dcmk

Those odds are incredible.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed? How does getting compensation prove he did nothing wrong though? Er he would have won his case, that he couldn't do his job as initially agreed upon and that he was forced out they had breached his contract and that he had valid grounds to sue for his treatment. What would he have done wrong? He could have gone in the summer when he was fully aware of the system he was working in, not waited until the day after the transfer window closed to maximise the damage it would cause. He was clearly pissed off when he gave that interview after the Chelsea game at the end of the season - why not go then? He could also not have spent the whole time he was here telling the supporters via the press that he was happy with the situation and that there wasn't a problem. Mind that's not the story he obviously told in his off the record conversations is it? People (myself included) laughed and said all of these journalists were making s*** up, but the truth is he's been dishonest throughout. he stayed untill the day he sent Wise and llambiarse out to sign Schweinsteiger, and they came back with two other muppets instead. Then Camels back was broken by this last straw. Keegan couldnt have known this would happen. He didn't "send them out" because they didn't report to him, he reported to them. Whether that's right or wrong (and it's wrong) that's the way it worked. OK then wrong choice of words. They told keegan they were going to sign him, and Didnt. They lied to Keegan. Would you stay in your job under management like that. Robson was sure he'd get Miguel and ended up with f***ing Carr. If ever there was a reason to walk............. "They lied to Keegan"? Get a grip, every manager has a similar story, things change. Wenger, Ferguson among others said they would have done the same in KK situation. There goes your theory. You have to be kidding me? Seriously. Er they said if they had no control over transfers they would walk away. Seriously. Would they have agreed to it in the first place? No, that's why if their jobs changed they would have walked. Probably sued too.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed? How does getting compensation prove he did nothing wrong though? Er he would have won his case, that he couldn't do his job as initially agreed upon and that he was forced out they had breached his contract and that he had valid grounds to sue for his treatment. What would he have done wrong? He could have gone in the summer when he was fully aware of the system he was working in, not waited until the day after the transfer window closed to maximise the damage it would cause. He was clearly pissed off when he gave that interview after the Chelsea game at the end of the season - why not go then? He could also not have spent the whole time he was here telling the supporters via the press that he was happy with the situation and that there wasn't a problem. Mind that's not the story he obviously told in his off the record conversations is it? People (myself included) laughed and said all of these journalists were making s*** up, but the truth is he's been dishonest throughout. he stayed untill the day he sent Wise and llambiarse out to sign Schweinsteiger, and they came back with two other muppets instead. Then Camels back was broken by this last straw. Keegan couldnt have known this would happen. He didn't "send them out" because they didn't report to him, he reported to them. Whether that's right or wrong (and it's wrong) that's the way it worked. OK then wrong choice of words. They told keegan they were going to sign him, and Didnt. They lied to Keegan. Would you stay in your job under management like that. Robson was sure he'd get Miguel and ended up with f***ing Carr. If ever there was a reason to walk............. "They lied to Keegan"? Get a grip, every manager has a similar story, things change. Wenger, Ferguson among others said they would have done the same in KK situation. There goes your theory. You have to be kidding me? Seriously. Er they said if they had no control over transfers they would walk away. Seriously.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed? How does getting compensation prove he did nothing wrong though? Er he would have won his case, that he couldn't do his job as initially agreed upon and that he was forced out they had breached his contract and that he had valid grounds to sue for his treatment. What would he have done wrong? He could have gone in the summer when he was fully aware of the system he was working in, not waited until the day after the transfer window closed to maximise the damage it would cause. He was clearly pissed off when he gave that interview after the Chelsea game at the end of the season - why not go then? He could also not have spent the whole time he was here telling the supporters via the press that he was happy with the situation and that there wasn't a problem. Mind that's not the story he obviously told in his off the record conversations is it? People (myself included) laughed and said all of these journalists were making s*** up, but the truth is he's been dishonest throughout. he stayed untill the day he sent Wise and llambiarse out to sign Schweinsteiger, and they came back with two other muppets instead. Then Camels back was broken by this last straw. Keegan couldnt have known this would happen. He didn't "send them out" because they didn't report to him, he reported to them. Whether that's right or wrong (and it's wrong) that's the way it worked. OK then wrong choice of words. They told keegan they were going to sign him, and Didnt. They lied to Keegan. Would you stay in your job under management like that. Robson was sure he'd get Miguel and ended up with f***ing Carr. If ever there was a reason to walk............. "They lied to Keegan"? Get a grip, every manager has a similar story, things change. Wenger, Ferguson among others said they would have done the same in KK situation. There goes your theory.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed? How does getting compensation prove he did nothing wrong though? Er he would have won his case, that he couldn't do his job as initially agreed upon and that he was forced out they had breached his contract and that he had valid grounds to sue for his treatment. What would he have done wrong? He could have gone in the summer when he was fully aware of the system he was working in, not waited until the day after the transfer window closed to maximise the damage it would cause. He was clearly pissed off when he gave that interview after the Chelsea game at the end of the season - why not go then? He could also not have spent the whole time he was here telling the supporters via the press that he was happy with the situation and that there wasn't a problem. Mind that's not the story he obviously told in his off the record conversations is it? People (myself included) laughed and said all of these journalists were making s*** up, but the truth is he's been dishonest throughout. He couldn't leave in the summer could he.. his main issue with the club was probably transfers, if he didn't even wait until the end of the window- to see if the situation got better he would be even more vilified. He waited to see if improved and would bring in his targets 'judge me on deadline day' and it didn't materialize... instead they brought in players he didn't want. One played about 20 minutes, another about 120 minutes in a season.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed? How does getting compensation prove he did nothing wrong though? Er he would have won his case, that he couldn't do his job as initially agreed upon and that he was forced out they had breached his contract and that he had valid grounds to sue for his treatment. What would he have done wrong?

