Jump to content

Keogh Sacked


Nuwtfly

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

The problem is that footballers are off sick routinely. Usually that's through something in training or a match. Occasionally, it is through some other kind of accident - Dave Bessant dropped a bottle on his foot. It would be difficult to make the case that Keogh was sacked because he caused himself injury.

Given that the club didn't fire either Lawrence or Bennett, who committed far more serious offences and ended up in front of the beak, Keogh's sacking could not have been the result of his actions that night.

So what were the reasons?

Not an expert but have come across some difficult situations and have used...

Incompetance - inability to do the work required

Attendance - frequent absences

 

I am guessing he would fall short of defending himself well on either of these.

There is also something about bringing the name of the company into a bad light that I have not had the pleasure of using

Another box I think Keogh would tick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Ramarena said:

The problem here is going to be the optics of getting shot of Keogh, but not Lawrence and Bennett.......even through Keogh couldn’t play and the others could, it gives the EFL the gap they need to hammer us!

I don’t see why there’s criticism of Mel here:

- Keogh wasn’t fired on the spot

- Keogh was offered rehab

- Keogh was offered a new contract at a lower wage to reflect the fact that the injury was “career threatening”, but give the player some security.

What else could the club really have done for a player, who at that stage had potentially destroyed their own career?????????

Totaly spot on,,

and for all those bleating unfair that Richturd keough was treated different from the other two ,,grow up , him and the other two have clubs by the nuts and us ordinary fans who shell out our hard earned to help line their over inflated over protected pockets ,the sad fact is they and their agents know it , we can’t and shouldn’t afford to kiss goodbye to transfer fees for Lawrence and Bennett , we can’t and shouldn’t afford to kiss goodbye to 2.3 mill in wages to a drunken idiot who can not do the job he’s paid to do because of his and their drunken pathetic stupidity,

always stood behind keough against what I felt was unwarranted stick he got but this ,,,, well he can go to duck with his scuzz money 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, EdinRam said:

Mel strikes again ? Probably would have got away with it if we sacked Lawrence and bennett aswell. We should have done.

Or you'd end up with 3x the grief. Although @Spanishhas very well articulated the process under employment law, this is the EFL we're talking about.

They take arbitrary and capricious to entirely new levels! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gccrowdpleaser said:

Employment law which is overseen by government but generally enforced in civil or private cases.

That said with Derby involved it may well just be Murphys Law.

Nope.

This was adjudicated on by an EFL subcommittee.

Id have preferred to see how this played out in a proper employment tribunal and hence why id like to see the details of this “ruling”

We already know our accountancy charge was judged by a panel that didn’t include an expert in accountancy. What’s the betting this was decision was handed down by a panel that didn’t have an employment law expert?

Edited by Ramarena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to the other two is irrelevant in my eyes (but clearly not in the eyes of the tribunal) - They were fined by the club and punished accordingly in the courts. It still doesn't sit well with me that they played away at Barnsley two games later but I've got over it.

Keogh was offered a taxi paid for by Derby County

Refused and got a lift in his mates car knowing he was drunk

Didn't wear a seatbelt

Crashed and got injured

Was unable to carry out the works in his contract

Was very kindly offered £5k a week to sit at home and recover and rehabilitate with the club

Refused and was sacked. (Rightly in my eyes)

The fact that he has sued the club that paid him so handsomely for 8 years, in the middle of a pandemic sums the bloke up.

I'd have like to have thought that Mel and Pearce did the due diligence before sacking him but we already know they are incapable of running a football club.

What angers me so much about this is Keogh's lack of remorse and that he doesn't see that he was in the wrong at all. His thick as pig muck agent said as much on Talksport at the time and his wife changed her instagram bio to "married to a professional scapegoat". He got offered £5k a week to rehabilitate for free with the club which was brought about because of poor decisions he made whilst drunk on a team bonding night for heavens sake!!

If I was Mel I would send an Eddie Stobart round to Keogh's filled with 1ps and 2ps to pay him.

I cannot wait to for Huddersfield at home (and away if possible) next season to give Captain Calamity the reception he deserves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As DCFC can exclude people from their club - which could readily happen to you and I for petty misconduct, such as (only) running onto the pitch - why can't the club ban Richard Keogh from the premises, having brought the name of Derby County into disrepute?

BAN KEOGH FROM PPS.

His behaviour was irresponsible, negligent, and endangered others by not imposing the club 'curfew' and ensuring chauffeured transport home upon all attendees of the 'bonding' event.

It was crucially incumbent upon The Captain to  deploy a few simple words:' Boys' give me your car keys. Transport is here, Drink up and go, now! NO driving!"

Ban him from the stadium; he wrecked the club's reputation, pulled the rug from under the manager, and lost the respect of the fanbase.

Fans' petition! Let him know how fans feel.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, DCFClks said:

I wouldn't have been fine for the others involved, but Keogh did the least out of all of them. What did he do? He got drunk and got in the back of someone's car, out of work hours. If it were most other professions he wouldn't have been sacked.

as club captain i'm afraid he has to take some responsibility though. 

agree any other profession he would not be sacked. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, DCFClks said:

No I didn't say that. But his contact clearly wouldn't have allowed us to sack him, but we did it anyway. We obviously don't know the details of his contact, but the club should know every detail out all our players contact, and should have known the harshest possibly punishment we could have given him.

please stop putting 'contact' for 'contract' i'm getting confused reading your posts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cannable said:

HE 

IS 

NOT 

THEIR 

DAD

Never been a fan of passing the buck, it's as if people think the other two were children and didn't know any better. End of the day decisions like these all come down to money. Bennett = £300k at best Lawrence = 1.5-2 mil, we should have sacked all 3 or nobody at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EdinRam said:

Never been a fan of passing the buck, it's as if people think the other two were children and didn't know any better. End of the day decisions like these all come down to money. Bennett = £300k at best Lawrence = 1.5-2 mil, we should have sacked all 3 or nobody at all.

You’re right it comes down to money

Two could still do the job they are paid to do. One couldn’t. 

If Lawrence’s transfer value had anything to do with the decision, he wouldn’t be going into the final year of his contract still here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To take the emotion and name calling out of it for a moment, it surely depends on the value of the contract offered? If it’s around the 20% of his original quoted today then...it’s a tough one. Thing is that doesn’t just effect this contract but any he would be offered after too. Effectively he’d be be punished for the rest of his career and have a much more longer lasting impact.

So yeah, I get the other side to this and it’s a hugely sensitive issue so I’m not going to argue really. But I do think maybe the best outcome would have been to be a bit more sensible with the contract renegotiation, come to a conclusion and we may have had a player come October time that may have been got us an extra 10 points (full on guess but Keogh has been the consistent factor in all our good defences the last few seasons) and kept us away from the relegation zone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...