Jump to content

Alan Curbishley wins case against West Ham


cp40
 Share

Recommended Posts

SSN, . Alan Curbishley wins case for constructive dismissal agains West Ham Utd.

 

Wonder how much he will get awarded, or what the deciding factors were?

 

 

 

To Admin, delet if theres already a thread.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo. Hiss.

 

Scum. He's trying to bankrupt them. He should've never walked out.

 

Thieving cunt!! How can he do that to West Ham, a club he loves?

 

How can the West Ham fans ever forgive him for betraying them? I'm sure he could have easily rode it out. Fucking hell what a quitter and a tosser.

 

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

not exactly what west ham need right now with the money they owe to sheffield united too, sorry to say i think they're screwed and will sell cole upson and green in jan just to pay the bills

 

It's alright though, because Curbs was RIGHT :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still do not understand what right the managers have to be winning these cases. According to this he quit because two rather rubbish players (McCartney and Ferdinand) were sold against his wishes. I mean they don't own the club, so why is it a breach of contract for people above them to change the staff? I feel like whoever wrote up these contracts must have been fools.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still do not understand what right the managers have to be winning these cases. According to this he quit because two rather rubbish players (McCartney and Ferdinand) were sold against his wishes. I mean they don't own the club, so why is it a breach of contract for people above them to change the staff? I feel like whoever wrote up these contracts must have been fools.

 

i think you've answered your own question  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baba, I was just about to post that I think we'll be seeing some serious rethinking of contracts for managers from now on.

 

I mean, I thought it was a basic part of being a manager that sometimes players would be sold who you wanted to keep. If the manager has to have overall financial control of the whole club, some more training is going to be needed! 10 years in top flight football, plus an MBA and accountancy training maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole 'final say' debate is a bit unreal. As with any business, in practice, the final say always rests with the person who holds overall financial responsibility. It can't be any other way.

 

I agree, but Kevin Keegan and the Premier League have different views apparently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole 'final say' debate is a bit unreal. As with any business, in practice, the final say always rests with the person who holds overall financial responsibility. It can't be any other way.

 

I agree, but Kevin Keegan and the Premier League have different views apparently.

I think the Keegan situation might be slightly different. While I don't think he should have won his case outright, it seemed as though people within the organization were trying to limit his role and lessen his influence. Seems more severe than Curbishley's case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole 'final say' debate is a bit unreal. As with any business, in practice, the final say always rests with the person who holds overall financial responsibility. It can't be any other way.

 

I agree, but Kevin Keegan and the Premier League have different views apparently.

 

but this thread is about Curbishley. The keegan situation is different - not about selling players over a manager's head but buying them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, but Kevin Keegan and the Premier League have different views apparently.

I think the scenario of a player being brought in is different to a player being sold in order to help the financial status of the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyway, for Curbishley the key is what the LMA Said - "The findings of the Tribunal demonstrate the critical importance of respecting contracts which need to set out the roles and responsibilities of the parties in clear and unequivocal terms.”

 

apparently his 'service agreement' said "The Manager alone shall select players for [the Club] to transfer to and from the Club" and it's pretty obvious the club didnt stick to that agreement. West Ham have no one to blame but themselves for this one. or at least, the previous clowns who ran the club.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it surprised me at the time that NUFC went to a tribunal as opposed to a court of law. i'm not so sure a court of law would have saw the managers role in the same light as the panel.

 

Would have led to the same outcome, as it was a legal technicality the case was decided upon. Happens quite often in employment law, whereby employers fail to grasp even the basics of a standard contract of employment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it surprised me at the time that NUFC went to a tribunal as opposed to a court of law. i'm not so sure a court of law would have saw the managers role in the same light as the panel.

 

Would have led to the same outcome, as it was a legal technicality the case was decided upon. Happens quite often in employment law, whereby employers fail to grasp even the basics of a standard contract of employment.

but the mater of what constitutes a mangers role may have been gone into a bit more and it may have came out that managers often do not have the final say on comings and goings.
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...