Allardyce still feels frustration over England sacking

Sam Allardyce has accused the Football Association of failing to follow employment law when sacking him as England manager in 2016.

Allardyce is considering legal action against the FA after the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) upheld in part a complaint over Daily Telegraph claims he had offered advice on how to circumvent FA and FIFA rules on third-party ownership of players.

The 63-year-old left his post by mutual consent after just 67 days in September 2016 following a Telegraph investigation into corruption in football.

Allardyce has now claimed he was given no choice by the FA but to relinquish his post as England manager.

“It was a reaction I didn’t expect,” Allardyce told talkSPORT of the FA’s response when he eventually left his role as England boss.

“I’d got called down to Wembley, and I’d actually been at a golf tournament when it broke. I had to get home and see what the situation was. I didn’t really know how to react or what to do.

“Talking about the FA, I am under a non-disclosure agreement.

“To cut a long story short it was about ‘let’s wait and see what happens’.

“And clearly by the time I got down there it wasn’t about that, it was all done and dusted in a few hours. Which was a huge shock.

“I had no choice in leaving, and none of the employment laws that you would expect were followed. I can’t really say any more than that.”

Allardyce took charge of the national team for just a single game, a 1-0 World Cup qualifying victory in Slovakia, but was handed a route back into football in December 2016 by Crystal Palace.

The FA issued a statement in response to Allardyce’s claims that their position  remained unchanged from September 2016.

“We have not been involved with, and do not know, the details of the Independent Press Standards Organisation report,” read the FA statement.

“However we can confirm that The FA’s position on Sam Allardyce has not changed. He apologised for his behaviour at the time and we reached a mutual agreement which both parties were happy with.”

The Telegraph acknowledged the IPSO decision in a correction printed in Thursday’s edition of the paper.

It accepted that Allardyce, while suggesting a way that a third party could share in the financial rewards of a transfer, had made clear that a third party could not take a portion of the transfer fee.

The Telegraph also accepted that Allardyce had not entered into negotiations to be paid to give advice on third-party ownership, and admitted “an inaccurate claim was made that Mr Allardyce had briefed on ‘breaking the rules’.”

The correction said: “On these three points alone, the articles were inaccurate. This correction has been published following a complaint upheld in part by the Independent Press Standards Organisation.”

An article in Thursday’s edition of the Telegraph also stated: “On the major issues raised by Mr Allardyce, IPSO found for the Telegraph.

“It upheld our right to use subterfuge and secret filming, since there was a strong public interest in investigating and it was reasonable for the Telegraph to have believed that it could only obtain material evidence through subterfuge.”

On the Telegraph’s claims he had attempted to explain how to circumvent third-party ownership rules, Allardyce added: “That was the key issue as far as we were concerned.

“I still truly believe that was the main reason I lost the England job.”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *