Wine, women and agents

Some clubs do run courses for young footballers on lifemanship in association with the Professional Footballers' Association.

But the central problem identified by my well-placed friend is that agents who should be looking after their clients' long-term interests don't - either because they are obsessed by short-term gains or lack the qualifications to do so.

My friend ran through some of the previous professions of the agents he deals with. "If the guy's a former kit man or an ex-driver, what's he really got to contribute to a player's long-term financial health?" he asked.

It's ironic that Gudjohnsen should be in trouble because it was his agent who went public in the summer about the need for a massive increase in his client's salary. His attempts included, though he wasn't quite so public about this bit, a bare-faced attempt to extract an £800,000 payment for himself for "facilitating the deal".

He would have been better off advising his client to stay out of casinos, although where's the 10 per cent in that?

Anybody who is anybody in the game from David Dein and Sir Bobby Robson downwards have denounced the present "anything goes" regime for licensing and supervising agents. Until that changes, a lot of fools with clever feet will be parted from their money far too readily.

Fayed's nomads lose way

However much that great champion of the truth Mr Fayed and his apparatchiks claim the apparent sale of Craven Cottage to a shadowy company called Fulham River Projects Ltd is "a precautionary move", few people imagine Fulham will return to their old home.

And it may get worse. The rumour mills suggest Fulham's losses have now become unsustainable, running into millions a month. While money from the sale of Craven Cottage, if it happens, will recoup some of the £100million-plus Mr Fayed has laid out, it offers no protection against future losses.

The real problem for Fulham fans, therefore, is the prospect of the squad being disbanded with the more expensive players being transferred, although they will be heartened by the signing of Sergi Rebrov. Already the Ladies' team have gone to save money. If it's that bad, who or what is next is anyone's guess.

As to where Fulham will play in the future, the chances of a new purpose-built stadium look slim. Loftus Road is plainly unattractive to fans, so some newspapers are suggesting wrongly that Fulham have reapplied to ground share with Chelsea.

If he did seek to reopen negotiations I suspect he would find that Chelsea have no interest in a short-term solution, and a long-term 25-year deal accompanied by a large capital payment might now be difficult given Chelsea's anger at the way Fayed apparently leaked details of his original discussions with Ken Bates to the press.

It gives me no pleasure to say so but if the news from Fulham this week is bad, it can only get worse.

Olympic panelmust get Carter

I am amazed that when a deputation from Sport England gave evidence to the House of Commons select committee about the London Olympic bid this week their new chairman Patrick Carter was absent.

Which does nothing to undermine the assertion-made in Standard Sport this week that this Governmentappointed crony is against a London bid.

I continue to find it offensive that Carter, a man who has risen without trace, and whose best friend is likely to say "I don't know who you mean", is allowed to occupy an influential public position without ever being required to give a proper public account of himself.

The select committee should have demanded his presence and they still could.

The curious case of Carlo's card

The decision to expunge Carlo Cudicini's suspension but not the red card is a curious one. It suggests the FA thought the referee was wrong but didn't want to say so. How does that sit with their protestations that the professional referees are paid to perform professionally and will be exposed if they don't?

But they aren't: incompetence isn't the exclusive preserve of the boys with the whistles and the flags.