With their name being dragged through the mud all over the press that'll be why West Ham did so poorly last season and couldn't get taken over then. I must have missed the bit where West Ham fans collectively spat out the dummy and started a boycoutt over their infallible god-like hero Curbishley. You really hate Keegan don't you? No, he really hates Newcastle supporters, as going by that it's US to blame for the difference between what happened at NUFC & what happened at WHUFC. BTW how has this supposed "boycoutt" affected the club Ozzie? The boycoutt which saw us have the highest ever attendance for a team relegated in the UK & the 6th highest average attendance in England this season. The turmoil definitely affected our chances of getting a decent interim replacement after KK legged it. It may also have affected the sale, but who can really say whether any buyers were put off by the prospect of a fractious, difficult-to-satisfy fan base? I'm sure it makes us look a less attractive prospect, though. How could it make us more likely to find a buyer? [b[No, the fact Ashley was only offering a 1 month contract affected the managerial appointment. [/b[On the second point, see my edited post above. Venables said otherwise. O RLY?

I don't think its anything to do with that tbh. Like I said, if Keegan left later I'd be annoyed but all he did was wait to see the outcome of the transfer window and then proved to himself that idiots were running the club's recruitment. Even with all the protests and furore we should've stayed up with 35 more games to go. Again, it goes back to blaming the board for everything. I know Mike Ashley is a w***** and a sad excuse of a businessman, but it doesn't mean he's to blame for EVERYTHING. Keegan, the players and such need to shoulder some of the responsibility as well. If Keegan wins this, why should he be blamed. He wasn't allowed to do his job and it would have been proved in court.

With their name being dragged through the mud all over the press that'll be why West Ham did so poorly last season and couldn't get taken over then. I must have missed the bit where West Ham fans collectively spat out the dummy and started a boycoutt over their infallible god-like hero Curbishley. You really hate Keegan don't you? No, he really hates Newcastle supporters, as going by that it's US to blame for the difference between what happened at NUFC & what happened at WHUFC. BTW how has this supposed "boycoutt" affected the club Ozzie? The boycoutt which saw us have the highest ever attendance for a team relegated in the UK & the 6th highest average attendance in England this season. The turmoil definitely affected our chances of getting a decent interim replacement after KK legged it. It may also have affected the sale, but who can really say whether any buyers were put off by the prospect of a fractious, difficult-to-satisfy fan base? I'm sure it makes us look a less attractive prospect, though. How could it make us more likely to find a buyer? [b[No, the fact Ashley was only offering a 1 month contract affected the managerial appointment. [/b[On the second point, see my edited post above. Venables said otherwise. I need to listen to Terry Venables more.

That's a staggering statement. It would have found that Keegan was forced out. How can he still be blamed?

With their name being dragged through the mud all over the press that'll be why West Ham did so poorly last season and couldn't get taken over then. I must have missed the bit where West Ham fans collectively spat out the dummy and started a boycoutt over their infallible god-like hero Curbishley. You really hate Keegan don't you? No, he really hates Newcastle supporters, as going by that it's US to blame for the difference between what happened at NUFC & what happened at WHUFC. The irony is he wanted everyone who called themselves a Newcastle fan to protest Freddy Shepherd

Well if he wins Ozzie, would you at least admit that he did nothing wrong by walking out?

