Keogh Sacked

[Uptherams]

1 hour ago, GrimsbyRam said:

Don’t understand why, if you did something irresponsible in your job that meant you could not perform for 18 months would you expect to be kept on, on full pay? You’d snap their hands off for half pay. Greedy stance to take if he has been offered any form of deal. Still not heard his apology either.

You don't know what the 'deal' was. This also won't stick in court. They can't offer him a new contract and then sack him for gross misconduct when he rejects it. 

[TheresOnlyWanChope]

16 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 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?

Keogh wasn’t driving. He was a passenger. I don’t understand this analogy. Unless it’s describing treatment of Bennett and Lawrence. 

[Nuwtfly]

16 minutes ago, Bristol City said:

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.

As some have suggested, I strongly suspect that there is a lot more to this than is being reported.

We do not know the full facts, nor will we, due to the sensitive legalities of this situation.

I can see why this looks so bad as a supporter of another club. Trust me. I feel so ashamed to be a Derby fan at the moment. Have felt this way to some extent ever since the stadium sale, then the Rooney 32 stuff. This is a dark, dark day for our future club, and I am left seriously considering whether the people running this club are doing a good job.

But, like I said, I think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye.

[IslandExile]

It's all very sad. Not least because a great club servant leaves in a pitiful manner.

There's lots of discussion on here about whether all three should be sacked. Without knowing the full facts we can only speculate on what happened.

I think the only way the club can justify not sacking Lawrence and Bennett is that their reckless actions could have caused them to be unable to work, whereas Keogh's have prevented him from doing his job.

It's like a defender diving in to try and make a tackle not getting a red card because the attacker leapt over him, avoiding the intended contact, and scored a goal. Whereas, if the defender scythes the attacker down, even if there was no more intent than in the first case, the greater consequences result in the greater sentence.

It's not the intent, it's the consequence.

I dunno if I agree with that's how it should be or not, but that can be the club's only argument - unless there is more that we don't know.

[RadioactiveWaste]

4 minutes ago, Coconut said:

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? 

If it's in a works vehicle some companies would consider it, although just a speeding ticket is probably a lower disciplinary, dangers driving or racing on a public road or something might be (probably depend on context)

[RamNut]

Well....where to begin? The club starts by saying that the players will be supported and helped back into the team; picks lawrence and bennett at the first opportunity; We draft a statement for lawrence which refers to his 'indiscretion', and then we sack keogh claiming that we will not tolerate blah blah blah blah i can't even be bothered to type the bs.

this is purely about money. I predicted we would attempt to pay off keogh. we now pretend that his gross misconduct was such  that we have no option but to terminate his contract. Altho had he agreed to a wage reduction we wouldn't have terminated his contract. So terminating his contract is not related to the incident but to his failure to consent to a reduction in pay. And the main culprits get a punishment which pales in comparison. I think that even if keogh wins at an employment tribunal the max damages are something like £80k.

We really are a shower of sht.

what will we have to show for the legacy of the last 6 years? A catalogue of managerial sackings; a huge debt; we lost the ownership of our own stadium; and we capped it off by sacking our own captain. 

Brilliant. 

[AndyinLiverpool]

A lot of lawyers on here today. 

[uttoxram75]

15 minutes ago, mozza said:

I'd like to see a poll set up for this.

For what mozza? What would we be voting on?

[cannable]

1 hour ago, MuespachRam said:

Best result of the season so far, at last something positive to come out of the whole sorry mess. 

Predictable but none the less disappointing 

[mozza]

5 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

For what mozza? What would we be voting on?

Fairness maybe?, justice? 

[PodgeyRam]

Without knowing all the facts it looks like a s**tty move from Mel and given his track record with sackings (remember Sam Rush and that day in court we never had?) it wouldn't surprise me if this is another one. 

[GadFly]

5 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

A lot of lawyers on here today. 

A lot of people with a moral compass that isn't broken and all. 

[Brammie Steve]

On having to cease work through ill health I had:-

6 months on full pay then

6 months on half pay then

a mediical to decide if I should be granted ill health retirement with my pension entitlement enhanced.

In circumstances like the three rampaging Rams (severally or in consort) I don't think my employers (in common with the police and other public service employers) would have been legally bound to make any remuneration except, extraordinarily, an actuarily reduced pension.

Much as I like Richard Keogh,I fail to see how the club is duty bound to pay him over £1 million PA to do nothing. It may be a different world as a pro footballer but I would expect the club to follow legal advice on the way forward.

