We all know why Sam Allardyce lost the England job, and will have differing views on whether he was treated fairly or not, and whether his appointment damaged our reputation (or the way we feel about the club). To the best of my knowledge however, and despite allegations of improper conduct surfacing throughout his career, Allardyce has never been proven to have broken any FA regulations of significance, and certainly never proven to have broken the law.

On the other hand, our new assistant manager Sammy Lee appears quite plainly to be guilty of the offence (i.e. the crime) of perjury. He is, according to a High Court Judge, a man who knowingly lied under oath regarding shady transfer dealings:

[Link]

[Link]

Though I personally wasn’t thrilled about Sam Allardyce getting the Palace job, I could see the logic and believe in giving him a fair crack of the whip now he is here. Within reason that has to include a free hand regarding his coaching staff, but should the club dictate that a person evidently guilty of an offence (not to mention the contravention of FA regulations) is not an appropriate appointment?

Is there any general agreement about where the line is drawn (if there is a line at all) when it comes to deciding that a person is not someone you want at the club?

Alan Pardew called Mancini and "Old C**t" and headbutted a player. He allegedly got friendly with a player's wife in his career.

Jason Puncheon claimed Neil Warnock got players to pay him to get in the squad.

Terry Venables has never been convicted of anything but he took a lot of money for not doing very much work the 2nd time around.

George Burley allegedly liked a drink when he managed us - ditto Steve Kember.

Steve Bruce said he was staying with us but was already in talks with Birmingham.

The list will go on and on.

I suspect if we went for someone whiter than white we may have to wait a very long time.

You fed me, you bred me, I'll remember your name.

I care more that every 'moral right minded person' seems incapable of not just adding their views to the dozens of other threads that are already out there.

Are you of the school of thought that anyone guilty of an offence shouldn't be allowed to work again.

If so, why not include supporters too and ban anyone from entering Selhurst Park if they have been convicted of an offence

The important things are honesty, fairness, and a high level of personal integrity - if they can fake those then I say give them a chance.

[Link]

personally think that BFS was left out to dry by the FA.

If you read the transcript of his discussions with the journalists its clear that he told them they couldn't do what they were proposing, and that when they offered him money to do speeches in the Far East for vast sums of money he told them he'd have to discuss that with the FA.

Most people would be flattered to be offered £400k (if that's what it was) for that sort of thing but BFS played it long.

I think the only reason he met these people was because they were offering a mate of his a deal and he wanted to help out the friend.

And that concludes the case for the defence.....