Mel Morris

[G STAR RAM]

39 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

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.

So you would have sacked him but are slating MM for taking the same action ???

[G STAR RAM]

38 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Here we go again more conspiracy theories.

Why is that conspiracy theory?

The EFL have twice ruled against us and then when the evidence was passed to experts they ruled in our favour.

You keep on siding with the EFL but they have been made to look fools over the course of action they took twice already...

[atherstoneram]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

So you would have sacked him but are slating MM for taking the same action ???

Read what i would have done and what MM did,Two completely different courses of action. You keep one player,you keep them both,you sack one,you sack both.Lawrence was just as guilty knowing he had a drink problem but also refused the offer of a taxi laid on by the club,because he was still of value to the club is immaterial.As i have stated previously this is not the Victorian era where an owner can get rid of someone just because they no longer feel they are of no use.

[atherstoneram]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Why is that conspiracy theory?

The EFL have twice ruled against us and then when the evidence was passed to experts they ruled in our favour.

You keep on siding with the EFL but they have been made to look fools over the course of action they took twice already...

And you don't think MM has, i am not siding with the EFL but i know who i would rather trust. I have not seen any other club owners/chairmen rushing to MM's defence saying he/the club is being treated unfairly.

[G STAR RAM]

1 minute ago, atherstoneram said:

Read what i would have done and what MM did,Two completely different courses of action. You keep one player,you keep them both,you sack one,you sack both.Lawrence was just as guilty knowing he had a drink problem but also refused the offer of a taxi laid on by the club,because he was still of value to the club is immaterial.As i have stated previously this is not the Victorian era where an owner can get rid of someone just because they no longer feel they are of no use.

Each case is judged on its own merits.

Interesting that you go on about it not being Victorian times but would gladly sack someone with mental health issues and a drink problem.

Keogh was not sacked because he was of no use, he was unable to carry out his duties.

[G STAR RAM]

4 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

And you don't think MM has, i am not siding with the EFL but i know who i would rather trust. I have not seen any other club owners/chairmen rushing to MM's defence saying he/the club is being treated unfairly.

Yes, I think MM has handled the whole thing poorly, it doesnt mean that I do not agree with the outcome that he correctly came to in my opinion. 

If you would rather trust the EFL, given their recent record on ruling in areas where they have no expertise, then I think that tells us all we need to know about your motives.

Have a great day.

[atherstoneram]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

Each case is judged on its own merits.

Interesting that you go on about it not being Victorian times but would gladly sack someone with mental health issues and a drink problem.

Keogh was not sacked because he was of no use, he was unable to carry out his duties.

I would have imagined then if that was the case the club should have advised Lawrence not to attend the days team building exercise so that can be seen as a failing on the club by letting him attend

They have a duty of care or,where you are concerned money over rides everything. 

[atherstoneram]

3 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yes, I think MM has handled the whole thing poorly, it doesnt mean that I do not agree with the outcome that he correctly came to in my opinion. 

If you would rather trust the EFL, given their recent record on ruling in areas where they have no expertise, then I think that tells us all we need to know about your motives.

Have a great day.

I always have a great day 

[G STAR RAM]

2 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

I would have imagined then if that was the case the club should have advised Lawrence not to attend the days team building exercise so that can be seen as a failing on the club by letting him attend

They have a duty of care or,where you are concerned money over rides everything. 

Well yes, when my club is on the brink I'd like to think they arent paying someone £2.3m to sit at home doing nothing because of a poor decision when he was pissed up.

I'd have been more than happy for Keogh to be paid SSP and DCFC pay for his rehabilitation, he at least deserved that after his service. 

[Macintosh]

4 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.

If Lawrence had also been sacked at the same time as Keogh, then a tribunal would also have ruled in Tom's favour, and the compensation to him would have been an extra million at least to that of Keogh, five million to find, and more lawyer fees on top. There's a whole untold story that we are not aware of. The author of Pride had an interview with Keogh lined up but the plug was pulled. The staff at the pub were told to keep quiet, but it appears one player particularly encouraged Lawrence to drink that night. If I was Morris, I would also have sacked Keogh.

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well yes, when my club is on the brink I'd like to think they arent paying someone £2.3m to sit at home doing nothing because of a poor decision when he was pissed up.

I'd have been more than happy for Keogh to be paid SSP and DCFC pay for his rehabilitation, he at least deserved that after his service. 

My point exactly,who has brought the club to the brink and it's not the EFL. You have worked it out at last.

[atherstoneram]

7 minutes ago, Macintosh said:

If Lawrence had also been sacked at the same time as Keogh, then a tribunal would also have ruled in Tom's favour, and the compensation to him would have been an extra million at least to that of Keogh, five million to find, and more lawyer fees on top. There's a whole untold story that we are not aware of. The author of Pride had an interview with Keogh lined up but the plug was pulled. The staff at the pub were told to keep quiet, but it appears one player particularly encouraged Lawrence to drink that night. If I was Morris, I would also have sacked Keogh.

That statement makes it look worse for the club

[G STAR RAM]

12 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

My point exactly,who has brought the club to the brink and it's not the EFL. You have worked it out at last.

Well its not really the point being discussed.

I assume though you can see how paying an employee £2.3m to contribute nothing would not have helped the financial situation that you are so obviously worried about?

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Well its not really the point being discussed.

I assume though you can see how paying an employee £2.3m to contribute nothing would not have helped the financial situation that you are so obviously worried about?

I'm not worried about it. If we go under we will rise again like a phoenix. After supporting the club for the best part of 50 years we have been in worse situations than this

[G STAR RAM]

13 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

That statement makes it look worse for the club

I can't be the only one who is getting confused by you here.

Just to be clear, what action would you have advocated?

[atherstoneram]

4 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I can't be the only one who is getting confused by you here.

Just to be clear, what action would you have advocated?

I wouldn't have advocated any action because i wasn't involved but for the comment that the pub staff were told to keep quiet i wonder why and what else possibly has the club got to hide. We may never find out but if there was nothing else that may have been brought into the public domain why tell them to keep quiet.

[Comrade 86]

At this stage of the contest, I've got @G STAR RAM well ahead. His opponent seems to be in trouble here and it's gonna take something pretty special from @atherstoneram if he's to regain a foothold in the fight...

 

 

[atherstoneram]

2 minutes ago, 86 Hair Islands said:

At this stage of the contest, I've got @G STAR RAM well ahead. His opponent seems to be in trouble here and it's gonna take something pretty special from @atherstoneram if he's to regain a foothold in the fight...

 

 

There is no fight, some on here think MM can do no wrong and walk on water as others can see his faults and failings

[Rab a dab doo]

12 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

There is no fight, some on here think MM can do no wrong and walk on water as others can see his faults and failings

That's just like my missus, she can see all sorts faults in me but yet I see none at all.  Funny that ?

[G STAR RAM]

36 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

I wouldn't have advocated any action because i wasn't involved but for the comment that the pub staff were told to keep quiet i wonder why and what else possibly has the club got to hide. We may never find out but if there was nothing else that may have been brought into the public domain why tell them to keep quiet.

Had you been MM what action would you have advocated?