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Alan-Curbishley-opts-for-tribunal-over-West-Ham-departure-article53590.html ?

Remind me again of how many clubs he's been manager of that he HASN'T walked out on ? (None ?) Did he take those to court?

If this was simply about the money why didn't he just see his contract out until it ended or he got sacked? His natural proven reaction is to walk away...he walked and still wants paying for it. You do know the man in your avatar and signature 'fleeced' the club when he left? No he didn't. His contract was a rolling12 months, if he was SACKED he was owed 12 months worth of money, simple as. What's the difference between that and Keegan being forced out of his job with three years still left on his contract and wanting that money? That's assuming that the tribunal rules in Keegan's favour. Massive assumption, and you really have to go on track record, which doesn't favour KK. He didn't get a world class player....Waaaaa Speculative He got enforced financial restraints on him (like most jobs).....Waaaaaa Was he pissed at this? Speculative His budget changed (like what happens in business)....Waaaaa Again? It wasn't quite what was on the brochure....double fuking waaaaaaaa....s*** happens, people oversell the dream, KK just as guilty of that a few times himself...more waaaaa. He didn't even say this under Ashley He should have told the fans WTF was going on and that he'd stick by us, as apparently he loves the club more than anyone and understands it even more...but instead through in the towel at the 1st sign of resistance. Massive assumption? Possibly, but if someone gets accused of stealing and has been done 2-3 times already for that crime, what would you think? What does constructive dismissal mean by the way? See above. Its your argument not mine. Back it up. Convince me. If he didn't have a case he wouldn't bother or he wouldn't win. Your problem with this seems to be, it takes money away from the club ...yet you have SBR in your avatar. Ok, for one moment we focus on payout and nothing else: Were talking £3m for a man who took us from relegation battles or at best bottom-mid table, to Champions league football - Deserved. To boot the money was given when we were at least the 5th best club in the country and in Europe regularly, we could afford it and he worked for it, for several years. KK situation is he was there for a few month, won a couple of games, didn't move the club forward, and now wants £10m, over 3 times as much, for a fraction of the work while we are in the worst position the club has been in for 15 years (or pushing) and people want to tag him as a fan of the club. They gave him that contract. He feels strongly that he was forced out of the club, if he is proved right, why shouldn't he get what is owed? The decision would have been - KK wasn't able to do the job he agreed to. Why would anyone put up with that?? You've never had your job change? Oh our jobs are a direct comparison to top football managers. Definitely. I have a job role, with a list of responsibilities. If i regularly had to put these off to do work which isn't in my contract i would have an issue with my contract of employment. Sure.

If this was simply about the money why didn't he just see his contract out until it ended or he got sacked? His natural proven reaction is to walk away...he walked and still wants paying for it. You do know the man in your avatar and signature 'fleeced' the club when he left? No he didn't. His contract was a rolling12 months, if he was SACKED he was owed 12 months worth of money, simple as. What's the difference between that and Keegan being forced out of his job with three years still left on his contract and wanting that money? That's assuming that the tribunal rules in Keegan's favour. Massive assumption, and you really have to go on track record, which doesn't favour KK. He didn't get a world class player....Waaaaa Speculative He got enforced financial restraints on him (like most jobs).....Waaaaaa Was he pissed at this? Speculative His budget changed (like what happens in business)....Waaaaa Again? It wasn't quite what was on the brochure....double fuking waaaaaaaa....s*** happens, people oversell the dream, KK just as guilty of that a few times himself...more waaaaa. He didn't even say this under Ashley He should have told the fans WTF was going on and that he'd stick by us, as apparently he loves the club more than anyone and understands it even more...but instead through in the towel at the 1st sign of resistance. Massive assumption? Possibly, but if someone gets accused of stealing and has been done 2-3 times already for that crime, what would you think? What does constructive dismissal mean by the way? See above. Its your argument not mine. Back it up. Convince me. If he didn't have a case he wouldn't bother or he wouldn't win. Your problem with this seems to be, it takes money away from the club ...yet you have SBR in your avatar. Ok, for one moment we focus on payout and nothing else: Were talking £3m for a man who took us from relegation battles or at best bottom-mid table, to Champions league football - Deserved. To boot the money was given when we were at least the 5th best club in the country and in Europe regularly, we could afford it and he worked for it, for several years. KK situation is he was there for a few month, won a couple of games, didn't move the club forward, and now wants £10m, over 3 times as much, for a fraction of the work while we are in the worst position the club has been in for 15 years (or pushing) and people want to tag him as a fan of the club. They gave him that contract. He feels strongly that he was forced out of the club, if he is proved right, why shouldn't he get what is owed? The decision would have been - KK wasn't able to do the job he agreed to. Why would anyone put up with that??

