The Kevin Keegan thread

[TRon]

Keegan's jackpot is now one of the remaining issues standing in the way of a takeover of Newcastle. If he gets awarded any more than the £4m allegedly turned down recently then you would have to assume that it might delay the sale as the price is re-negotiated. It would be ironic if  Ashley ended up staying here longer because of Keegan's pay out considering most of the people fervently supporting Kev hate Ashley with a passion.

[Isegrim]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

[geordie_b]

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract.  Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

 

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season.

 

IMO if someone is sacked when under a contract, they're entitled to have that contract paid up in full. In Robson's case, that was only a year's money. For the club to demand that he didn't take any job during the duration of that year or forfeit part of the money was the most fantastic cheek, even if it was within the letter of the law. They showed no appreciation whatsoever for what Robson had done for us.

 

That's why I was so sickened when Shepherd came out with all that public hand-wringing after Sir Bob's death.

 

The payout was to cover him until he got another job, as is the case with most compensation settlements

[Stu]

GET AWAY FROM OUR CLUB

GET AWAY FROM OUR CLUUUUUB

YOU BANKRUPT GREEDY BASTARD

GET AWAY FROM OUR CLUB

[Tooj]

The only reason Keegan/Ashley arent getting more stick is because of the good start we have made

 

Keegans compensation issue stopped the takeover happening in the summer imo. He was completely selfish in his intentions with no consideration for NUFC and the fans. MA could quite easily have got rid of more players, the Taylors, the Kruls, the Jonas's and we would be up shit creak without the oar!

 

I am not for one minute sticking up for the fat one but Keegans actions have been part of the problem

 

Are you sure about that?

[TRon]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

[ChezGiven]

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract.  Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

 

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season.

 

IMO if someone is sacked when under a contract, they're entitled to have that contract paid up in full. In Robson's case, that was only a year's money. For the club to demand that he didn't take any job during the duration of that year or forfeit part of the money was the most fantastic cheek, even if it was within the letter of the law. They showed no appreciation whatsoever for what Robson had done for us.

 

That's why I was so sickened when Shepherd came out with all that public hand-wringing after Sir Bob's death.

 

Only when a termination clause is in the contract which only happens if the club was desperate enough for the manager. If you have 10 candidates, you dont draw up a contract with a termination clause, since candidate number 2 would take one without it.

 

Which sets the context well for this discussion, KK is only taking what he is 'owed' by the law, now what he 'deserves' morally. Its not the act of being 'sacked' or 'forced out' which allows him to claim compensation, its the strength of football agents negotiation skills.

 

Also, people are talking about the question of constructive dismissal as though it is a black and white issue, one way or the other. This is never the case when someone has been 'constructively' dismissed, since neither party has broken the terms and conditions of the contract. KK can claim that he was not allowed or was unable to perform his duties to the best of his ability under the circumstances. MA etc can claim that KK wasnt aligned to the vision they had for his role. It then becomes very tricky to disentangle.

 

The final judgement is likely to be decided on how KK's job title is defined in the eyes of the law and whether his scope for doing this role (as defined within the contract) was undermined by the club. In all honesty, i think it was but the devil is in the detail unfortunately for us and for KK.

 

These types of financial issues dont affect the long term view of the accounts, they are usually dismissed as one-off items. Since the claim will be about the same as the profit made in the january window, MA can suck it up. 

[UV]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract.  Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

 

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season.

 

IMO if someone is sacked when under a contract, they're entitled to have that contract paid up in full. In Robson's case, that was only a year's money. For the club to demand that he didn't take any job during the duration of that year or forfeit part of the money was the most fantastic cheek, even if it was within the letter of the law. They showed no appreciation whatsoever for what Robson had done for us.

 

That's why I was so sickened when Shepherd came out with all that public hand-wringing after Sir Bob's death.

 

Only when a termination clause is in the contract which only happens if the club was desperate enough for the manager. If you have 10 candidates, you dont draw up a contract with a termination clause, since candidate number 2 would take one without it.

 

Which sets the context well for this discussion, KK is only taking what he is 'owed' by the law, now what he 'deserves' morally. Its not the act of being 'sacked' or 'forced out' which allows him to claim compensation, its the strength of football agents negotiation skills.

