Allardyce goes
Discussion
johnxjsc1985 said:
I don't like this method of catching people out it stinks but not as much as wealthy rich men in positions of some responsibility acting like pigs. I suspect the time yesterday was spent on agreeing a compensation package for him and his staff.
Indeed. The only way the FA could f*** things up further is if it is found they paid out his contract in full. And I wouldn't even be surprised.ReallyReallyGood said:
So he's committed gross negligence, brought the game and his position into disrepute, but it's in his contract that despite all that he gets £1m? Who writes these contracts!?
What gross negligence? I'm guessing you mean gross misconduct, but I doubt he's done that either. What he did was take the mickey out of "Woy" and say something that needed saying about Neville. Everything else he said would have to be run past the FA before he did anything.
Gavia said:
What gross negligence? I'm guessing you mean gross misconduct, but I doubt he's done that either.
What he did was take the mickey out of "Woy" and say something that needed saying about Neville. Everything else he said would have to be run past the FA before he did anything.
So he would have run by the FA his blatant offer to help circumvent the 3rd party ownership rules? Sure he would. I see he's now claiming this is entrapment. My heart bleeds.What he did was take the mickey out of "Woy" and say something that needed saying about Neville. Everything else he said would have to be run past the FA before he did anything.
ReallyReallyGood said:
Pesty said:
Apparently he leaves with a meagre 1 million.
So he's committed gross negligence, brought the game and his position into disrepute, but it's in his contract that despite all that he gets £1m? Who writes these contracts!?AyBee said:
My first thought too...how the hell can he justify a payout after all of this? If he hasn't broken his contract, why sack him? If he has, release him and pay £0.
He doesn't have to justify it, just take it.The FA likely wanted this over quickly without the cost, and embarrassment of a court case so probably thought £1m was a good deal.
I understand he took his agent and his financial advisor to the meeting with the FA. I doubt they were there for moral support.
Most people don't earn enough to worry about this sort of stuff, but up at the higher end a compromise agreement is usually the preferred way to get someone out quickly and easily.
I think it would be fair to pay for the days worked to date, plus whatever agreed notice period he had.
But then it's obvious that in many high pay areas that work behind closed doors, what people would expect as "normal" or "fair" seem to go completely out of the window.
Ian
Most people don't earn enough to worry about this sort of stuff, but up at the higher end a compromise agreement is usually the preferred way to get someone out quickly and easily.
I think it would be fair to pay for the days worked to date, plus whatever agreed notice period he had.
But then it's obvious that in many high pay areas that work behind closed doors, what people would expect as "normal" or "fair" seem to go completely out of the window.
Ian
WestyCarl said:
AyBee said:
My first thought too...how the hell can he justify a payout after all of this? If he hasn't broken his contract, why sack him? If he has, release him and pay £0.
He doesn't have to justify it, just take it.The FA likely wanted this over quickly without the cost, and embarrassment of a court case so probably thought £1m was a good deal.
So, yes, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth, but I can see why a settlement agreement with a payout would be seen as the most expedient route.
Why all the talk of employment law? He will have been self employed, probably via a company, and on a fixed contract which will usually state termination terms. Unless there were specific clauses about this then the FA will have no grounds to withhold payment. They might argue there were and would have to terminate the clause and then face a lengthy court case all in the public glare. Much better to terminate in line with the contract and let that more or less be the end of that matter.
He hasn't actually done anything wrong and the part they chose to show from a 2 hour conversation was the most damning when in fact he talks about his current employers and running things past them.
If you asked me how to open a safe and I told you you couldn't call me a safecracker...
If you asked me how to open a safe and I told you you couldn't call me a safecracker...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff