quayside

Or perhaps "£25m - leave it aht son, you're having a giraffe"

I would say that at the time of our successful spells under the old board the club probably had more disposable cash than many of our our rivals due to the revenues we could generate as a big club with a large catchment. The world has changed post Abramovitch and money just gets lumped into clubs these days. We now are in an era when players who are no more than decent Prem standard command fees of £10 million or more and wages of £50k and only the billionaire owned/heavily leveraged backed clubs can compete - different gravy to the climate when we were at the top of the table imo.

I never thought we would get a judgement on this case that goes into so much detail, in fact its quite astronishing how much is revealed in that document. Constructive dismissal is a relatively easy action for an employer to defend because courts and tribunals will readily accept that high level decisions get made for commercial and financial reasons and sometimes this cuts across someone's employment contract. Ashley's reign has seen some lows in incompetent day to day management but the fact that the bunch of low life, sleasy spivs that Ashley put in charge couldn't even defend this action is about as damning an indictment as it gets. Reading that judgement it is apparent that Keegan wasn't even close to losing this imo.

Justify it however you want, he still tried to take 25 million pounds from Newcastle United. Not really. His lawyer would be negligent if he didn't stick some fantasy pie in the sky maximum figure in, its the way it works I guess. There would have been zero expectation of getting that level of payout by KK and his legal team. Did he also not say in the hearing that he considered £2 million to be a fair compensation?

And then he dropped most of the money because his priority was rather that his reputation was restored. Does that disprove your ridiculous claim that he was intent on just pocketing the most money? Yep. Not quite true. They were never going to consider that part of the claim, but wanted to make it clear that if they had, they would have ruled for publication (as they had anyway) which would restore Keegan's good name, and therefore not require any further compensation. Which Keegan could only agree with. They didn't say "you can take publication or £10m, what's it to be?" while the lawyers shouted "gamble...gamble" Exactly. If you believe that winning the constructive dismissal case is going to restore your good name, why make the additional claim in the first place? And incidentally, if KK or anyone else thinks that his reputation has been restored with this, I reckon they're very mistaken. Any prospective future employer is going to look at that judgement and not go near him with a barge pole. Yup - anyone who sues their employer will find it hard to get a similar type of job again - no matter how justified the case.

Its interesting, on reading that pdf, as to how many of the facts of the case were leaked to the press. The fact that its restricted to £2 million means Ashley will see this is a victory tbh. I doubt he will care too much about the club being exposed as liars. So its a moral win for Keegan but a financial win for the club imo.

Other than your first sentence I'm more or less ok with that.

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? So if the club wins the case - then they are blameless and did nothing wrong?

His salary was probably £2 or £3 million a year - was it a 4 year contract? Can anyone provide an explanation of how a figure of £18 million (let alone £25 million) could be arrived at? If KK wins surely no court will award anything beyond what he would have earned under the contract - if they even award that much. Bear in mind he has mitigated his loss of earnings by working for ESPN and that will be taken into acccount.

If Keegan were to lose this, what would happen? Would costs bankrupt him? I don't know KK's financial situation or what costs have been incurred so can't say but the loser picks up the costs normally and it would be significant wedge. Also if he loses the constructive dismissal case and there was, as is rumoured, a walkout clause in his contract........

I've said it before on here but constructive dismissal is hard to prove because courts/tribunals don't like to pass judgement on how owners run their business. Commercial and financial decisions sometimes have to be made that cut across an employee's employment contract but it doesn't, by any means, mean the employee has a cast iron case for constructive dismissal. Lambias was running the show for Ashley and if the club lose this then its about as damning a proof as you could get of his sheer f*cking incompetence - not that any further proof is required tbh.

Hmm - Chris Mort is a Freshfields partner and they have been Ashley's corporate lawyers for several years, so who is working for the club on this? It's interesting that all parties are supposed to have signed a "reveal nothing" agreement and yet the word seems to be going around that Ashley has offered £4 million to settle because he's crapping himself about emails that KK has produced I think if a settlement is offered and rejected and then the legal action results in a lower figure being awarded then the plaintiff (KK) is on risk for picking up the costs - anyone on here know whether that's right?

SBR happy clappers man, dont let them get to you. They only remember moments under SBR which were good and forget some of the shyte that was churned out. What a crock of s***. Robson had lost the discipline of the squad, hence the introduction of the c*** Souness. Dyer etc had almost got SBR the sack with their s**** attitude. SBR really neded to sell Dyer the day he refused to play and the fact he didn't did as much to undermine his position as anything. Agree to some extent - although that makes it sound as though there was some logical thought process behind the appointment of Souness. My understanding is that he was only given the job after Bruce and maybe Allardyce (anyone else?) had turned it down.

I don't understand why we risked Shola and Guttierez against Huddersfield for this.

The last round saw us pick up big injuries to two important players, both of whom were brought on as subs. Bearing in mind the bigger picture of where we are and what we need to do was it worth it? We aren't going to win this cup.

Harper Simpson S.Taylor Coloccini Enrique R.Taylor Smith Butt Barton Nolan Carroll Not one person on this board would pick that side - but I doubt anyone would bet heavily against Hughton selecting that as his starting line up.

