When the sack finally arrived after surviving two previous investigations and inquiries there was a feeling that England Ladies Head Coach Mark Sampson’s employers had simply grown tired of the increasing scrutiny they were under.

Given that the recent allegations were also supposedly well known within the ivory walls of Football Association’s HQ before he was even appointed, it seems strange that his behaviour while coaching in Bristol prior to being employed as the national football team’s supremo should bring about his downfall.

Mark Sampson’s ‘inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour’ while in charge at the Bristol Academy, while not illegal did breach safeguarding limits according to the FA now.

Confusingly those incidents were investigated previously by the governing body’s safeguarding unit which after a year concluded that Sampson was ‘safe’ to continue as England’s manager yet still recommend that he attend an appropriate course.

According to another manager the rumours about Sampson were well known within the game when he was appointed yet they were ignored, along with the FA’s own stipulation that the incoming coach should have international qualifications.

Pressure is mounting on the FA’s CEO Martin Glenn, along with other senior officials, as to why Sampson was allowed to continue in his role for four years. First amongst the many questions asked of him should be the handling of the report from the safeguarding unit.

Whether he chose not to read the full report or had not had access to it is irrelevant – both outcomes raise serious questions as to why either situation was allowed to arise. Strangely, Glenn is claiming that only now has he seen the full report.

Of course Sampson – and Glenn – have been under pressure for some time as a result of the allegations made by England striker Eni Aluko.

For any of you unfamiliar with the name it was she, having amassed, 102 caps for England and scored 33 times over an 11-year period, although has not played since 2016, who made allegations of sustained bullying.

One specific incident occurred where Sampson was alleged to have made a comment about Aluko’s Nigerian heritage at the time of the outbreak of the ebola virus. 

The FA appointed an independent barrister, Katharine Newton, to investigate. Having found Sampson had no case to answer the FA curiously paid Aluko £80,000 and again insisted that the England manager attend an educational course.

Bizarrely, while he was being exonerated of one charge with Newton having reviewed of a video of the team meeting at which the alleged comments were made, Sampson was found to have made comments with racial undertones to another England player.

The recurring theme of allegations, investigations, not guilty verdicts followed by sending Sampson on a course is troubling to say the least. However, it does provide some background as to why the FA has now terminated Sampson’s contract over an issue that they seemingly already knew about.

While the result has come after a succession of own-goals, the news will have pleased Kick It Out, an organisation that fights racism and discrimination in football, which had been backing Aluko throughout her case.

The FA’s own articles of association as a pastoral organisation refer to its objective to ‘promote football… and protect it from abuses’. 

It appears to have failed on several counts over a number of years.