Keogh (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter speedie87
- Start date
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Isn't that likely to weaken their case. How can they claim they sacked him for gross misconduct or endangering lives or any of the other things in their statement when they were prepared to keep employing him if they lowered his wages.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
But that isn't the reason they've stated for sacking him.
If that is the case all three have to be dismissed. On those grounds there is far more reason to sack the other two.
Also, if he can prove that they offered him a reduced deal and then sacked him after he refused the reason given isn't true.
I'm not saying that they may not have grounds to dismiss him, but the reasons they are giving publicly are clearly false.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
No one agrees with his actions but this is clearly age discrimination and he will have a good case in any tribunal. Derby have behaved appallingly in treating him differently to the other 2 that have broken the law.
It's clear to see this is because hes injured long term and he has no resale value.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
It's clear to see this is because hes injured long term and he has no resale value.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Grendel
Well-Known Member
We don’t actually know whet happened though
now I’m not saying this did happen but consider this scenario
Two young players very pissed decide not to drive home but use the transport on offer
The captain - their leader - says to them to screw that and get the cars out and let’s race off to another night club
they take the leaders word and decide this is what they should do or the overbearing captain will make their lives hell going forward
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It isn't relevant mate. If it was found that they hadn't applied their policy in the case of the other two it doesn't mean they shouldn't have for Keogh.
We don't know what it says in Keogh's contract either.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
Petrocelli - still alive and practising.
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
The whole thing stinks. He deserves to be sacked and so do the other two.
Nick
Administrator
Doubt you would care if he didn't used to play for us.
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
Agreed. All or nothing.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
It is though as it is punishment for the same incident. Disciplinary actions have to be fair and equal. If he had something in his contract then that is a different story
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
Mild-Mannered Janitor
Kindest Bloke on CCFC / Maker of CCFC Dreams
Everyone has gross misconduct clauses in their contract, he breached his terms, insurance kicked in to be able to pay him 50% of his weekly wage of £24k, so he could have seen out his remaining contract on over £500k per year, he needs a reality check and should have ignored his lawyer and agents advice.
Each employee (and that’s what they are) has to have their own case dealt with and that’s what the club have done.
I don’t buy this, he has played hundreds of games loyalty BS, he has also earns millions for that. He was club captain and took players drinking, sat in a car with someone pissed and didn’t wear his belt, I hope he recovers well enough to have a good life and maybe play again.
have a reality check on how many on this site and across the uk will be paid by their employers 50% of their wage when they committed an act against their employer and then cannot work for two years, when you find them, stay with that company for life.
Each employee (and that’s what they are) has to have their own case dealt with and that’s what the club have done.
I don’t buy this, he has played hundreds of games loyalty BS, he has also earns millions for that. He was club captain and took players drinking, sat in a car with someone pissed and didn’t wear his belt, I hope he recovers well enough to have a good life and maybe play again.
have a reality check on how many on this site and across the uk will be paid by their employers 50% of their wage when they committed an act against their employer and then cannot work for two years, when you find them, stay with that company for life.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
You don't know what's in their policies, it may be that their policy is that players who can't play can be offered a revised deal to account for it and if they don't accept are dismissed.
How are people on here and Twitter etc. Saying things like "its clearly age discrimination" or "Derby are a disgrace sacking just Keogh and not the other two"
When will people realise that they dont have the full facts in cases like this? Although it may seem a certain way, it doesnt make it a fact. The whole social media witch hunt stuff with everything in society gets on my tits. People dont seem to bw able to actually think about the whole picture but just what someone on Twitter said or one particular media outlet.
When will people realise that they dont have the full facts in cases like this? Although it may seem a certain way, it doesnt make it a fact. The whole social media witch hunt stuff with everything in society gets on my tits. People dont seem to bw able to actually think about the whole picture but just what someone on Twitter said or one particular media outlet.