I've seen the Cellino video, or at least the Telegraph's edited cut of it. For once I don't believe he's broke the rules. He's very opinionated and maybe going against the FL's 'ethics' (if they have any!!) but I don't believe he's broke any rules?
This is coming from a Leeds fan who's very much anti-Cellino.
I've only just watched the video, they are again framing it as dodgy but he says, if you want a share of the profits, buy in... it's that simple. That is how football works. If you want a share of the profits of a business, you buy into that business.
The guy taking a 5k bung specifically to get players into his club, or to help, that is dodgy as hell. 55k to go talk to some people is not, neither is saying, if I sell you 20% of the club, you're entitled to 20% of the profits on players.
This is where the whole 'sting' and all the articles are really ******* me off, they are trying to muddle completely legal things and normal business, with bungs and illegal activity.
The Leeds guy offered to 'get around the rules' as the telegraph say, but offering a standard and completely legal deal to buy part of the club to share in the profits. THey keep framing getting around the rules as illegal as they did with Fat Sam but there is zero actual evidence or even implication they mean doing so illegally or by breaking FA rules.
It shouldn't be a surprise that QPR said Hasselbaink did nothing wrong and had a clause in his contract that he can accept such speaking gigs and most managers take such work on the side. The one guy directly fired now was literally caught accepting a bung. Allardyce specifically rejected a bung when offered and told them no multiple times and to never talk about it again... but he got fired because the Telegraph framed paid meet and greets and 'getting around the third party ownership rules' as dodgy when they aren't.
Even the Barnsley guy, people need to realise exactly what he said. There is a world of difference between saying, "if you give me £5k I can tell you who i think are good players the club needs and if you want to try and sign them and get involved that is on you", and "for 5k you give me a list of players you want us to buy and I'll try and convince the boss to buy them".
One is more than anything else, just advice. That is in general what paid meet and greets in any industry are about, getting the ear and knowledge of the person you are paying. But influence is a very different thing. You can go to meet an investment group and say, if you want my advice, Iwobi, Ihaenacho and 5 other players are top rising stars who will go very far in the game. You should totally try to sign them up because their value will increase. You can also go to meet an investment group and say, give me a list of 5 players you act as agents for who you want my club to buy, I'll go back and try and convince my bosses to buy them. The former is not wrong, the latter is very wrong. One is paying for advice, it's consulting, the world revolves around this and is in no way improper, the latter is offering to use their influence in an unprofessional way, against what his bosses pay him for.
I'm sure I remember something along the lines of Wenger giving Pulis some advice to buy that defence midfielder whose name I can't remember. I'm not suggesting it was paid at all, just that advice is fine, it can be paid or unpaid. Where it would be dodgy is if Wenger was paid by an investment group to give that advice to Pulis to get him to sign the player so the investment gorup could profit. Advice, fine even paid advice is fine, it's when you pay for undue influence that you get dodgy.
Now you can certainly imply that the Barnsley guy taking 5k and specifically talking about players and spicy deals means he'd also take money to try to sign players that he had no interest in other than financial gain.
