to the Far East and work for a company looking to sell players to the Championship club.

QPR launched an investigation and Hasselbaink spoke to Rangers director of football Les Ferdinand this morning about the allegations. Ferdinand is leading the probe with chief executive Lee Hoos, who was due to speak to Hasselbaink today, with owner Tony Fernandes out of the country.

Hasselbaink has not been suspended by the club and is expected to be in charge for their trip to Fulham on Saturday. He was due to take training today and will continue in his role as normal while the investigation is ongoing.

please log in to view this image

Hasselbaink denies Telegraph claims; QPR launch internal investigation

Hasselbaink was named as part of Daily Telegraph investigation which led to Sam Allardyce leaving his post as England manager on Tuesday night.

Video footage shows Hasselbaink asking his suitors to “come up with a nice figure” for a role in their company, which the Telegraph says would involve a number of trips to meet with the firm in Singapore. In a statement last night, QPR said they have “every confidence in our manager”.

Hasselbaink, 44, said in a statement: “I have, through my lawyers, responded in full to the accusations levelled against me by The Telegraph.

“I was approached by Mr McGarvey and Ms Newell of The Telegraph purporting to be players’ agents. They offered me a fee to make a speech in Singapore. I do not see anything unusual in being offered to be paid to make a speech.

“I did not make any promises in return. I did not ask QPR to purchase any of the players who were said to be managed by Mr McGarvey and Ms Newell and did not and would not recommend the purchase of a player for my personal gain. I deny any accusations of wrongdoing on my part.”

A QPR statement said: “First and foremost, the club takes very seriously any alleged breach of the rules.

“With this in mind, the club can confirm that there will be a thorough internal investigation regarding this matter. However, we have every confidence in our manager and the robust systems and processes the club has in place.”

Read more

• 
  
  
  • Greg Clarke admits The FA are limited in battle against corruption
  • Barnsley suspend assistant head coach Tommy Wright over bung allegations
  • Sam Allardyce: Harry Redknapp says entrapment is wrong but he will return to management

Meanwhile, Barnsley have suspended their assistant head coach Tommy Wright following allegations — also coming from the Telegraph’s undercover sting — he took a £5,000 ‘bung’ to help place players at his club.

Leeds owner Massimo Cellino was also implicated in the Telegraph investigation, with the Italian alleged to have offered a way to help businessman get around third-party ownership rules.
Wright denies any wrongdoing and Leeds called the allegations concerning Cellino a “non-story”.

http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...sfer-claim-as-he-remains-in-job-a3357111.html

 

I'm going to keep an open mind until the true facts become apparent. I trust the club to carry out their own internal investigation and to take whatever action they consider necessary. Having said that, the sheer fact that the media are once again talking about our club in a bad light, is not good. We do not need more negative publicity. If JFH is completely innocent, I hope his litigation against the newspaper is successful and he takes them for millions. If he is not as squeaky clean as he claims, he deserves his P45.

 

Just realised that BBC radio news has stopped mentioning us and JFH in their last 3 bulletins - now it's just Allardyce and Barnsley. A sign that the proof required to defend a lawsuit from JFH may not be there?