TRon Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. There are also those who just have the interests of Newcastle United as a football club at heart. If it can be shown to me how Keegan winning this case will benefit the club I am willing to listen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 no. he's saying the people who hope (key word) keegan wins simply because he was good 15 years ago or just because they like him more than ashley are missing the point of this. none of us know what happened so why hope (again, key word) keegan wins and takes £8 million off us? the club > anyone. The comment came across that he doesnt want Keegan to win, regardless of whether he is right or wrong; that was why I asked if I was interpreting right. To say the club is more important than Keegan = I "hope" the club win. How is that different to hoping Keegan wins. Its equally as short sighted without, as you say, knowing what happened. Ultimately, every level headed person/fan should be hoping that the person who wins is the person who has been wronged. Yes that's how every level headed/neutral/Keeganite should think. On the other hand, I am a Newcastle United fan and I want what is best for NUFC and our fans so I hope Newcastle United win this case. I see no benefit for NUFC or our fans in Keegan winning it as I can't see him coming back here. Take your point but it's about right and wrong too isn't it? If the club has broken it's contract then Keegan deserves whatever comes his way. He's entitled to it. It's a big 'if' mind obviously. No he doesn't deserve it if you want an honest answer. He isn't going to get that sort of job or contract from any other club. He shouldn't have taken the job unless he was going to see it through. All this talk of constructive dismissal is bollocks in the real world. If the club has fucked him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. Agreed. It's a shame that the only club he'll ever be able to screw for recompense is Newcastle Utd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. There are also those who just have the interests of Newcastle United as a football club at heart. If it can be shown to me how Keegan winning this case will benefit the club I am willing to listen. 2nd part of my first sentence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. there is a third view, is that keegan bottled it like he has at other jobs when he couldn't get his own way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 If the club has f***ed him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. I keep playing Devils Advocate on this so don't take it the wrong way. Do contracts work both ways? I don't think they do and would like to see somebody who breaks it from the other side have to pay the employer for the remainder of the contract. It seems all one sided to me, it's far too easy for one party to break a contract while the other ends up out of pocket if they do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. there is a third view, is that keegan bottled it like he has at other jobs when he couldn't get his own way they are the mormons of the equation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. there is a third view, is that keegan bottled it like he has at other jobs when he couldn't get his own way Such as? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 No he doesn't deserve it if you want an honest answer. He isn't going to get that sort of job or contract from any other club. He shouldn't have taken the job unless he was going to see it through. All this talk of constructive dismissal is bollocks in the real world. Constructive dismissal isn't bollocks in the real world, it prevents people from being walked all over by an employer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 If the club has f***ed him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. I keep playing Devils Advocate on this so don't take it the wrong way. Do contracts work both ways? I don't think they do and would like to see somebody who breaks it from the other side have to pay the employer for the remainder of the contract. It seems all one sided to me, it's far too easy for one party to break a contract while the other ends up out of pocket if they do it. A contract is a statement of terms upon which 2 parties are willing to be legally bound. If either side has broken the terms of the contract, and it can be proven, they'll lose. Keegan signing his contract in January seemed to happen very quickly iirc. I'd like to think he and his lawyer gave it the once over and he knew exactly what he was signing... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 No he doesn't deserve it if you want an honest answer. He isn't going to get that sort of job or contract from any other club. He shouldn't have taken the job unless he was going to see it through. All this talk of constructive dismissal is bollocks in the real world. Constructive dismissal isn't bollocks in the real world, it prevents people from being walked all over by an employer. I'm sure there are loads of employers ready to employ Keegan. That must be why he's so intent on screwing his first love Newcastle Utd for compensation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Just reading back there and seeing the debate. What a right f***ing mess this is. there isn't a debate. you have on the one side those who think keegan couldn't ever do any wrong and on the other those who think it's just better if nufc kept any money regardless of the rights and wrongs. one or two are enlightened through their unenlightenment enough to say....i'll decide after the evidence comes out. ironically the world divides itself along similar lines. those who want evidence and proof get swamped by those too emotional to see past their blind,closed minded petty views. There are also those who just have the interests of Newcastle United as a football club at heart. If it can be shown to me how Keegan winning this case will benefit the club I am willing to listen. Surely, regardless of whatever personal feelings of empathy (or antipathy) one has towards Keegan - any right-minded person must want this sorry episode to be reviewed and properly scrutinised by the eyes of the law, as only then will any sort of healing be able to take place for the club as a whole? