EXCLUSIVE: BBC Bung storm

 

Beeb bung names revealed

 

By Rob Beasley

 

THE News of the World can reveal the football clubs, managers and staff targeted in the TV bung row tearing soccer apart.

 

High-profile staff at Bolton, Portsmouth and Middlesbrough have had letters from the BBC's Panorama programme telling them they have been suckered into an elaborate sting aimed at exposing the bung culture in English football.

 

Among the BBC's targets are Pompey manager Harry Redknapp, ex-player Kevin Bond, now at Newcastle, and Craig Allardyce, son of Bolton boss Sam.

 

Others involved are soccer agent Peter Harrison, Sven Goran Eriksson's manager Athole Still and England star Stewart Downing's agent Ian Elliott.

 

Undercover

 

They were among a long list of soccer personalities introduced to a German businessman called Knut Aufdemberge.

 

He claimed to represent a mega-rich American tycoon, Paul Silverman, who wanted to launch a new, money-rich sports agency in the UK called Dynamic Soccer.

 

What the football men did not know was that the two "businessmen" were really undercover BBC investigators.

 

The pair secretly recorded meetings and conversations over a six-month period.

 

They tried to persuade some of their targets to offer huge sums of money to Premiership managers illegally in a bid to involve them financially in the new agency.

 

All the BBC targets vigorously deny any wrong-doing.

 

They insist they refused to offer or accept bribes.

 

Harrison even sent an e-mail to Aufdemberge last April threatening to report him.

 

He then wrote to the FA two weeks ago, warning them that two mysterious businessmen were attempting to bribe Premiership managers.

 

But before that, Harrison helped set up a meeting between Redknapp, Bond and Aufdemberge at Portsmouth's training complex.

 

We contacted both Harrison and Redknapp last night and both refused to comment. The Portsmouth manager has made it known that he has contacted his lawyers to defend his reputation.

 

One man who did go on the record was Ian Elliott, who insisted he had done nothing wrong.

 

Buy

 

He explained: "I agreed to a meeting because I was told these people wanted to buy my company, Elliott Sports Management, for ??1.2million. It all seemed too good to be true.

 

"The meeting did not last long, about 20 minutes I think.

 

"Afterwards I told my accountant and my lawyer that things just didn't add up.

 

"And I must stress that the subject of paying managers or players was never raised by me or by them."

 

Bolton boss Sam Allardyce is privately furious that BBC bosses tried to take advantage of his son.

 

Craig Allardyce quit being a sports agent last month amid concerns he could be compromising his father's position in the game.

 

The BBC sting began last November when Aufdemberge first contacted Harrison.

 

The pair had a number of meetings and dinners to discuss the project. Aufdemberge claimed Silverman wanted to form a "super" agency in England.

 

His plan was to unite a number of top English agents who would work together to take on the game's biggest names.

 

Dynamic Soccer claimed they would pay managers cash bungs of around ??200,000 to get involved in their company.

 

But the News of the World understands that all the BBC's targets refused, insisting the plot would breach FA rules.

 

Harrison claims he was told he alone could earn a staggering ??1.8m if he could help to launch the agency successfully.

 

The agent was so keen to cash in he even wrote a detailed business plan for Silverman to put into operation and also recommended a number of agents who might be interested.

 

Corruption

 

He suggested Ian Elliott, Craig Allardyce and Athole Still.

 

A BBC insider said: "All the agents fell for the story.

 

"They had no idea the company was not for real or that the two individuals were in fact reporters.

 

"The tactics were to persuade them to offer Premiership managers large sums of money to get involved in the company. It was hoped it would uncover widespread corruption.

 

"Now there is a big legal row over what Panorama can or cannot screen."

 

FA chiefs have vowed to investigate, providing the BBC shows them its evidence.

 

The programme is due to be screened later this month ??? providing it gets the green light from lawyers.

1 why not?

Because I pay tax on my earnings. Why should someone already earning infinitely more than me be exempt from this?

1 why not?

 

2 a number? can think the revenue will be intersted, but who else

 

Why not? Because it's illegal. That's a good enough reason in my book. But most of all, it's immoral.

 

Inland Revenue. FA rules. Fraud (fair enough, may ultimately be the same as tax evasion). May even fall under theft from employer.

 

If you found out an employee had formed a relationship with a supplier - where the supplier was giving the employee a cut - would you not question whether your employee was comprimising his judgement? Even if it didn't directly cost your company anything, in the short term?

 

Somewhere down the line their decisions will become clouded by what is in it for them - not for the business.

 

It's blatantly wrong.

Because I pay tax on my earnings. Why should someone already earning infinitely more than me be exempt from this?

 

the question was why would somebody take a bung if they already wanted the player

 

i answered, why wouldn't they

 

 

i'd have no problem with the revenue going after anybody - high earner or otherwise - who avoids income tax

 

but i didn't think that was the question

 

the question, as i understood it, was what an employer should do

the question was why would somebody take a bung if they already wanted the player

 

i answered, why wouldn't they

i'd have no problem with the revenue going after anybody - high earner or otherwise - who avoids income tax

 

but i didn't think that was the question

 

the question, as i understood it, was what an employer should do

 

In a nutshell - they shouldn't take it because it's illegal, and like many things illegal - it's also immoral.

