[wba13]

"We could only get the deal done with that agreement", those word imply previous knowledge.  I would not try and defend, any club if they clearly break the rules any more than I would condone any player taking a dive.  It may be the deal was done without SA'a knowledge, yes it is possible, we sign a player from the Sham which of course Sam is the ex manager of, he has been investigated by the FA for doggy dealing, twice and had to resign as England manager after taking a payment for advising on doggy dealing (whether he was set up or not), so historically the score is; Sam 3 - WBA 0, but yes it is possible, he knew nothing about it.  

Point is none of that matters, the one who picks the team is the manager, the issue is about Snodgrass being left out of the squad for a non legitimate reason, one that may very well breach FA Reg: 17.  From Sam's statement we know 'at least' he went along with the alleged breach, by not playing him, so at the least he was complicit in any breach which may or may not have occurred.   But fingers crossed the FA have not found anyone guilty of any  breach of regulations, yet.  

I get it you want big Sam to fail. You obviously don’t like him. So I will leave it at that.

I would have left it at that but to suggest that I want the manager of our team to fail, which in turn would mean I want our team to fail, is out of order.   I don't quite get how you think stating the facts means I do not like Big Sam, the facts are the facts and would not changed whether I love or hate Allerdyce.  If you can point at anything I said which is not factual, in order to show why you think I think I want him to fail, that would be interesting.

---

    and the jibes on other site have started 'Bung Bung Baggies'    

FACT your words. { So Allardyce is up to his doggy dealings already, } but as I stated you have no idea who made this agreement , you are implying in that first sentence that it was Allardyce when you don’t know. Never anywhere have I said you wanted Albion to fail and never would. 

Yep and I stand by that as fact, I did not say corrupt, illegal or anything like that.  I said dodgy.  If a club buys a player and they do not play that player in a game after a 'gentleman's agreement', that is dodgy, could the board or anyone else other than SA change the team that played against the Sham, no.  When was the last time our transfers were examined by the FA for this type of thing?  As for the fail bit, I don't follow how the SA could fail and the club be successful, hence it follows if I want SA to fail the consequences means the club fails.  

We will have to disagree on this debate because we’re both Stubborn bar stewards.  Anyway incoming being reported no names mentioned but possibly Diange from Galatasaray.