Is it? Not quite You have to prove that your employer breached your employment contract in such a way that it was impossible for you to continue working. You then have to prove that what the employer did was unfair. As I said earlier its not always easy to prove a case of constructive dismissal, but it does exist and there have been successful cases......

how? if keegan wins, the club (bigger than keegan remember) doesnt benefit at all. we get X million further in the red. Like we would ever see that 10 million anyway, and if KK does win the truth is OUT once and for all. Yet another NAIL in Ashleys coffin. If Ashley wins and KK is proven to be a c*** (which i dont think he will) It finally gets rid of the monkey off the cubs back with the fans and the club doesnt lose 10 mil or whatever. Not that the club would ever see that money. See our last few transfer windows for proof. it's not so m uch that we'd ever see it,more so that any buyer would possibly have to find another 10mill to takeover the club as ashley would be unlikely to pay keegan himself. I presonally think and this is just me, if fat git sold the club during this court case and then left quickly. I think KK would trike a deal with the new owners, KKs gripe is with Ashley, Llambias, wise and his other bitches. It just so happens these bastards were running the club at the time. I personally think Keegan's claim is only a bargaining chip to try and get the club to drop it's claim against him. That is quite possible. All the media and fan emphasis has been on Keegan's action against the club. As I said above the club's action against KK could be a harder one for the defence. A lot depends on what Keegan's employment contract said about his duties, areas of responsibility and powers - and then whether the club breached any of those.

even if it turns out he was in the wrong ? If he is worng he wont get a penny. well dah! i was replying to ahmed hope that he gets every penny he's claimed for without actually knowing what went on. we should have a sweep as to what people think will be the result. i'm going for keegan to be awarded a sum but nowhere near the ammount he's claiming. And us never to find out the whole truth. Seems the most likely outcome. aye. my hopes were dashed as soon as i found out it was going to an arbitration panel and not a court of law. There still seem to be plenty of people amongst our fanbase who have already decided that the case will be decided on the premise that Ashley is a fat Cockney tosser and Keegan is a Toon legend. Therefore its a nailed on massive victory for KK. We know very little of the contracts or any of the facts really. I have had some experience of constructive dismissal and it is very hard to prove. Employers have successfully defended claims like this by saying that they had to take certain actions in the commercial and financial interests of the business and, as such, couldn't honour clauses in the employee's contract. And none of us even knows if there were any clauses in Keegan's contract that were breached here. If it's true that Keegan had a £2 million penalty clause in his contract for a walkout it's quite possible that he is the party who has to come up with a decent defence and not the club. so after reading that it could happen that keegan could be broadly in the right but could still get found against ? Possibly. And Keegan could lose his case and the club win theirs, so Keegan has to cough up.

even if it turns out he was in the wrong ? If he is worng he wont get a penny. well dah! i was replying to ahmed hope that he gets every penny he's claimed for without actually knowing what went on. we should have a sweep as to what people think will be the result. i'm going for keegan to be awarded a sum but nowhere near the ammount he's claiming. And us never to find out the whole truth. Seems the most likely outcome. aye. my hopes were dashed as soon as i found out it was going to an arbitration panel and not a court of law. There still seem to be plenty of people amongst our fanbase who have already decided that the case will be decided on the premise that Ashley is a fat Cockney tosser and Keegan is a Toon legend. Therefore its a nailed on massive victory for KK. We know very little of the contracts or any of the facts really. I have had some experience of constructive dismissal and it is very hard to prove. Employers have successfully defended claims like this by saying that they had to take certain actions in the commercial and financial interests of the business and, as such, couldn't honour clauses in the employee's contract. And none of us even knows if there were any clauses in Keegan's contract that were breached here. If it's true that Keegan had a £2 million penalty clause in his contract for a walkout it's quite possible that he is the party who has to come up with a decent defence and not the club.

Did he not have such an opportunity in May but decided to put the club up for sale yet again making the same old mistakes and if the clubs not sold soon have we just more of the same from him to look forward to in January/Summer 2010? Ashley is never going to invest in the team. He needs to go as quickly as possible Someone should let him know and I'm sure he'll do the the decent and and proper thing.... http://chattahbox.com/images/2009/03/hari-kari.jpg ? Although its possible Ashley might not see it that way tbh.

Did he not have such an opportunity in May but decided to put the club up for sale yet again making the same old mistakes and if the clubs not sold soon have we just more of the same from him to look forward to in January/Summer 2010? Ashley is never going to invest in the team. He needs to go as quickly as possible Someone should let him know and I'm sure he'll do the decent and and proper thing....

Butt is more of a holding midfielder than any of the others - and lets not forget this is not the Premiership. Even Smith has looked first class at this level.....

We need one of the central midfielders to shield the back four, like Smith has done so well this season. Its one of the main reasons we've only conceded one goal so far. Guthrie, Barton and Nolan are not holding midfielders and, for this reason, Butt must play against Blackpool.

Or was he sacked? If he left by his own will he wouldn't be asking for compensation, right? Not just the wages but how much KK has cost the club just in compensations for terminating his contracts You can resign/walk out/spit dummy and still launch a constructive dismissal claim.