Spanish Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 3 minutes ago, Gaspode said: You absolutely don't - each individual's case has to be addressed independently. There were different actions, different outcomes and different consequences for the club and the individuals concerned. Personally I'd have sacked all 3 if I'd been in Mel's shoes, but as it is now becoming clear, the club finances dictated that the players with any 'value' had to be retained in an attempt to recoup some value from their contracts, whereas a certain individual was unable to fulfil his footballing commitments (and at the time we all thought he'd probably ended his career). we all knew this at the time and this probably a big reason why the tribunal rejected it. That and suggesting he accepted a new reduced contract which looked like gaming the situation to reduce costs. Gross misconduct is go away and never some back, trying to soften it undermines the charge atherstoneram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 5 minutes ago, angieram said: Really not sure why you are bothering with circular arguments about something that happened two years ago now, court fines been issued, community service orders completed and driving bans almost completed? Forest fans singing " he should be in jail" at the game. Can't move on. Remind you of anyone? I agree angie but the actions we have seen taken at times by MM tells you all you need to know why the club is in the state it is in. He thinks,or likes to think, that he can do what he likes when he likes but it has been proven he can't. Deej 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 9 minutes ago, atherstoneram said: Are you really not capable of seeing why Keogh won his claim against the club, it is not just about being able to play football but that's all you seem to be focused on which is understandable in the same vein that MM did. Lawrence was culpable of causing the accident as was proved by the judiciary. Keogh wasn't able to carry out his contract due to the actions of a Third party. I really can see the difference it is just you that cannot grasp it. So if you was an employer and one of your managers took the junior employees on a night out, got pissed up, refused to go home in a taxi provided by you, knowingly got into a car of a junior employee, was involved in a crash, then rang in the following day to say they wouldn't be in work for the next 12 months due to their actions, you would just carry on paying their salary would you? r_wilcockson, GB SPORTS and Premier ram 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: So if you was an employer and one of your managers took the junior employees on a night out, got pissed up, refused to go home in a taxi provided by you, knowingly got into a car of a junior employee, was involved in a crash, then rang in the following day to say they wouldn't be in work for the next 12 months due to their actions, you would just carry on paying their salary would you? I was astounded Keogh won that tribunal, unless it was won on a technicality because we didn't follow a process. Finch, r_wilcockson and johnnymw 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 Just now, G STAR RAM said: So if you was an employer and one of your managers took the junior employees on a night out, got pissed up, refused to go home in a taxi provided by you, knowingly got into a car of a junior employee, was involved in a crash, then rang in the following day to say they wouldn't be in work for the next 12 months due to their actions, you would just carry on paying their salary would you? How many more times are you going to keep trotting out the same quotation. Keogh was not a manager, he was their captain "on the field only" when he put that armband on. I would have sacked both,covering my backside,then telling the "your words" manager to claim off the others insurance I also think it probably wasn't a closely guarded secret within the club that Lawrence was reliant on alcohol unless he is billy no mates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said: I was astounded Keogh won that tribunal, unless it was won on a technicality because we didn't follow a process. Does MM ever follow a process Jimbo Ram and Angry Ram 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WharfedaleRam Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said: I was astounded Keogh won that tribunal, unless it was won on a technicality because we didn't follow a process. Offering to keep him on during his rehab on a reduced salary didn't help. He was either guilty of gross misconduct or he wasn't. If we'd just got rid without the rehab offer, the Tribunal might have made a different decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, WharfedaleRam said: Offering to keep him on during his rehab on a reduced salary didn't help. He was either guilty of gross misconduct or he wasn't. If we'd just got rid without the rehab offer, the Tribunal might have made a different decision. Exactly,you can't have a middle ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, WharfedaleRam said: Offering to keep him on during his rehab on a reduced salary didn't help. He was either guilty of gross misconduct or he wasn't. If we'd just got rid without the rehab offer, the Tribunal might have made a different decision. Crazy really - the club tried to do right by him (as a long serving player) and it came backt to bite them on the bum...... atherstoneram and May Contain Nuts 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Contain Nuts Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 (edited) I'm Edited September 13, 2021 by Coconut's Beard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 16 minutes ago, Gaspode said: Crazy really - the club tried to do right by him (as a long serving player) and it came backt to bite them on the bum...... More like that MM wanted rid because he was no longer of any value to the club so he decided to use gross misconduct as an excuse but then "advised" by his lawyers that wouldn't be successful. He then tried to reduce Keogh's terms to save money and Keogh's representatives told him not to accept. MM was then in no mans land as gross misconduct would not be proved as the club offered to keep him on albeit on a reduced contract. Finch 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram-Alf Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 48 minutes ago, angieram said: Really not sure why you are bothering with circular arguments about something that happened two years ago now, court fines been issued, community service orders completed and driving bans almost completed? Forest fans singing " he should be in jail" at the game. Can't move on. Remind you of anyone? Just to play Devils advocate Angie. Remember Chappaquiddick, Or the Texas School Book Depository Building, How about when Natalie Wood mystreriously drowned, And why was Christopher Walken on the yacht? Where was Keogh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hintonsboots Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 2 hours ago, Unlucky Alf said: Just to play Devils advocate Angie. Remember Chappaquiddick, Or the Texas School Book Depository Building, How about when Natalie Wood mystreriously drowned, And why was Christopher Walken on the yacht? Where was Keogh ? There was a Rosemary Keough at the party on Chappaquiddick Island that infamous night...........spooky. Ram-Alf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB SPORTS Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, hintonsboots said: There was a Rosemary Keough at the party on Chappaquiddick Island that infamous night...........spooky. Ha Keogh, always a Conspiracy in him. atherstoneram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Ram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 3 hours ago, Gaspode said: Crazy really - the club tried to do right by him (as a long serving player) and it came backt to bite them on the bum...... Do right by him by sacking him ? atherstoneram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 3 hours ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said: I was astounded Keogh won that tribunal, unless it was won on a technicality because we didn't follow a process. It was process undertaken by the EFL, are you really astounded that they ruled against us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 3 hours ago, atherstoneram said: How many more times are you going to keep trotting out the same quotation. Keogh was not a manager, he was their captain "on the field only" when he put that armband on. I would have sacked both,covering my backside,then telling the "your words" manager to claim off the others insurance I also think it probably wasn't a closely guarded secret within the club that Lawrence was reliant on alcohol unless he is billy no mates. So you would have sacked Keogh...that is not what you have been saying for the last 2 days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: So you would have sacked Keogh...that is not what you have been saying for the last 2 days. You asked me what i would have done so i gave my answer,that is not the same as getting rid of someone who is no longer of use to you and the other person still is. Keep defending MM all you like he has still been made to look a fool over the course of action he took. Deej 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atherstoneram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 12 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said: It was process undertaken by the EFL, are you really astounded that they ruled against us? Here we go again more conspiracy theories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eatonram Posted September 13, 2021 Share Posted September 13, 2021 31 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said: Do right by him by sacking him ? No doing right by him by still offering him more money a week than most can only dream of, then paying for his medical care and rehab, whilst keeping his job open for him. May Contain Nuts 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now