May Contain Nuts Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 31 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said: No because the 3 cases were not dealt with in a consistent manner Say me and my work colleague were in a job that relied on us being able to drive in order to fulfill our duties, I've already got 9 points in my license, he's only got 6. One day we stupidly decide to race each other home after work in our company registered cars, we're both caught by a speed camera, we both get 3 points. Only with that 3 points I've now been disqualified from driving for a year, I can't fulfill a basic requirement requirement of my job. I get sacked. My mate though, he's 'only' up to 9 points on his, he's on his last warning and gets a severe dressing down about his conduct, but if he behaves from now on then he'll keep his job. Have we been dealt with in a consistent manner? Should my mate have been sacked too? Should I complain that I'm being discriminated against? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePrisoner Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristol City Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Derby’s statement makes little sense as it is clear that the two drivers endangered others life’s whilst driving under the influence of alcohol. And they have been found guilty of that offence in a court of law. Surely they too should be sacked. Legally they are on dodgy ground here. ”As we have said from the outset, 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." Looks clear to me that the other two should be sacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TommyPowell Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, Coconut said: Say me and my work colleague were in a job that relied on us being able to drive in order to fulfill our duties, I've already got 9 points in my license, he's only got 6. One day we stupidly decide to race each other home after work in our company registered cars, we're both caught by a speed camera, we both get 3 points. Only with that 3 points I've now been disqualified from driving for a year, I can't fulfill a basic requirement requirement of my job. I get sacked. My mate though, he's 'only' up to 9 points on his, he's on his last warning but if he behaves from now on then he'll keep his job. Have we been dealt with in a consistent manner? Neither of the individual cases you quote have committed an act of gross misconduct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozza Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 I'd like to see a poll set up for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GadFly Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, TommyPowel said: or it could be that the other two never actually injured anyone? 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bimmerman Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 22 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said: It could be inferred that Keogh was discriminated against regards his disability to be able to play as a footballer to wit his long term injury thereby making him a worthless asset whereby his colleagues even though they also committed acts of gross misconduct were not he's not disabled,he's temporarily injured Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramshankered Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 8 minutes ago, GadFly said: Trying to defend this decision reeks of tribalistic politics tbh. It's like Liverpool fans defending Suarez for his racism or biting opponents simply because he was THEIR player at the time. Forget the club for a second in your thinking, imagine it was another clubs players, Forest's even, and the whole thing looks a hell of a lot different ... from the perspective of what's morally right/fair/just this is absolute bullcrap, and Lawrence/Bennett should be sacked too if Keogh has been shown the door. Echo this sentiment. Im sure a lot of money was spent on lawyers making sure this decision was watertight. Morally though it’s utterly ruthless and I expect better from DCFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, mozza said: I'd like to see a poll set up for this. Splendid idea. How can we make that happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCFC1976 Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 If Keogh had not done his knee he would no doubt be playing again now so the Lawrence and Bennett point is mute. Ultimately Keogh was captain made two errors of judgement on the night and another one not accepting the pay cut. Typifies the modern day footballer when Keogh states he feels let down by the club... how does he think the club and is the supporters feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GadFly Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 11 minutes ago, Ramshankered said: Echo this sentiment. Im sure a lot of money was spent on lawyers making sure this decision was watertight. Morally though it’s utterly ruthless and I expect better from DCFC. I honestly would respect it a lot more if they were just honest and said "basically he's old AF, injured for 14 months, will probably never be the same player again and he's going to cost us a lot of money in wasted wages. The other 2 can hopefully be re-sold and can still play a part for us, it'd be too expensive to get rid of them and/or replace them, so we're less bothered, this has everything to do with money and football and nothing to do with morals" Instead, they've gone all high-horse about it and are trying to take some sort of ducked up moral high-ground and hoping we're too stupid to go "Eh?! What about Lawrence and Bennett who actually drove the cars!?" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GadFly Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Just now, DCFC1976 said: If Keogh had not done his knee he would no doubt be playing again now so the Lawrence and Bennett point is mute. Ultimately Keogh was captain made two errors of judgement on the night and another one not accepting the pay cut. Typifies the modern day footballer when Keogh states he feels let down by the club... how does he think the club and is the supporters feel. It's not a moot point though is it though because the club make no reference to his injury or ability to play in their statement. They expect us to honestly believe it's about morality and conduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozza Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 2 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said: Splendid idea. How can we make that happen I could, anyone could, but would prefer admin to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Just now, mozza said: I could, anyone could, but would prefer admin to do it. Make it so ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 9 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said: Neither of the individual cases you quote have committed an act of gross misconduct Sorry, what? Are you saying it's only gross misconduct if there's alcohol involved? Driving at excessive speeds and racing on a public road, putting the safety of both of us and the general public at risk doesn't count? Seems a bit of a cop out tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coneheadjohn Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 Going to brilliant on Saturday when Gibson realises Mel’s sacked a Keogh and had him valued at 15 million for FFP purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Key Club King Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 The argument that Bennett and Lawrence have not been sacked due to them being saleable assets is at best only half right. I would be very surprised if we ever make any money from selling Mason Bennett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GadFly Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said: Make it so ? Not admin... but it is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GadFly Posted October 30, 2019 Share Posted October 30, 2019 19 minutes ago, Davide said: I would be embarrassed being Bennett or Lawrence after this. Sack all of them or none. So much this. Wish I could like it twice or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.