TommyPowell

54 minutes ago, RamNut said:

That bit is correct.....☝️

That bit isn’t.

it is quite possible that Lawrence appeared perfectly ok to drive. And said he was ok. Keogh accepted a lift and was then injured by a driver who drove like an idiot, legged it and then failed a breathalyser test. If I was Lawrence I would feel extremely guilty for what has happened to keogh. I’d probably even give him half of my wages if I was millionaire overpaid footballer. 

Are you serious this isnt a bystander getting a lift he was there he knew who had drank etc However theres is no getting away from the fact if captain marvel had worn his seat belt he probably wouldnt be injured

28 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

There's 79 pages of speculation and conjecture. Haven't seen any conclusive proof of anything.

so you think he might not have been sacked? surely thats speculation on you part

1 hour ago, King Kevin said:

I've skipped half  a dozen pages ,have I missed anything?

no he is still sacked

16 hours ago, Tyler Durden said:

Keogh was well within his rights to refuse to take a pay cut as per any other ordinarily employed worker.

Whether Derby were within their rights to then sack Keogh is something that remains to be seen. 

it doesnt remain to be seen they have sacked him. Theres 79 pages in this forum proving it.Is there anyway back not on your life

39 minutes ago, cosmic said:

"...and you said that automatically you are always going to fire them, the financial implications are a nightmare"

This is all you need to know. The difference in 'punishment' is purely down to money, not ethics.

theres nothing like  taking something out of context.MM was explaining how a player coulddeliberately get himself sacked so he could go play for another team

21 minutes ago, RamNut said:

I thought it was a basic tenet of contract law that a contract had to be freely entered into by both parties, and that if one party entered into the contract “under duress” then it was not legally binding. 

But if a employee willfully got into a position that made it impossible to carry out  their duties. Surely that could be said that the employee had broken their contract?

12 minutes ago, deanoakaram4life said:

How can Keogh have a case when he is unfit for work and unwilling to take a pay cut. If it happened to me and I took that stance, my boss would tell me to f##ck right off to the job centre. 

most bosses would.But i assume at this stage the PFA just have Keoghs account

27 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I did say you'd have to suspend belief to a degree. What I'm saying is, if as someone did say he was within a beer of being under the limit, can he be held responsible for being a passenger of a drunk driver? He's possibly thought he's not over the limit. If it's the difference between having 2 beers and 3 on the night, is it possible that Keogh didn't know?

It's all supposition and that doesn't help. Not wearing a seatbelt is a stupid decision as well, of course. But the drink driving aspect is perhaps not 100% cut and dry.

the biggest mistake WAS NOT wearing a seat belt therefore endangering himself proof injured for 12 months,Thats not taking into account the Mails article which i have no way of knowing how true if any,Being drunk maybe a factor in gross misconduct

4 hours ago, GboroRam said:

It's never been confirmed, although there's plenty of speculation I'll remind everyone of the banner at the top of the page. 

I dont particularly want to know However if it was an academy player,Iam sure a lot of people would not be so up in arms about Keoghs departure

7 hours ago, BondJovi said:

Maybe the club do place too much emphasis on the role of captain but if that is the expectation then Keogh knew full well.

I don't think it is Bennett or Lawrence the club are bothered about him not looking after but the 4th player involved. Keogh made a series of poor judgement calls and rightly or wrongly the club have made him ultimately responsible. We all make mistakes and have to own up to them, Lawrence and Bennett have done so and been punished internally and externally. Accepting the contract would be Keogh doing so. 

What do people want to happen to Keogh? Because there was a good chance we could have paid him full wage to get fit and then he could have left for nothing. Will he even be able to play again to a decent level? Was he the one behind the drinking culture, very easy if you don't drive? Keogh needed to accept the contract and allow everyone to move on, sadly I feel his choices back my view on his character.

What a sorry state of affairs. Classically Derby, the right way, the wrong way and the Derby way.

 

Who was the mysterious 4th person in the car?I wonder why he has never beened named??

1 hour ago, Ewe Ram said:

Because no decent taxi driver would accept a passenger who is incapable of coherent conversation 

are you speaking from experience lol lol lol

41 minutes ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

You didn't. 

But, until we know the reasons as to why Keogh hasn't made a statement, we can't judge. The club are clearly extremely unhappy with him, so they might have barred him from saying anything publicly. He might not be able to make a statement because of some legal issue that we don't know about. He might even be an unrepentant Bamford, but then so too might Bennett and Lawrence, who could quite possibly be hiding behind club-drafted statements whilst laughing themselves silly. I'm pretty confident that that isn't the case but, the point is, we don't know. 

The point i was making im pretty sure Keogh has never said sorry etc

my final thought on the matter (well for today anyway) Why would a guy on£24k a week rake a lift of an obviously drunk colleague rather that spend on a taxi?

