So they cleared him if recent allegations but sack him for something that may have happened in a previous job?
2 Likes
The Ebola One 1:0 The FA?
Did i call it right, or talking bollocks? Might still be bollocks but i wouldn’t bet on it.
Another fa inquiry(only because they shit themselves, when they heard that there was going to be a parliamentary inquiry) still to come. Wonder if they will be forced to look at the evidence this time, maybe even talk to the players involved and release the video to Aluko’s legal team, so they can confirm(or not) if it is in fact the correct video.
I still say lots more to come out and some very high up people forced out by their own attempts to sweep it all under the carpet.
2 Likes
He’s been sacked, after previous inappropriate conduct at the Bristol Academy in 2015.
They’ve obviously got him bang to rights on the sacking.
Get the impression he sees himself a bit of a player’s playa. He’ll also see himself as unemployed after tonight. As always, I’m disappointed with the misogynists online insisting it must be some problem with the woman.
I reckon we’re going to find out that it’s actually Mark Sampson who has a problem with women, not least staying professional with them in a working environment.
5 Likes
Chief executive, Martin Glenn was notified about this from someone outside the fa. Was it a journalist? Maybe Daniel Taylor. He has been all over this.
His statement doesn’t sound good.
"Mark had overstepped the professional boundaries between player and coach.”
Tbf, he looks like a wrong 'un anyway.
Ahhh, trial by the media and social media…
Don’t doubt there is likely to me more “revelations” in the coming days, weeks, months.
As I said originally on page one of this thread when it all started:
“I’m of the view that you go to court to air any grievances and if you win then shout it from the rooftops…”
I’d rather see the whole situation sorted out of the public gaze and speculation, with a formal comment / press release at the end of the whole affair if appropriate. Don’t see that happening though.
Appreciate that living in the public gaze means you’re subject to more scrutiny, but I find these sort of media events slightly sordid / tacky - particularly where all of the facts aren’t generally available. Maybe it’s just me who feels like that.
3 Likes
If his previous misconduct was so obvious it makes you wonder about the FAs due diligence when they appointed him.
3 Likes
How so? The statement from the FA suggests anything but that.
Yeah, that’s going to be hard to explain for one or two people.
He was already on the fa payroll when the report was completed. I can only assume someone(maybe multiple people) buried it.
@fowllyd Some people will of course listen to what the FA have to say. But taking a (un)educated guess, a lot of people have already made up their minds based on comments from the media, but more likely social media Arsebook, Twatter and maybe even Sotonians (you never know) etc etc
What does that have to do with anything? What does it matter what I think or what you think, or whereby we arrive at our conclusions? The opinion of the FA’s managemnet is all that matters here, and they’ve taken a decision based on a full report that they apparently hadn’t seen until very recently.
I can’t see why you’re putting this down as a case of trial by media/social media.
2 Likes
Having acquitted him twice of racist remarks, finding that not only has the problem not gone away, it is escalating, the FA lawyers have gone on a trawl to find something, anything to get shot of him, sweetened of course with a sizeable lump sum.
1 Like
And you don’t see that the discussions on social media are being based on very little actual evidence / information (unless you have access to all the relevant source material)? All were doing is taking 1 + 1 and making 3, that’s you, me, everyone. Let me put it this way, if it were you, would you like the whole story to be out there in the media with people coming up with what are most likely inaccurate theories and wild / offensive comments and opinion? Trial by popular social media in my opinion. Feel free to disagree, that’s your prerogative.
Forget social media. Let’s take the words of the fa chief executive as evidence.
“Mark had overstepped the professional boundaries between player and coach. We know that coaches are in a potential position of power and that position mustn’t be abused."
3 Likes
So are you saying that the FA have terminated Sampson’s contract because of things that have been written/said in the media or posted on social media?
Fair enough SOS
I see it is reported that the FA did check his tenure in his previous role, receiving a report on this which concluded he was fine to be employed in the England job.
Some 2.5 years later they now say that they have only just read the full report which they have had all along, after a tip off (!) and have spotted that, no, his conduct was unprofessional after all.
Seriously, WTF?
6 Likes
You know full well that I’m not saying that. Public perception of the whole sorry mess that’s a different story. People here are generally pretty well balanced when it comes to things like this. Elsewhere I’m not so convinced.