London broadsheets yesterday sharply criticised the decision of the AIB's board not to sack senior executives because of the huge losses at Allfirst bank.

In particular the newspapers concentrated on the positions of chief executive Mr Michael Buckley, and the Allfirst chief executive, Ms Susan Keating.

"Investors slam AIB as senior staff survive damning report," read the front page headline in the Financial Times.

The newspaper's editorial was headlined "AIB's scapegoats" and said the report's "alarming findings identify management failures at the highest levels at AIB that raise questions about the future of those at the very top of the bank".

Scrutiny by management in both Baltimore and Dublin was weak. Dublin was "too easily fobbed off" in May 2001, when Mr Buckley was told of heavy trading by Baltimore, it said..

Shareholders are unlikely to be happy if the same management is still in place a year on from now, it continued . "Mr Buckley's days - and those of other top executives in Dublin and Baltimore - are almost certainly numbered," the editorial said.

The Independent, on its business pages, carried a story with the headline: "Allfirst executives "asleep on the job" but AIB rejects resignation offer from chief executive Michael Buckley."

The opening paragraph questioned whether Mr Buckley can "really survive the UK's biggest rogue trading scandal since Barings".

The newspaper quoted Mr John Gollins, an analyst with Bank of America; "I don't think this restores any confidence in the incumbent management. The bank remains vulnerable to a takeover."

The Daily Telegraph carried the headline: "The Buck-ley has to stop somewhere."

The article stated: "It's a bit rich to suggest that Mr Buckley and chairman Lochlann Quinn should stay because their departures would unsettle the bank. A fraud was committed on their watch. It was not just Mr (David) Cronin and his five colleagues who were asleep at the switch. Mr Buckley may have forgone his bonus; he should do the same with his job." The Guardian carried the headline: "Fraud stricken bank sacks underlings but rallies behind top executives." It reported that the City was "astonished" that Ms Keaing is still in her job.

"That a bank can lose half a billion pounds and none of the big bosses pay the price does smack of undue leniency."

The Times also concentrated on Ms Keating. It said pressure was growing on Ms Keating to resign as chief executive of Allfirst "after she unexpectedly escaped a cull that claimed the jobs of six of her banking colleagues".

"The case against Keating is simple. If she knew what was going on, she should go. If she did not, she should not have been there in the first place. Shareholders should make known their disapproval."

German-speaking newspapers also focused on the fact that only middle-management were fired as a result of the Allfirst scandal. "Incompetence, lack of organisation and sloppiness made possible the AIB scandal, the third biggest in banking history," wrote the Su*ddeutsche Zeitung. "That's what comes out of an investigation report. But the AIB chiefs have absolved themselves of any blame."

German wire service Deutsche Presse-Agentur quoted Mr Piers Brown of Commerzbank saying: "AIB has restricted itself to the absoulte minimum necessary of personnel consequences."

"The Allfirst scandal will have no consequences for the top management of Allied Irish Banks," said Switzerland's Neue Zu*rcher Zeitung.

• Meanwhile, analysts in the US were critical of AIB following the publication of the Ludwig report.Bank stock analyst, Lewis Sosnowik, vice president of Koonce Securities in Bethesda, scoffed at the fallout from the large-scale losses. "I'm surprised there weren't more severe repercussions," Sosnowik said. "The big kahunas will always find someone to hang. You blame the underlings on this side of the Atlantic."

"This bank never should have been doing transactions of this magnitude anyway," said Richard Bove, managing director of the securities firm of the San Francisco-based Hoefer & Arnett Inc. "Banks of this size don't have the expertise or the money to spend on the proper computer system." Allfirst never should have relied on human supervision to check on Rusnak's daily activities, Mr Bove said.

Trading floors at large banks use computers to calculate the values of such complicated transactions. "It's not something you can sit down and figure out on a sheet of paper, nor can you put ten mathematicians in a room and figure it out," he added.

The full text of the Ludwig Report is available on the Irish Times website ireland.com, www.ireland.com