[Tombo]

1 hour ago, MuespachRam said:

Best result of the season so far, at last something positive to come out of the whole sorry mess. 

The sort of post that makes me weigh up whether telling you what I think is worth the inevitable ban ?

I'll simply just say, you definitely never come across as the sort of bloke I'd like to have a pint with, judging by the general sort of thing you post consistently.

[RadioactiveWaste]

I've figured it out.

His being unconscious whilst lawrence and bennett ran off was the final straw in Keogh's long legacy of inexplicable defensive lapses. Just simply unacceptable (on full pay)

[Tyler Durden]

9 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

A lot of lawyers on here today. 

Barrack room ones are always the best

[May Contain Nuts]

11 minutes ago, Davide said:

Keogh wasn’t driving. He was a passenger. I don’t understand this analogy. Unless it’s describing treatment of Bennett and Lawrence. 

I'm not entirely sure where I was going with it by the time I got half way through tbh ?

I was thinking aloud on what does and doesn't count as dealing with an action in a consistent manner, but, ehhhh..

 

...can't be arsed now

[Ambitious]

I really don't understand the surprise or upset by this. 

Derby County offered each player a contract at one time or another. The contract doesn't just say how much money you will earn during whatever duration you are offered. It comes with stipulations, for example: If Derby County offer Joe Bloggs a 5-year-deal but he doesn't do a day of work. They will have a stipulations to sack them. 

Now, ignoring the hypothetical and focusing on the players involved in the situation: all three could've been sacked for gross misconduct. I have absolutely no doubt about that. The issue would've been how that would've impacted us as a club on FFP. It's effectively writing off assets against the club. We know why we issued contracts to certain players last season we clearly had no intention of keeping or playing. 

Lawrence & Bennett are arguably at much bigger fault, based on what we know, but quite frankly I don't care in that situation whether you're the one driving or a passenger. It's not like he didn't know or willingly get into the car with a drunk driver. I also think he could've influenced them not to get into the car, so I don't think I buy that he's not as guilty as the others. The only reason he probably wasn't driving was because he hasn't bothered to learn. 

The key difference is that Keogh simply cannot fulfill the terms of his contract, i.e. the duty he is paid for, whilst simultaneously breaking god knows what stipulation in the contract. It's well documented that these deals come with all sorts of daft clauses, for example: I remember one player for Sunderland who was banned from going into space, I've also heard of others banning things like skiing and theme parks. 

Lawrence and Bennett similarly broke whatever stipulations in their contract, but they can fulfill the terms of their contract. They can continue to play for the club. Realistically, it's not affected their ability to turn up and play football for Derby County. Keogh's part in the whole thing has, in fact it looks like it's impacted him so badly that even if he wasn't sacked, he would never be able to set foot on the pitch. Again, I say it is no surprise that he's been released from his contract as he's effectively ended his contract through his own misgivings. 

Let's not target Derby County or Mel Morris for this - they didn't want any of this. Unfortunately, the black and white is that Keogh has ended his own football career through poor decisions and expected someone else to foot the bill. If he had no injured himself then I have no doubt he would've also been back in for the first game as Lawrence was. It's life at the end of the day. 

No sympathy for him - the club even offered him the opportunity to stick around on a lesser wage. It will probably go to court, but 'serious incapacity or misconduct caused by excess alcohol or drugs' is a cornerstone of gross misconduct. The police report will probably detail enough to give Richard no leg to stand on in the courtroom.  

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

This isn't difficult. All three are guilty of gross misconduct. The impact of that gross misconduct can be dictated by the company. Lawrence and Bennett have been dealt with and have returned to work. Keogh rendered himself unable to work so the club have used their right to sack him after offering him a generous chance to stay on reduced terms. 

[RandomAccessMemory]

The main thing I noticed about Keogh, he has tweeted since it happened thanking people for their support, but there has been absolutely no sign of a public apology from him for his part in the whole thing. Would this indicate he believes he has nothing to apologise for? I wonder if there has been a behind the scenes apology?

Whatever you think of the other two and their actions that night, they have been both punished by the club and apologised, and it was before reaching court, so they didn't wait until after the court case to see what happened before they took responsibility, and they have now also been punished by the court.

Their situations are not the same as Keogh's. They are fit to play and as such can hold up their end of their contracts with the club, and so they are able to begin to repay the club on the pitch. Keogh is not and I'd guess the clubs offer to keep him employed but lower his wage was them giving him his chance to do the same.