Jump to content
Nuwtfly

Keogh Sacked

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TommyPowel said:

When are Lawrence  and Bennets contracts up for renewal?

Bennett - summer 2020 (end of season)
Lawrence - summer 2022

41 minutes ago, StapenhillRam said:

Would it be possible for Keogh to sue Tom Lawrence for loss of earnings ??????

Doubt it as it would be a voluntary reduction in pay

Share this post


Link to post

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?  

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

I don't understand why you're having so much trouble understanding my point? I don't care about how 1 can't contribute and isn't worth anything and the others are .... I completely understand why the club are doing what they're doing. I'm looking at the situation purely out of my own morals and I don't think it is fair that 1 person is suffering more severe consequences than the other 3 involved. That's it, there's nothing more to it. You, SaintRam and others can keep repeating stuff about the financial consequences and why the club is making the right choice which is fine and I agree with, but I just don't believe it to be morally correct, that's all.

As for the press stuff, the stadium sale and Rooney signing come to mind. Sure they're both legal and haven't gone against any rules (unless the EFL change their mind), but even the most biased Derby fans can surely see selling a stadium to yourself to avoid FFP punishment and having a betting company heavily involved in a player's arrival isn't a great look.

I think Cam that the way to look at this is that it is not a punishment for Keogh, its a consequence of his actions. He can no longer play because of his own actions and as such he is in a different position to Lawrence and Bennett.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

I don't understand why you're having so much trouble understanding my point? I don't care about how 1 can't contribute and isn't worth anything and the others are .... I completely understand why the club are doing what they're doing. I'm looking at the situation purely out of my own morals and I don't think it is fair that 1 person is suffering more severe consequences than the other 3 involved. That's it, there's nothing more to it. You, SaintRam and others can keep repeating stuff about the financial consequences and why the club is making the right choice which is fine and I agree with, but I just don't believe it to be morally correct, that's all.

As for the press stuff, the stadium sale and Rooney signing come to mind. Sure they're both legal and haven't gone against any rules (unless the EFL change their mind), but even the most biased Derby fans can surely see selling a stadium to yourself to avoid FFP punishment and having a betting company heavily involved in a player's arrival isn't a great look.

Exactly! Is it suddenly less of a case of gross misconduct if you're able to play work, and retain some form of resale value? Surely your ability to do your job after your misconduct, has no bearing on the severity of the misconduct itself? 

Share this post


Link to post
Quote
1 minute ago, GadFly said:

Exactly! Is it suddenly less of a case of gross misconduct if you're able to play work, and retain some form of resale value? Surely your ability to do your job after your misconduct, has no bearing on the severity of the misconduct itself? 

 

You are looking at it as a punishment. Its not, its a consequence of his actions. He has ended his own career.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, The Orange Pimpernel said:

You are looking at it as a punishment. Its not, its a consequence of his actions. He has ended his own career.

I'm looking at it that way because the club are supposedly viewing it as "gross misconduct", and I'm wondering why his case is seen that way but the other guy's cases aren't. Please explain. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, GadFly said:

I'm looking at it that way because the club are supposedly viewing it as "gross misconduct", and I'm wondering why his case is seen that way but the other guy's cases aren't. Please explain. 

What it is saying is if we chose to sack him, or anyone involved, we would be able to on grounds of gross misconduct.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, GadFly said:

I'm looking at it that way because the club are supposedly viewing it as "gross misconduct", and I'm wondering why his case is seen that way but the other guy's cases aren't. Please explain. 

They potentially are all guilty of gross misconduct but its the clubs decision whether to enforce sacking or not. You have to look at this from the clubs perspective. Lawrence can still work despite his actions. Same for Bennett. Keogh cannot. Keogh by all accounts was drunk and willingly got into a car with a drunk driver. He has to take responsibility for his own actions. If he gets an offer to stay on reduced wages he's a lucky boy.

Edited by The Orange Pimpernel

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, The Orange Pimpernel said:

I think Cam that the way to look at this is that it is not a punishment for Keogh, its a consequence of his actions. He can no longer play because of his own actions and as such he is in a different position to Lawrence and Bennett.

