Keogh (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter speedie87
- Start date
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It isn't a disgrace in itself as he deserves it. The other two should have been sacked as well though
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Anyway it'll be interesting if he appeals / it goes to tribunal as it'll probably disclose a bit about what's in players contracts.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Don't see how Derby are going to be able to defend this when it ends up in court. If they'd sacked all three of them fair enough but you can't keep playing the two players who were driving and sack one who was a passenger, it's ridiculous.
Wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of lawsuit from Keogh over loss of earnings if he can't play again as it was a club event he was at. Probably some sort of duty of care angle he can go for.
Wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of lawsuit from Keogh over loss of earnings if he can't play again as it was a club event he was at. Probably some sort of duty of care angle he can go for.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
He's under contract. They can't just decide to not pay him what he is contractually due.
When it inevitably ends up in court they're going to have to show they have a valid reason to sack him but continue to employ the two players who were the drivers in the incident.
Nick
Administrator
He got seriously injured though something he could have prevented.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
They can sack Keogh for the simple reason that he's unable to fulfil his contract due to this own recklessness whereas the other two can.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I think the defence would be they were offered club transport home when the function ended but declined it to go elsewhere. But the decision to not sack the two main culprits will indeed be used against them.
Nick
Administrator
I think the difference is injuries. They are still able to play, he isn't.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Bound to end up in court so Derby will need to be able to cite precedence of players who have been sacked without pay when incurring injuries from non-football actives. Are there such cases they can cite?
If his contracts ending just pay it up and its over and done with. This will now be a distraction for months or even years and will most likely cost them more in the long run.
Nick
Administrator
Unless it has something in his contract?
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
This is why they say they've sacked him
Be interesting to see how they are going to show that two players found guilty of drink driving and leaving the scene of an accident, who the judge said were lucky not to be dismissed for gross misconduct, don't qualify as having put their colleague in danger or brining the club into disrepute while the passenger who wasn't charged with anything does.Derby said:
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
As others have said this is going to get bad for Derby if he takes it to a tribunal which I hope he does. It’ll hopefully force them to take similar action against the other two. It’s time our sportsmen get the same treatment as they would in the states. If you’re playing in the NFL and behave poorly or do something illegal you get suspended.
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
as it was a club function and was being driven home by other staff members, he could sue the Company for not fulfilling its duty of care
Many similar stories around this lately
eg
Firm liable for business trip death during sex
Many similar stories around this lately
eg
Firm liable for business trip death during sex
Nick
Administrator
Even though he refused to go back in the car the club put on?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No chance the club laid transport on and he declined it
rob9872
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure it's so much about defending him as criticising Derby for the hypocrisy. Most clubs would be similar, including ours I feel as if the roles in the Hickman Bayliss episode were reversed, I imagine we'd have fined Bayliss rather than sacked due to the sell on capacity. That's what Derby have done here by playing and keeping the other two, but it still stinks.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
fuck him, if they hit a and killed a kid no one would be standing up for him
all 3 should be sacked but it makes sense he can not offer them anything unlike the other 2 who can still do their jobs
if he had done a mma match and got injured halfway through his contract he would be sacked. he got injured doing a dumb thing its that simple
all 3 should be sacked but it makes sense he can not offer them anything unlike the other 2 who can still do their jobs
if he had done a mma match and got injured halfway through his contract he would be sacked. he got injured doing a dumb thing its that simple
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
So what did he actually do wrong, other than get pissed (at a club event) and get into a car driven by people who were not fit to drive? Keogh COULD end up suing the other two for loss of earnings!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Agreed, don't think anyone is defending him but you can't sack Keogh, who at the end of the day was a passenger who has not been charged with anything, while keeping two other players, who have both been charged and found guilty. Lets not kid ourselves, they're just trying to get out of paying the rest of his contract.
Nick
Administrator
He can't go his job but the others can?
The club statement is something along the lines of “we will not accept anybody at the club breaking the law or putting the club in disrepute...”
That is clearly bollocks. He may have bought the club into disrepute but he didn’t break the law. The other two broke the law and bought the club into disrepute, but they are willing to accept that.
everybody knows it’s because of the injury and contract circumstances. But Derby trying to wrap it up as something else is hypocrisy and a disgrace.
Statement from the Club: "As we have said from the outset, (Derby County FC) will not tolerate any of its players or staff behaving in a manner which puts themselves, their colleagues, and members of the general public at risk of injury or worse, or which brings the club into disrepute....."
(unless they think they can sell them for a nice profit in a couple of years)
(unless they think they can sell them for a nice profit in a couple of years)
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
agree sacking all 3 would be awesome but then someone would just sign them
keogh has left them at a disadvantage so they are just trying to save some cash
keogh has left them at a disadvantage so they are just trying to save some cash
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
But Derby need to treat him fairly. The tribunal will look at the nom sacking of the other 2 and find in his favour. Stupid statement from Derby
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
Nick
Administrator
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
No they won't. They will look at whether or not Derby followed their own policies correctly in this case.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
... and the law!
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
Really? They will say why weren't the other 2 given the same punishment. If it was me my union would have a field day. Him being injured has nothing to do with it. There reasoning is gross misconduct bringing the club into disrepute which Lawrence and Bennett are equally guilty of.
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
But that is not the stated reason is it. Seen it loads as a rep. The tribunal will look at the lesser punishment for a greater crime.
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk