The FA have been undone by Allardyce’s baffling stupidity

There are some things that you should probably not do. You should not cover yourself in chicken liver pate and jump in the lion enclosure at a zoo. You should not give Donald Trump either your money or your mother, and expect either of them back in one piece, if at all. You should not watch Breaking Bad with high expectations unless you like the ‘A’ Team. And lastly, you should not hire Sam Allardyce as a manager if you don’t want to get someone digging around his dealings.

When the FA appointed Allardyce as manager, there were sensible reasons to do so. For one, he was the opposite of Roy Hodgson in ways that mattered. Hodgson is an introvert and does not inspire his players. Allardyce is ebullient, and said he was conscious that the players had become self-conscious. After the failure of Fabio Capello and the misery of the later days of Sven Goran Eriksson, it would not have been possible to appoint another foreign manager to the job. They needed a manager with experience in the Premier League, who was English, and who had the ego and press contacts to carry himself with confidence in the new job.

What they really needed - a sophisticated manager, able to inspire players without much technical ability, and with no history that could be targeted by a limited press - either did not exist, or was unaffordable. Allardyce is English, and he has patches of overachievement, and his pragmatic approach to tactics is probably suited to players who can no longer think for themselves.

The FA probably did not expect that Allardyce would be foolish enough to bring such a faeces-storm upon them so quickly. However much this disaster might seem retrospectively inevitable, Allardyce never seemed a complete buffoon. There were always rumours of wrongdoing, which we’ll get to later, but he never appeared to be so easily tricked. Or at least, few would have expected him to be tricked again. Or at least, few would have expected him to be tricked again while England manager. Or at least, few would have expected him to be tricked again while England manager just a few days into his tenure. Or at least, few would have expected him to be tricked again while England manager just a few days into his tenure, for a relatively piddling sum of money. But here we are.

Allardyce earns £3 million pounds a year. For a little over 10% of that, he was willing to discuss with people he believed wanted to ‘get around’ transfer rules, like third-party ownership. Third-party ownership was abolished for utterly sensible reasons, so sensible that even football’s governing bodies thought they were a bit prone to corruption. Nevertheless, Allardyce mentioned that Enner Valencia was able to make his way to West Ham United when he was manager there, and he was apparently subject to third-party interference. He might have been set up by some experienced supporters, or he may have been grossly foolish to talk of such sensitive matters, but he didn’t stop there.

He also managed to criticise Hodgson. While Hodgson did some eminently silly things, the politic move would not be to criticise his predecessor. While the FA was stupid for loading the association with such huge amounts of debt, forcing them to keep football at Wembley instead of taking it across the country, he should not have told them that. There is no upside to saying so, but plenty of downside. And Allardyce had not even taken charge of his first England training session before getting into this.

Unfortunately for Allardyce, and the FA, the signs that such a sting was possible were publicly available. At the start of 2014, Allardyce was forced to deny that a row over Ravel Morrison refusing to move to his favoured agent was at the heart of their disagreement. Why a manager should be involved in a player’s choice of agent, it’s hard to fathom, but there is no proof that Allardyce did anything untoward. However, that wasn’t the sole report that suggested that Allardyce would bring baggage with him.

Going back to 2006, Allardyce claimed that he would be suing the BBC. The BBC had produced a programme that had accounts of agents claiming that they had paid Allardyce bungs. His son, Craig, boasted of having access to his father, and to be able to push him towards certain transfer deals. Allardyce was understandably agitated at the accusations. To be accused of such extensive wrongdoing could taint his reputation for the rest of his career. Financial impropriety has followed Harry Redknapp for much of his career, despite the conclusive proof in the courts that he and his dog have never, once, done anything even vaguely dodgy.

All this hoo-ha now, then, seems essentially inevitable and completely foreseeable. Allardyce has a history of scrapes - despite his obvious evidence - that impugn his good name. He attracts the attention of the press who, if the target is worth enough, can commit to spending many months in pursuit of a story. Allardyce is 61, and should know better by now than to mouth of inconsiderately about sensitive subjects. The England players, the FA and negotiating the problems of third-party ownership should not be discussed so openly and honestly (perhaps) with anyone but those who can be implicitly trusted.

Allardyce has already made mistakes. His first match was incredibly boring, and he lost the run of Wayne Rooney straight away. He obviously was not going to revolutionise English football, and now it seems that the FA have had their hand forced early. But there was no other compelling candidate, and the FA probably assumed Allardyce was not this foolish, whatever his other weaknesses. Allardyce does not deserve to keep his job, but whoever follows will likely be no better.