Mark Sampson

Sweep

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
2,476
Visit site
Mark Sampson has been sacked as England Women football head coach by the FA after nearly 4 years in the job. Apparently he was dismissed after the FA was made aware of his conduct when he was manager at Bristol Academy. The FA say a report "revealed clear evidence of inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour" and the full report was only brought to the attention of the current FA leadership last week. However, Bristol Academy say that they were made aware of the FA investigation into allegations over Sampson in 2014 but they haven't had any further contact with the FA on the issue. The 2014 report concluded that Sampson "did not pose a risk".
The FA says it still stands by the findings of the investigation into the more recent allegations made by player Eni Aluko which found no evidence of any wrongdoing, so Sampson's sacking is nothing to do with that. Sampson was immediately removed as patron of the charity Women in Sport after his dismissal.

Seemingly the FA decided to sack him last week but left him in post for the match against Russia. In any event they had full knowledge of the report and the "clear" evidence last week.

This all seems a bit odd. Even the Sports Minister has waded in, saying it's "a mess".

So, as I understand it, he has been sacked for something he did in a former job that was investigated 3 years ago by the people who have just sacked him, after he has been doing a very successful job for almost 4 years. On top of that, the people who have just sacked him say it's nothing to do with allegations of a similar nature that they have also investigated and also found nothing. Despite him then being deemed guilty 3 years after the fact and against the findings of the original report, it seems they let him carry on for a few days more. As this would seem to leave the current players at risk it would be interesting to know what this "inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour" consisted of. I am sure I am not the only one wondering if the FA was more concerned about the Russia result than protecting their players from this kind of behaviour. Behaviour bad enough to get him the sack.

This all seems a bit strange and as the Minister says, it's a mess.
 

chrisd

Major Champion
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
24,788
Location
Kent
Visit site
Also, it seems that the FA had the report of the Bristol case but nobody had bothered to read it??

You couldn't make it up!
 

sawtooth

Tour Winner
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
5,226
Location
Berkshire
Visit site
There's no mystery, the FA has very recently received new information and then sacked him.

You have to give the FA credit for acting decisively and honourably. There must have been a huge temptation to sweep it under the carpet as Sampson looks to be doing a great job.
 

rudebhoy

Q-School Graduate
Joined
Sep 3, 2015
Messages
4,454
Location
whitley bay
Visit site
Bizarre that the 2015 enquiry cleared him of any wrongdoing at Bristol, yet they are now using that as an excuse to sack him, while at the same time saying he is clear to work elsewhere as a coach, so presumably not considered a risk.

it all stinks.
 

sawtooth

Tour Winner
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
5,226
Location
Berkshire
Visit site
Bizarre that the 2015 enquiry cleared him of any wrongdoing at Bristol, yet they are now using that as an excuse to sack him, while at the same time saying he is clear to work elsewhere as a coach, so presumably not considered a risk.

it all stinks.

That would be a rather silly and expensive mistake to make. The FA and their solicitors would know the financial consequences of sacking Sampson unless they had a water tight case.
 

FairwayDodger

Money List Winner
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Messages
9,622
Location
Edinburgh
Visit site
Shows real failures in their recruitment that he ever got the job in the first place but strange that he can be sacked for something that happened before he was in the job.

Can't help but thinking they've been looking for a way to get rid of him after there wasn't enough evidence to support the more recent allegations against him.
 

Lord Tyrion

Money List Winner
Moderator
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
26,695
Location
Northumberland
Visit site
Can't help but thinking they've been looking for a way to get rid of him after there wasn't enough evidence to support the more recent allegations against him.

This. A forgotten report, that they actually knew about, suddenly appears and out he goes. All very convenient. This makes the FA look both incompetent and weasely at the same time.
 

Old Skier

Tour Winner
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
9,607
Location
Instow - play in North Devon
Visit site
Nice way to get sacked - full buy out of the contract. FA once again played/pays a blinder. If the guy has done something wrong and failed to disclose information at interview why has he been sacked on such a big wedge.
 

rudebhoy

Q-School Graduate
Joined
Sep 3, 2015
Messages
4,454
Location
whitley bay
Visit site
That would be a rather silly and expensive mistake to make. The FA and their solicitors would know the financial consequences of sacking Sampson unless they had a water tight case.


they've paid up the rest of his contract, I guess he will have signed something to say it's the end of the matter, in order to get the settlement.

another good question is why did the FA pay Aluko 80k if her allegations were dismissed?

some papers dropping heavy hints that he got into "relationships" with a couple of female players while at Bristol. it's possible that one of the tabloids was about to run a "kiss and tell", and the FA wanted to do a bit of damage limitation.
 

Sweep

Journeyman Pro
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
2,476
Visit site
There's no mystery, the FA has very recently received new information and then sacked him.