But he also can't play because of Tom Lawrence's actions. As I've said, I completely understand the club's decisions and I know they're the best form of action for the club. It just doesn't sit well with me that the others are getting off (in comparison to Keogh's punishment) lightly. 1 week we're seeing articles from Curtis Davies about the club doing all they can to integrate Lawrence and Bennett back into the team so they don't feel ostracised and the next we're seeing that Keogh must take a pay cut or be sacked. 

The funny part about it is that the Keogh offer is obviously because as @SaintRamsaid, he'll be unavailable for a huge part of his remaining contract (66% I think you said?) ..... Bennett has probably been unavailable for around that amount of time in all of his previous contracts through injuries (although most/all occurred via football activities) 😂

Share this post


Link to post

When you think about it, it's the same action a normal business would take if an employee injured themselves on a night out.  If it was me, I would be down to statutory sick pay within 2 months, until such time as I was able to work again.  If i objected, I'm sure my boss would advise me not to let the door hit my arse on the way out.  £12k a week and access to fantastic medical facilities & rehabilitation is a pretty good deal when you look at it.

Edited by ramsbottom

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

But he also can't play because of Tom Lawrence's actions. As I've said, I completely understand the club's decisions and I know they're the best form of action for the club. It just doesn't sit well with me that the others are getting off (in comparison to Keogh's punishment) lightly. 1 week we're seeing articles from Curtis Davies about the club doing all they can to integrate Lawrence and Bennett back into the team so they don't feel ostracised and the next we're seeing that Keogh must take a pay cut or be sacked. 

The funny part about it is that the Keogh offer is obviously because as @SaintRamsaid, he'll be unavailable for a huge part of his remaining contract (66% I think you said?) ..... Bennett has probably been unavailable for around that amount of time in all of his previous contracts through injuries (although most/all occurred via football activities) 😂

That is it though Cam, its Keoghs own actions that caused his problem. He was apparently drunk so his judgement was impaired and he accepted a lift from a drunk driver. 

Edited by The Orange Pimpernel

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Cam the Ram said:

 

The funny part about it is that the Keogh offer is obviously because as @SaintRamsaid, he'll be unavailable for a huge part of his remaining contract (66% I think you said?) ..... Bennett has probably been unavailable for around that amount of time in all of his previous contracts through injuries (although most/all occurred via football activities) 😂

Yeah I think two thirds of his remaining contract is about right.

But of course it does make a huge difference if injuries occur via footballing activities; because wages for players injured in that way are covered by insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes 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?  

He would be dismissed for a frustration of contract - off sick and unlikely to be available in the near future 

Share this post


Link to post

What we do not know here is exactly what the club know,they conducted an investigation and what they found out may well have led to this action.

Plus has it has been said 12k a week and the best medical care you can get everyday would be most people's dream with a injury like this.

Cannot second guess the clubs decision but they obviously feel justified in making it.

Edited by Rambalin

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

Can't agree with you. Whilst we most certainly miss Keogh on the pitch I cannot help think that off the pitch he's the kind of leader we could well do without.

TBH getting rid of him might help bring about a 'culture change' at the Club?

Seems strange then that every manager that comes in since hes been here say how good he is, in and around the dressing room.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

There was someone on the DCFC1884 facebook group that claimed his Mum was one of the first responders and that Keogh allegedly tried to claim he was called 'Alfie' but she recognised him and corrected him immediately 😂 

When did it come out [another player] was the other individual involved? 😱 Missed that one 

It was never confirmed who the 4th player involved was. The Mail and other sources gave a brief description.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, mwram1973 said:

Seems strange then that every manager that comes in since hes been here say how good he is, in and around the dressing room.

People are taking the whole Captain thing too far. 

Ultimately, it was a night on the piss gone badly. He was out having a drink with his mates. He wasn’t there to dad them just because he wears and armband. 

If anything, one of the historical jobs of a captain has been to organise these sorts of things.

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.