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 No he doesn't deserve it if you want an honest answer. He isn't going to get that sort of job or contract from any other club. He shouldn't have taken the job unless he was going to see it through. All this talk of constructive dismissal is bollocks in the real world. Constructive dismissal isn't bollocks in the real world, it prevents people from being walked all over by an employer. I'm sure there are loads of employers ready to employ Keegan. That must be why he's so intent on screwing his first love Newcastle Utd for compensation. Jesus wept. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 I'm sure there are loads of employers ready to employ Keegan. That must be why he's so intent on screwing his first love Newcastle Utd for compensation. What has that got to do with the rights and wrongs of Constructive Dismissal? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 A contract is a statement of terms upon which 2 parties are willing to be legally bound. If either side has broken the terms of the contract, and it can be proven, they'll lose. Keegan signing his contract in January seemed to happen very quickly iirc. I'd like to think he and his lawyer gave it the once over and he knew exactly what he was signing... I understand that but how many times does an employee walk away and nothing happens yet it caused massive disruption replacing that person and the company receives nothing in return from the employee? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 If the club has f***ed him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. I keep playing Devils Advocate on this so don't take it the wrong way. Do contracts work both ways? I don't think they do and would like to see somebody who breaks it from the other side have to pay the employer for the remainder of the contract. It seems all one sided to me, it's far too easy for one party to break a contract while the other ends up out of pocket if they do it. A contract is a statement of terms upon which 2 parties are willing to be legally bound. If either side has broken the terms of the contract, and it can be proven, they'll lose. Keegan signing his contract in January seemed to happen very quickly iirc. I'd like to think he and his lawyer gave it the once over and he knew exactly what he was signing... isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 If the club has f***ed him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. I keep playing Devils Advocate on this so don't take it the wrong way. Do contracts work both ways? I don't think they do and would like to see somebody who breaks it from the other side have to pay the employer for the remainder of the contract. It seems all one sided to me, it's far too easy for one party to break a contract while the other ends up out of pocket if they do it. A contract is a statement of terms upon which 2 parties are willing to be legally bound. If either side has broken the terms of the contract, and it can be proven, they'll lose. Keegan signing his contract in January seemed to happen very quickly iirc. I'd like to think he and his lawyer gave it the once over and he knew exactly what he was signing... isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Nah, I always understood it was when an employer acts (or fails to act) in such a way as to make it impossible for the employee to carry on doing their job with any credibility or in a sustainable manner with terms and conditions which are not prejudicial to the employee carrying out their duties. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Constructive dismissal is where an employer appears to force an employee to resign because of the actions of the employer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 If the club has f***ed him over he deserves recompense. Contracts work both ways. I keep playing Devils Advocate on this so don't take it the wrong way. Do contracts work both ways? I don't think they do and would like to see somebody who breaks it from the other side have to pay the employer for the remainder of the contract. It seems all one sided to me, it's far too easy for one party to break a contract while the other ends up out of pocket if they do it. A contract is a statement of terms upon which 2 parties are willing to be legally bound. If either side has broken the terms of the contract, and it can be proven, they'll lose. Keegan signing his contract in January seemed to happen very quickly iirc. I'd like to think he and his lawyer gave it the once over and he knew exactly what he was signing... isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Nah, I always understood it was when an employer acts (or fails to act) in such a way as to make it impossible for the employee to carry on doing their job with any credibility or in a sustainable manner with terms and conditions which are not prejudicial to the employee carrying out their duties. same thing really Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Constructive dismissal is where an employer appears to force an employee to resign because of the actions of the employer. same thing really Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Constructive dismissal is where an employer appears to force an employee to resign because of the actions of the employer. Wow. It's like I never even posted that seconds before you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Constructive dismissal is where an employer appears to force an employee to resign because of the actions of the employer. Wow. It's like I never even posted that seconds before you. it's just people see your name and keep going. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 same thing really It's not really working within the contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 isnt constructive dismissal when an employer acts within the contract but does whatever they can to get rid of the employee. Constructive dismissal is where an employer appears to force an employee to resign because of the actions of the employer. Wow. It's like I never even posted that seconds before you. it's just people see your name and keep going. Never a truer word posted on this forum, tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 Wow. It's like I never even posted that seconds before you. I had a few posts to read before replying, I probably explained it better anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 same thing really It's not really working within the contract. t'is. they keep within the terms of employment but as you say,make it almost impossible for the employee Link to post 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 in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now