 

Also, people are talking about the question of constructive dismissal as though it is a black and white issue, one way or the other. This is never the case when someone has been 'constructively' dismissed, since neither party has broken the terms and conditions of the contract. KK can claim that he was not allowed or was unable to perform his duties to the best of his ability under the circumstances. MA etc can claim that KK wasnt aligned to the vision they had for his role. It then becomes very tricky to disentangle.

 

The final judgement is likely to be decided on how KK's job title is defined in the eyes of the law and whether his scope for doing this role (as defined within the contract) was undermined by the club. In all honesty, i think it was but the devil is in the detail unfortunately for us and for KK.

 

These types of financial issues dont affect the long term view of the accounts, they are usually dismissed as one-off items. Since the claim will be about the same as the profit made in the january window, MA can suck it up. 

 

Good post.

[Guest Phil K]

The only reason Keegan/Ashley arent getting more stick is because of the good start we have made

 

Keegans compensation issue stopped the takeover happening in the summer imo. He was completely selfish in his intentions with no consideration for NUFC and the fans. MA could quite easily have got rid of more players, the Taylors, the Kruls, the Jonas's and we would be up s*** creak without the oar!

 

I am not for one minute sticking up for the fat one but Keegans actions have been part of the problem

 

Well said.

I like you am getting heartily sick of the messiah can do no wrong crap.

He meant well, and was hampered by Ashley and Wise, no doubt.

But he has contributed as much to our fall.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

The only reason Keegan/Ashley arent getting more stick is because of the good start we have made

 

Keegans compensation issue stopped the takeover happening in the summer imo. He was completely selfish in his intentions with no consideration for NUFC and the fans. MA could quite easily have got rid of more players, the Taylors, the Kruls, the Jonas's and we would be up s*** creak without the oar!

 

I am not for one minute sticking up for the fat one but Keegans actions have been part of the problem

 

Well said.

I like you am getting heartily sick of the messiah can do no wrong crap.

He meant well, and was hampered by Ashley and Wise, no doubt.

But he has contributed as much to our fall.

 

I don't think you can say he contributed "as much" but he certainly played a significant part in getting the ball rolling.

[Mowen]

KK's departure was clearly a trigger, but you'd have to be pretty mentally retarded as an owner to allow that situation to evolve into what's actually happened. There were numerous oppertunities to turn the situation around.

[Robster]

Well said.

I like you am getting heartily sick of the messiah can do no wrong crap.

He meant well, and was hampered by Ashley and Wise, no doubt.

But he has contributed as much to our fall.

[2sheds]

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract.  Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

 

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season.

 

Ok first of all he didn't get a new job until after his contract with Newcastle would have ended despite being offered jobs in that time.  Secondly if someone with a contract is sacked he has to be paid in full for the remaining time of that contract.  Getting another job has absolutely no baring on that what so ever.

 

Was he?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave

So just to clarify this, you are criticising Sir Bobby for claiming for his full contract of a year to be paid after he was sacked yet you're defending Keegan for claiming for the longer terms of his contract to be paid after he walked out?

 

[Guest johnson293]

NUFC.com have commented on this...

 

Administration threat:

 

Scaremongering

 

Those club insiders have been busy again, coming up with a tale that the soon-to-be-known outcome of the legal action brought by Kevin Keegan could be a payout so large as to force Newcastle United into administration.

 

Our interpretation of this is a final attempt by the current administration to demonise the former United boss and divert the blame for the events of 2008 and subsequently away from them and their former hired hands.

 

The automatic 10 point deduction that administration brings would drop us back to fourteenth spot in the current table, but leave Mike Ashley just one of a list of creditors, rather than the recipient of the proceeds of a sale. In short, it sounds like a simple scaremongering.

 

It's less than six months since club MD Derek Llambias went on the record to deny press reports that relegation would see the club enter administration, saying that:

 

"There is absolutely no truth in the story whatsoever. It's ridiculous, it's usually based on a rumour and I don't know where these things are hatched."

 

"We'd have to restructure our own business plan like everybody else. But our finances are strong, and there would be no threat of administration."

 

Apologies if this is a rehash of anything on previous pages.

[OzzieMandias]

Robson was sacked and, as far as I remember, simply wanted the money owed to him for the rest of his contract.  Keegan walked out and is suing for more then his contract was even worth.