If this was simply about the money why didn't he just see his contract out until it ended or he got sacked? His natural proven reaction is to walk away...he walked and still wants paying for it. You do know the man in your avatar and signature 'fleeced' the club when he left? No he didn't. His contract was a rolling12 months, if he was SACKED he was owed 12 months worth of money, simple as. What's the difference between that and Keegan being forced out of his job with three years still left on his contract and wanting that money? That's assuming that the tribunal rules in Keegan's favour. Massive assumption, and you really have to go on track record, which doesn't favour KK. He didn't get a world class player....Waaaaa Speculative He got enforced financial restraints on him (like most jobs).....Waaaaaa Was he pissed at this? Speculative His budget changed (like what happens in business)....Waaaaa Again? It wasn't quite what was on the brochure....double fuking waaaaaaaa....s*** happens, people oversell the dream, KK just as guilty of that a few times himself...more waaaaa. He didn't even say this under Ashley He should have told the fans WTF was going on and that he'd stick by us, as apparently he loves the club more than anyone and understands it even more...but instead through in the towel at the 1st sign of resistance. Massive assumption? Possibly, but if someone gets accused of stealing and has been done 2-3 times already for that crime, what would you think? What does constructive dismissal mean by the way? See above. Its your argument not mine. Back it up. Convince me. If he didn't have a case he wouldn't bother or he wouldn't win. Your problem with this seems to be, it takes money away from the club ...yet you have SBR in your avatar.

If this was simply about the money why didn't he just see his contract out until it ended or he got sacked? His natural proven reaction is to walk away...he walked and still wants paying for it. You do know the man in your avatar and signature 'fleeced' the club when he left? No he didn't. His contract was a rolling12 months, if he was SACKED he was owed 12 months worth of money, simple as. What's the difference between that and Keegan being forced out of his job with three years still left on his contract and wanting that money? That's assuming that the tribunal rules in Keegan's favour. Massive assumption, and you really have to go on track record, which doesn't favour KK. He didn't get a world class player....Waaaaa Speculative He got enforced financial restraints on him (like most jobs).....Waaaaaa Was he pissed at this? Speculative His budget changed (like what happens in business)....Waaaaa Again? It wasn't quite what was on the brochure....double fuking waaaaaaaa....s*** happens, people oversell the dream, KK just as guilty of that a few times himself...more waaaaa. He didn't even say this under Ashley He should have told the fans WTF was going on and that he'd stick by us, as apparently he loves the club more than anyone and understands it even more...but instead through in the towel at the 1st sign of resistance. Massive assumption? Possibly, but if someone gets accused of stealing and has been done 2-3 times already for that crime, what would you think? What does constructive dismissal mean by the way?

FYP Oh by all means enlighten us then, or ignore the issue.. as your doing atm.

He wants his contract paid off, like SBR did when he was fired. If he doesn't have a case, he wont get any money. Not rocket science. If your employer is a c*** and forces you out, you seek compensation. SBR actually got sacked. And he pressed the club for compensation. Me or you know fuck all what happened behind the scenes.. if he has a case for 'constructive dismissal' he is entitled to it. Just like SBR was entitled to having his contract paid off.. or do you still fail to see it?

He wants his contract paid off, like SBR did when he was fired. If he doesn't have a case, he wont get any money. Not rocket science. If your employer is a cunt and forces you out, you seek compensation.

Did SBR not seek compensation when he was fired? Was he being selfish?

you never contemplated KK winnning? of course he'll win, his main part of his defence case is NUFC's own publications, its in the official match programme and the magazine with Ashley interviewed saying KK has final decision on transfers. i'm pretty sure anything in the contract would outweigh that, which is after all the equivilent of wenger saying anelka wouldn't be sold. the ""final decision" but could mean lots of things. if darlos manager asks for wayne rooney and is told they cant afford it does that mean he didn't have the final say ? It obviously does if the manager is Kevin Keegan. it appears even Ashley dosent have your faith in his position. The only position I have is that I'd rather the club had the money than Keegan. That and the fact I find the blind faith of the Keegan worshippers both amusing and a bit f***ing sad. Maybe its because he was the best manager we have ever had in the Premiership, understood the club, passionate, good football and ever ambitious.

Spanish league is a joke, he is probably going to beat his tally of 42 goals.. if remains injury free

I wouldnt touch Portsmouth with a barge pole at the moment