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

This first line completely contradicts the second one. You clearly don't know all the facts either, so how can you assume what Lawrence's, Bennett's and Keogh's attitudes have been like while keeping a straight face?

Have your opinion, fine. But don't criticise people for making assumptions before going onto make a huge one yourself.

Oh did i dream that both Lawrence and Bennett had both said in a public the they were sorry and would accept any punishment handed down to them?

1 hour ago, GadFly said:

Are you on glue? 

 

Put themselves at risk. Tick. 

Colleague at risk. Tick. (Keogh actually injured for 14 months through their actions as well as his own) 

General public at risk of injury or worse. Tick. 

Club in disrepute. Massive tick. 

 

You're going to need to elaborate on your comment because I really don't understand it. 

ok first and foremost professional footballers are very rarely sacked after being done for drinking and driving(not that i agree with it).first let me point out that there was very little if any call for Lawrence and Bennett to be sacked after the court case.

Keogh was not injured because of the crash he was injured because he was stupid enough NOT  to wear his seat belt,which of course legally the responsibility of the passenger and not the driver,So as you have said he was injured bad enough for him to be out at least 14 months .His contract expires in june 2020,will he be fit by then? who knows.Was he offered a contract at a reduced wage  yes So my point his he wasnt sacked,IMO  he was silly not to accept the offer look at Thorne and how long its taking him to fully recover

19 minutes ago, GadFly said:

“The club will not tolerate any of its players or staff behaving in a manner which puts themselves, their colleagues, and members of the general public at risk of injury or worse, or which brings the club into disrepute. The club will be making no further comment at this time regards this matter until the conclusion of any potential appeal.”

How does any of the above not equally relate to Lawrence and Bennett? 

At least be honest and explain how the club is being sweaty and won't sack them because they're still worth something. 

or it could be that the other two never actually injured anyone?

1 hour ago, GadFly said:

Let's say he doesn't accept the offer... 

Are we going to sack Keogh for "gross misconduct" on the basis that he was a passenger in Lawrence's car whilst Lawrence was drunk... but not sack Lawrence himself for gross misconduct? Surely that's wildly hypocritical?  

But is he being sacked? If he is offered a new contract  that is based on mutual agreement,he can accept or decline as any player can. that seemed to be the bones of the article.

Just now, ThePrisoner said:

What makes it a fact?

fact A) His present contract runs out next year?

       B) Being club captain must give him a degree of authority,some sort of setting an example 

      C) Tried to give false name as reported  in newspapers

 But disregarding that I am entitled to voice my opinion as everyone is thats why its called a forum

2 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I thought that was a joke Forest fans made up.

just quoting facts if you decide not to take notice thats up to you

42 minutes ago, Steve How Hard? said:

Agreed. Can understand where the club are coming from but surely they all have to be dealt with the same. Interesting to see how this plays out. 

When are Lawrence  and Bennets contracts up for renewal?

42 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

So the 2 main culprits have been given a fine and are already back in the team and playing like nothing happened, but the passenger who's already suffered the most is now being threatened with being sacked? Sure he's the captain and should know better, but if you're exploring the possibility of sacking him then you should have probably done that with the other 2 as well.

They are not sacking him .Them seem to be offering a new contract sat new terms,the ball surely is in his court

34 minutes ago, Srg said:

Would love to know how we could sack him and not the other two considering he wasn't even driving. I'm sure his lawyer would eat that one up. Or, y'know, shoddy journalism.

Simple his contract wont b e renewed  when it expires next year

34 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

So the 2 main culprits have been given a fine and are already back in the team and playing like nothing happened, but the passenger who's already suffered the most is now being threatened with being sacked? Sure he's the captain and should know better, but if you're exploring the possibility of sacking him then you should have probably done that with the other 2 as well.

he was the club captain and should A) Have  made sure the players did not get into that state.

B) He was the one not wearing a seat belt,which must have had some bearing on the injuries he sustained.

C ) Wasnt it him that tried to give the police a false name.

No I am not a Keogh critic in fact I rate/rated him.

On 06/09/2019 at 13:38, ilkleyram said:

As I said, the show was "excellent" so he is doing a lot right.  But to my eye anyway the large phone in one pocket and the mic pack in another, in a pair of skinny jeans, was distracting at best. @OwenB87 could ask the camera person just to shoot him 'head and shoulders' would equally get around the issue.

If you want another comment (and perhaps you don't) then someone ought to tell Darren Wassell to have a shave before he gets interviewed on Rams TV, unless he's growing a beard.  It looks more professional.

 

I am 79 but even i know the unshaven look is the modern trend

6 hours ago, Mckram said:

First time I’ve had problems this preseason. Keeps stopping and saying the stream is off air!

had same problem 2nd half

13 hours ago, loweman2 said:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Whos-Who-Derby-County/dp/1859834094/ref=sr_1_29?ie=UTF8&qid=1526802927&sr=8-29&keywords=Derby+county+book

are you on commission from Amazon? lol