 

The employer should sack the employee for dishonesty, fraud and comprimising their position.

 

Quite clear cut in my book...

What should an employer do? They should sack them immediately. As suggested by exiledwhite, if a manager is offered 2 players for the same price, their decision on which to buy should based purely on footballing ability. I would hate to think that transfer decisions are clouded by the availability or otherwise of a bung. Then again, how else do you explain transfers such as Bellion from Sunderland to Manchester United?

 

Despite what I've already said, I agree with suggestions from other posters that it's probably best for us not to say too much on this right now. At the moment, it is after all, just rumour and scaremongering.

can't believe he won't know whats in the show before its aired

 

I don't think anyone does. I've just read on the BBC website that the programme has still not reached the final edit, there are bits going into it even this afternoon, and whereas normally other internal BBC departments get to see previews, this time they're not being allowed

 

I have a bad feeling about this.

 

 

As a record 300m pounds was spent on players in the Premiership this summer, an undercover team infiltrated the murky world of football for a year to reveal the extraordinary depth of dishonesty, flagrant rule-breaking and outright corruption in the nation's favourite and wealthiest sport. The investigation names top agents, clubs and managers who are cheating their supporters and delivers evidence which will rock football to its foundations.

Unusual horseracing results are investigated after every race.

Transfers that look a little strange ie Bellion, Oscar Perez, Emile Heskey for ??5.5m etc should also be investigated straight away.

I think a more difficult documentary to make would be to uncover someone in football who is completely clean.

Christ, who gives?

 

Anyone recognise this fella?

 

There must be some reason we signed him....

Just a thought, and I haven't checked my facts, but....

 

Didn't Venables get done for something like this? If so, God help Allardyce if the same happens to him. This time in a couple of years he might be the England assistant manager.....

 

Anyone recognise this fella?

 

There must be some reason we signed him....

 

So that's what he looks like

Just a thought, and I haven't checked my facts, but....

 

Didn't Venables get done for something like this? If so, God help Allardyce if the same happens to him. This time in a couple of years he might be the England assistant manager.....

 

I suspect Sugar made allegations (when he ousted Venables from Spurs) that boringly dragged on for months and months with no real evidence ever forthcoming.

 

From memory like...

 

Anyone recognise this fella?

 

There must be some reason we signed him....

 

 

That is the deal that really worries me.

 

We have all questioned why? why? why? and you have to say that what ever the reason, it does stink.

I suspect Sugar made allegations (when he ousted Venables from Spurs) that boringly dragged on for months and months with no real evidence ever forthcoming.

 

From memory like...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/965692.stm

 

In January 1998 the High Court banned him from being a company director for seven years.

 

In their case against Venables, the Department of Trade and Industry outlined instances of bribery, lying, deception, manipulation of accounts and taking money that should have been given to creditors.

 

He also left the BBC for ITV in 1994, following a legal dispute over allegations ironically on Panorama.

He sounds a good, honest law abiding sort

The real worry about this programme is what does not make TV due to legal reasons but still ends up in the hands of the Lord Stevens enquiry.

 

I hope Big Sam is cleared but just think back to the many transfers of players into the Reebok that make you ask why?

Remember the 3 signings on transfer deadline day in January 2003(?). Sam admitted he had not seen any of them play and the names had come from agents!

 

All is probably innocent and above board but these investigative hacks make a living out of half-cooked stories like that!

The real worry about this programme is what does not make TV due to legal reasons but still ends up in the hands of the Lord Stevens enquiry.

 

I hope Big Sam is cleared but just think back to the many transfers of players into the Reebok that make you ask why?

Remember the 3 signings on transfer deadline day in January 2003(?). Sam admitted he had not seen any of them play and the names had come from agents!

 

All is probably innocent and above board but these investigative hacks make a living out of half-cooked stories like that!

 

 

 

The BBC is run by Jews & Queers. I'll wait until the Stevens enquiry thank you very much.

The BBC is run by Jews & Queers. I'll wait until the Stevens enquiry thank you very much.

 

 

You believe everything that Keith Chegwin says?

The BBC is run by Jews & Queers. I'll wait until the Stevens enquiry thank you very much.

 

Funny that as Jewish friends of mine reckon BBC News coverage of the Palestinian/Israel conflict is massively anti-Israel.

Surely Big Sam would know what will be in the show. To some extent, because he knows whether he's guilty or not.

 

I will say though, that the Oscar Perez deal does scare me.

Anyone else seen the mob of press at the game, much more than usual. All there to get a snap of Big Sam. Something smells shitty....Just hope this isn't Sam's last game

Well craigs on there anyroad!

Jesus wept. This isn't looking good.

Ooh Boy

Allarydyce, Gartside, Fadiga..... BOLTON WANDERERS.

Looking bad so far!!!!