You have to give the FA credit for acting decisively and honourably. There must have been a huge temptation to sweep it under the carpet as Sampson looks to be doing a great job.
But what new information? When he was accused about his time at Bristol a full report was commissioned (which concluded he posed no risk). When Aluko accused him the FA commissioned an independent enquiry which also cleared him. So now the FA receive new information and they take it at face value, no report, no enquiry. This then causes them to read the 2014 report for the first time (!) which concluded that he posed no risk and say it contains clear evidence of inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour. I'd say that constitutes some mystery. I'd say none of this means the FA have acted decisively or honourably. Unless decisively means reading a report years later and it's honourable to not immediately remove someone when you have clear evidence of inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour.
 

Crazyface

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
7,023
Location
Cheshire
Visit site
I think he knew before the match this was going to happen. If you watched his reaction when the girls ran over to him when they scored the first, he almost shunned them, with a wry smile. I thought this was odd when it happened.
As for the FA, they are bunch of, well I hate every single one of them. They do nothing to help at grass roots level. DO NOT BELIEVE WHAT THEY SAY !!!!!
 

pbrown7582

Money List Winner
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
9,050
Location
north yorks
Visit site
it was all sorted before the match the other night.

A right old mess surely if the allegations of inappropriate relations with players at Bristol were around when he was appointed the FA should of fully read the report then not NOW.

Not a safeguarding issue which is really big at present in light of the sad tales which have been exposed recently but a conduct issue so those relationships weren't with U18's but deemed inappropriate for a coach.
 

Fish

Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
18,384
Visit site
A 'whistle blower' brought the alleged inappropriate relationship/s to the FA attentions which is why they only just read the reports in detail recently as they took all the previous allegations at face value when he was cleared of them.

This just stinks of sour grapes from someone acting on behalf of Aluko (or even herself) who although has had an nice little earner for some reason, is still seeking some kind of personal attack on Sampson because she couldn't accept being dropped at times and thought she was better than she was and as such through in the race card!

His relationship/s were clearly mentioned in the report that cleared him of any wrong doings so it's very poor of the FA to look back at the report and now decide that he's not the 'character' they want to fill the current role.

I think the FA are having their balls squeezed personally, the 'whistle blower' is obviously threatening to air everything and question his appointment. They (the FA) are showing weakness by bowing to this because if he was cleared of everything they have nothing to be concerned about, but once again the PC brigade win and the weak people in authority bend over to appease them!

If a coach/manager or even owner cannot have a relationship with a player as it's deemed inappropriate, even though the relationship at the time could be serious and who knows where it may lead, then what of Karen Brady, or is it OK that way around?
 

richart

Major Champion
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
19,000
Location
Surrey
Visit site
Another player Chelsea's Drew Spence has now come forward to corroborate Aluko's claims.

Why pay out £80,000 to someone if there is no case ? Think there is a lot more to be revealed, and wouldn't surprise me if more players come forward now Sampson has gone.
 

Fish

Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
18,384
Visit site
Another player Chelsea's Drew Spence has now come forward to corroborate Aluko's claims.

Why pay out £80,000 to someone if there is no case ? Think there is a lot more to be revealed, and wouldn't surprise me if more players come forward now Sampson has gone.

She's not just come forward, she was always at the center of the allegations in support of Aluko who has a confidentiality clause built into her 'settlement'.

Obviously now Sampson has gone Spence is looking for some action (money) and more snakes will come crawling out, but the actions of the players on the pitch after the goal speaks greater than a couple of players who were dropped and couldn't accept it which is why not only an internal, but an external investigation cleared Sampson of all those allegations.

This will run for a while now......
 

Kellfire

Blackballed
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
7,580
Location
Leeds
Visit site
She's not just come forward, she was always at the center of the allegations in support of Aluko who has a confidentiality clause built into her 'settlement'.

Obviously now Sampson has gone Spence is looking for some action (money) and more snakes will come crawling out, but the actions of the players on the pitch after the goal speaks greater than a couple of players who were dropped and couldn't accept it which is why not only an internal, but an external investigation cleared Sampson of all those allegations.

This will run for a while now......

Just because the players on the pitch who celebrated with him didn't witness whatever Sampson may said to Aluko and/or Spence (or are not bothered by it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. Their celebration speaks to absolutely nothing.
 

Beezerk

Money List Winner
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
12,756
Location
Gateshead, Tyne & Wear
Visit site
Just because the players on the pitch who celebrated with him didn't witness whatever Sampson may said to Aluko and/or Spence (or are not bothered by it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. Their celebration speaks to absolutely nothing.

Agree with this, the celebration was probably because they already knew he was getting the boot. It proves absolutely nothing about the other allegations.
 

Fish

Well-known member
Banned
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
18,384
Visit site
Just because the players on the pitch who celebrated with him didn't witness whatever Sampson may said to Aluko and/or Spence (or are not bothered by it) doesn't mean it didn't happen. Their celebration speaks to absolutely nothing.

So an internal & external (independent) investigation both failed then?
 
Top