Jump to content
Nuwtfly

Keogh Sacked

Recommended Posts

fair offer. He stays he can only help mentor younger players. He leaves then we don’t pay him. Simple and a good offer from the club which shows there has been forgiveness towards him 

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, rynny said:
 
I'm not sure what to say on this. This has definitely come as a surprise. 

 

Yeah I have mixed feelings myself. 

Not sure I'd like to see him sacked tbh, but we are paying him a lot of money to sit on his backside.  Hopefully he'll sign reduced terms.

Share this post


Link to post
3 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.

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 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.

Well obviously, because the other 2 involved can still play football and earn a living where as the other cannot.  Hence why are they involved and the other isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute 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. 

Yes, but the other two are able to play and earn their wages now. 

if they ended up in prison for their crimes, then I’m sure they’d be facing a similar offer. We’re not going to pay them for sitting in jail. 

But while they’re able to play, they’ve served their time, they’ve been punished in the eyes of the club and the law, so they carry on playing and getting paid for it. 

This all seems completely sensible to me. 

Keogh has sidelined himself through an unnecessary, avoidable, and non work related incident. So we shouldn’t have to pay him silly wages. Imagine if you could get yourself a massive contract, then just accidentally break your leg and sit the rest of the contract out on full wages. 

Sean Barker, for example, is a different case, as he got his injury in the line of duty. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute 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.

trouble is that he is not competent to do the job he is paid for and he was contributory to the reasons why

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Joel said:

Think the club are well within their rights here.

Presumably the insurance doesn't cover the player in this case.

Exactly. Insurance will not cover this.

Usually, with injured players - the club is not paying nearly their total salary for them to not play. With Keogh, the club are faced with paying his full salary during his lengthy time out.

So this is a very reasonable direction to go. The fact that it is being reported as a "final offer" implies (nothing stronger than that), that he's been asked to take a pay cut and refused.

If he refuses to take a pay-cut, sacking him is the only option really. And it's obviously the case that if we wanted to sack anyone involved in the crash, we have grounds to do so. 

This makes a lot of sense. It's unfortunate, but reasonable.

Edited by SaintRam

Share this post


Link to post
12 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.

I'm not sure I can feel all that much outrage when - even at half wages - Keogh will be on £12.5k per week - That's not a bad wage to earn for 18 months while the club also pays for your care, gives you access to facilities and the best in sporting rehab - And he'll be contributing nothing towards what we pay him for (playing games)

15 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.

Yeh, I think the sacking rumour will be nonsense - I can't imagine anyone at the club leaking this information but I can imagine his agent doing it to generate sympathy for the player - In which case you throw in "yeh, the club threatened to sack him" it makes a story sympathetic - Whether the club have done that or not

Share this post


Link to post

The article says dismissal can't be ruled out, so that's hardly the case that we're definitely sacking him.  Seems a little sensationalist from Percy, who is usually above that sort of thing.  Although Keogh couldn't really moan if the club reduced his wages, he'd quite rightly feel aggrieved if he was sacked.

One thing springs to mind though, when Bryson & Hughes were injured Mel said Butterfield & Johnson's signings were covered by the insurance we had in place.  Now, taking this situation into account

1 - Do we no longer have such bumper insurance to cover Keogh's wages?

2 - Do we have the insurance, but it doesn't cover this sort of thing?

3 - Looking at our precarious FFP situation at the moment, was Mel merely bull-mudding about the whole thing when we signed those two financial sinkholes?

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, therams69 said:

Well obviously, because the other 2 involved can still play football and earn a living where as the other cannot.  Hence why are they involved and the other isn't.

I might be in the minority, but it doesn't sit right with me that 3 people were involved in the incident and 1 of them (the 1 who didn't actually commit a crime) is facing the sack whilst the others aren't. Sure the other 2 can play and still contribute, but that shouldn't exempt them from the same punishment as Keogh.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, ramsbottom said:

The article says dismissal can't be ruled out, so that's hardly the case that we're definitely sacking him.  Seems a little sensationalist from Percy, who is usually above that sort of thing.  Although Keogh couldn't really moan if the club reduced his wages, he'd quite rightly feel aggrieved if he was sacked.

One thing springs to mind though, when Bryson & Hughes were injured Mel said Butterfield & Johnson's signings were covered by the insurance we had in place.  Now, taking this situation into account

1 - Do we no longer have such bumper insurance to cover Keogh's wages?

2 - Do we have the insurance, but it doesn't cover this sort of thing?

3 - Looking at our precarious FFP situation at the moment, was Mel merely bull-mudding about the whole thing when we signed those two financial sinkholes?

I find it very unlikely that any insurance would cover a non-footballing related injury caused by gross misconduct. I'm confident that is where such a move is coming from. 

We've lost him for more than 66% of his remaining contract and would likely have to pay the full salary out of our own pockets for that time.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.