by ferrarilover » 17 Nov 2013, 21:15
Ok Edd, here's the thing.
Unless he's done something illegal or very, very wrong, sacking a bloke is breaching his contact. That's the very strict legal reality. To sack a bloke without sufficiently tangible reason is a breach of contract.
It's the same everywhere. It's why you're always seeing stories on the news about BBC or NHS or Council bosses being sacked, but being given millions of pounds as a result.
With football managers, it's no different. If we want a bloke to leave, but he hasn't done anything seriously wrong, then we have to pay him off. Now, that payoff could be anything. It could be a packet of pork scratchings, it could be a voucher for a wash and blow dry at the local hair salon, it could be £100, 000, 000 cash.
What will happen is that Knill will be called into the Boardroom and will be told that he is being let go
The club, knowing that he won't simply walk out with nothing, offer him, say, 6 months salary. He can accept or reject. What they're doing at this point is creating a new contract. They are essentially paying him not to take them to an Employment Tribunal.
The form that the payment takes is entirely up to the parties involved.
Your correct in that, sometimes, the deal is that a manager will be paid his salary exactly as though he were still employed by the club, until he finds another job. This is the case with Bobby Di Matteo at Chelsea.
Regardless of what happens with anyone else, Knill will want paying. Standard with football that he'd get a full years money. If you watch 'The Damned United' (BRILLIANT film), you'll see Cloughy negotiating his way out of Leeds. He demands the remainder of his salary, plus his tax and NI paid for a year, plus his club car, plus some other stuff. It might well be that's what Knilly would want. He'd want his Toyota, he'd want his salary, he'd want £20, 000 in 'moving expenses' plus God knows what else (please don't take this as my suggesting that Knill is somehow of flawed character, if I'd done what he's done and moved my life down here, worked for months for almost nothing, done my best etc, then I'd be demanding all sorts).
This is the trouble with the 'Just Sack Knill' brigade. It's not that simple.
As for Brassy, he'd probably leave too, in reality, but even if he stayed, we'd still have to pay Knill, for the reasons that the rest of this post makes clear.
Got it?
Matt.
Ok Edd, here's the thing.
Unless he's done something illegal or very, very wrong, sacking a bloke is breaching his contact. That's the very strict legal reality. To sack a bloke without sufficiently tangible reason is a breach of contract.
It's the same everywhere. It's why you're always seeing stories on the news about BBC or NHS or Council bosses being sacked, but being given millions of pounds as a result.
With football managers, it's no different. If we want a bloke to leave, but he hasn't done anything seriously wrong, then we have to pay him off. Now, that payoff could be anything. It could be a packet of pork scratchings, it could be a voucher for a wash and blow dry at the local hair salon, it could be £100, 000, 000 cash.
What will happen is that Knill will be called into the Boardroom and will be told that he is being let go
The club, knowing that he won't simply walk out with nothing, offer him, say, 6 months salary. He can accept or reject. What they're doing at this point is creating a new contract. They are essentially paying him not to take them to an Employment Tribunal.
The form that the payment takes is entirely up to the parties involved.
Your correct in that, sometimes, the deal is that a manager will be paid his salary exactly as though he were still employed by the club, until he finds another job. This is the case with Bobby Di Matteo at Chelsea.
Regardless of what happens with anyone else, Knill will want paying. Standard with football that he'd get a full years money. If you watch 'The Damned United' (BRILLIANT film), you'll see Cloughy negotiating his way out of Leeds. He demands the remainder of his salary, plus his tax and NI paid for a year, plus his club car, plus some other stuff. It might well be that's what Knilly would want. He'd want his Toyota, he'd want his salary, he'd want £20, 000 in 'moving expenses' plus God knows what else (please don't take this as my suggesting that Knill is somehow of flawed character, if I'd done what he's done and moved my life down here, worked for months for almost nothing, done my best etc, then I'd be demanding all sorts).
This is the trouble with the 'Just Sack Knill' brigade. It's not that simple.
As for Brassy, he'd probably leave too, in reality, but even if he stayed, we'd still have to pay Knill, for the reasons that the rest of this post makes clear.
Got it?
Matt.