 

The club was happy to continue to pay Robson, honouring his contract, until he got a new job elsewhere. That wasn't enough for him though, he wanted to be able to get another job (possibly for a rival) and carry on leeching supporter's money off us as well as getting paid for managing another club. So he dragged the club through an expensive court case. It was futile in end for him anyway, as noone wanted him after the out of control dressing room he left at SJP which even the best manager in the world would have found difficult to turn around, and ultimately led to our relegation last season.

 

Ok first of all he didn't get a new job until after his contract with Newcastle would have ended despite being offered jobs in that time.  Secondly if someone with a contract is sacked he has to be paid in full for the remaining time of that contract.  Getting another job has absolutely no baring on that what so ever.

 

Was he?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_leave

So just to clarify this, you are criticising Sir Bobby for claiming for his full contract of a year to be paid after he was sacked yet you're defending Keegan for claiming for the longer terms of his contract to be paid after he walked out?

 

 

He's also saying that Sir Bobby is the reason we were relegated, but UV never does make much sense.

[TRon]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

 

Obviously people who are entrenched in their views or those with an agenda won't give a damn either way, but there are plenty who will be prepared to accept a fair verdict on this issue.

[OzzieMandias]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

 

Obviously people who are entrenched in their views or those with an agenda won't give a damn either way, but there are plenty who will be prepared to accept a fair verdict on this issue.

 

It'll be hard unless the proceedings are made public, though.

[Guest The Libertine]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

 

so if all the evidence (including all the stuff the cant say in public) proves keegan is in the wrong, you'll still say he's in the right?

 

how fucking childish 

[Guest Brummiemag]

I hope Keegan wins the case and screws Ashley for the full amount - he's entitled to it. 

 

None of the money would have been spent on players, in case no ones noticed ,we are are selling club, we dont buy players anymore. 

[Dave]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

 

so if all the evidence (including all the stuff the cant say in public) proves keegan is in the wrong, you'll still say he's in the right?

 

how fucking childish 

 

And vice versa?

[dustynrg]

I hope Keegan wins the case and screws Ashley for the full amount - he's entitled to it. 

 

None of the money would have been spent on players, in case no ones noticed ,we are are selling club, we dont buy players anymore.   

 

   

[Guest The Libertine]

Some people sit on very high horses. Blind following the club isn't any better than having apparently his head stuck up a Messiah's arse.

 

Some people do as if the club can do no wrong and should get exculpated just for the greater good.

 

If the arbitration panel finds that Keegan is entitled to the money then he had every reason to sue the club (represented by its owner). Because if the club is going to get found guility of constructive dismissal then he it gets found guilty in shockingly mistreating its most important employee. In that case of gross misconduct I think this person is even more entitled to his compensation than a manager who gets the boot for his (arguably) poor performances.

 

And that has nothing to do with failing in the "love for the club". In the same way I think every fan who gets mistreated by the club has the right to seek legal actions and fight for his rights. Be it "Save our Seats" or - for example - because of an hypothetical accident and the club's liability for premises.

 

That's fair enough but on the flip side if Keegan doesn't get everything he's looking for, or if the panel finds in favour of Ashley then those on the other side of the fence will also have to get off their "high horse" and accept that Keegan shares some of the blame in this case. Let's see what happens.

 

Unless further evidence comes to light, a legal verdict on who should get compensation one way or the other isn't going to change my view on matters one bit, and I wouldn't expect any Keegan haters to change their minds either.

 

so if all the evidence (including all the stuff the cant say in public) proves keegan is in the wrong, you'll still say he's in the right?

 

how fucking childish 

 

And vice versa?

 

whoever "wins" is the person who is legally entitled to "win". the people deciding this know far more than we probably ever will so im with them.

[OzzieMandias]

Ashley won\t pay it. The club will pay it. One way or another it will mean less money to buy players once Ashley has gone.

[BottledDog]

I hope Keegan wins the case and screws Ashley for the full amount - he's entitled to it. 

 

None of the money would have been spent on players, in case no ones noticed ,we are are selling club, we dont buy players anymore.   

 

   

 

You have to be joking. We'd have been a hell of a lot more of a selling club if there was 8 million less in the clubs coffers over the summer. Of course it makes a fucking difference.