Benitez .... prick

[TANGODANCER]

Don't understand all this? Like him or hate him, Benitez has done well for Liverpool and they're hardly relegation candidates are they?. Just proving more and more that football is just another business enterprise to these hobby boys. Sport and the nature of it mean nothing anymore. They should stick to the Stock Market instead of the Transfer Market.

[blurred]

He should just quit after this, he's in danger of ending up like Jol otherwise.

What, and lose a couple of million in terms of compensation? Nope, I'd make them look like the nice people they are and sack me, and cough up what they owed, if I was in his shoes. Plus I genuinely believe that he doesn't want to leave the club at all - it must be trying his patience no end.

It seems to me like a typically dense American ploy of undermining an authority figure to make him walk, from the outside looking in, I just don't think he's wanted whatsoever!

Precisely - they want to force him out because they can't be seen to sack him, because there'd be an almighty backlash. As it is they've pretty much cocked up any chance of any good feeling toward them with the way they've behaved in the last couple of months. They're also full of shit - Hicks' statement that they considered this in November 'when our Premier League results were poor' (or whatever it was) - we were still unbeaten then. Load of shit.

[Worthy4England]

I did hear something in all the speculation yesterday, that they would be willing to sell to the Dubai consortium if it was still interested too. Doesn't look good for long term planning.

[fatshaft]

I did hear something in all the speculation yesterday, that they would be willing to sell to the Dubai consortium if it was still interested too. Doesn't look good for long term planning.

[CrazyHorse]

He should just quit after this, he's in danger of ending up like Jol otherwise.

What, and lose a couple of million in terms of compensation? Nope, I'd make them look like the tw*ts they are and sack me, and cough up what they owed, if I was in his shoes. Plus I genuinely believe that he doesn't want to leave the club at all - it must be trying his patience no end.

It seems to me like a typically dense American ploy of undermining an authority figure to make him walk, from the outside looking in, I just don't think he's wanted whatsoever!

Precisely - they want to force him out because they can't be seen to sack him, because there'd be an almighty backlash. As it is they've pretty much cocked up any chance of any good feeling toward them with the way they've behaved in the last couple of months. They're also full of shit - Hicks' statement that they considered this in November 'when our Premier League results were poor' (or whatever it was) - we were still unbeaten then. Load of shit.

With you on your first point brother; I'd do exactly the same thing myself and wait to be sacked, though I do disagree that he doesn't want to leave - I think Rafa has had enough of being messed about and that his heart isn't in it anymore.

As for the second though, what do you mean by backlash? Who by, because the fans have no power whatsoever. Case in point is your mates up the M62 when the Glazers took over there.

[blurred]

I did hear something in all the speculation yesterday, that they would be willing to sell to the Dubai consortium if it was still interested too. Doesn't look good for long term planning.

They tried to buy a stake in the club in Autumn, apparently, but felt that G+H overvalued the club so didn't buy in. I doubt they'd come in now and pay more than they were prepared to a year or so ago for the whole she-bang.

[blurred]

As for the second though, what do you mean by backlash? Who by, because the fans have no power whatsoever. Case in point is your mates up the M62 when the Glazers took over there.

Glazer hasn't sacked Ferguson, though. If he'd come in and booted him out within 12 months do you reckon the OT faithful would've taken that lying down?

[CrazyHorse]

As for the second though, what do you mean by backlash? Who by, because the fans have no power whatsoever. Case in point is your mates up the M62 when the Glazers took over there.

Glazer hasn't sacked Ferguson, though. If he'd come in and booted him out within 12 months do you reckon the OT faithful would've taken that lying down?

They would've hated it; but there isn't a lot they can do about it. Buring an effigy of Glazer is about as bad as it gets. Sorry to say it but the same goes for you guys.
Downside of being a massive club is that the fans have no power. There are plenty more fish in the fanbase sea.

[blurred]

They would've hated it; but there isn't a lot they can do about it. Buring an effigy of Glazer is about as bad as it gets. Sorry to say it but the same goes for you guys.
Downside of being a massive club is that the fans have no power. There are plenty more fish in the fanbase sea.

In the bigger picture, yes, I agree with you, but to say that a fanbase has no power I think is over-stating it. If they start fecking around with things at Liverpool and the populace don't like it, they can create plenty of trouble for them (and jeopardise their investment to a certain degree). The owners wouldn't want to continue owning the club if the fans turned on them, I don't think. It wouldn't become a good business opportunity, and that's what they're interested in.

[Worthy4England]

They would've hated it; but there isn't a lot they can do about it. Buring an effigy of Glazer is about as bad as it gets. Sorry to say it but the same goes for you guys.
Downside of being a massive club is that the fans have no power. There are plenty more fish in the fanbase sea.

In the bigger picture, yes, I agree with you, but to say that a fanbase has no power I think is over-stating it. If they start fecking around with things at Liverpool and the populace don't like it, they can create plenty of trouble for them (and jeopardise their investment to a certain degree). The owners wouldn't want to continue owning the club if the fans turned on them, I don't think. It wouldn't become a good business opportunity, and that's what they're interested in.

Not sure the comparison between Glazier's trying to sack Ferguson and Hicks/Gillette trying to sack Benetez stands much real comparison to be honest, their relative levels of success don't stand comparison (that's not to say that they wouldn't in 20 years time....)

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

He should just quit after this, he's in danger of ending up like Jol otherwise.

What, and lose a couple of million in terms of compensation? Nope, I'd make them look like the tw*ts they are and sack me, and cough up what they owed, if I was in his shoes. Plus I genuinely believe that he doesn't want to leave the club at all - it must be trying his patience no end.

With you on your first point brother; I'd do exactly the same thing myself and wait to be sacked, though I do disagree that he doesn't want to leave - I think Rafa has had enough of being messed about and that his heart isn't in it anymore.

Indeed, didn't he walk out of Valencia because he was tired of internal politicking that wasn't even threatening his job? (Even if the board were buying players he didn't want - wasn't it he who said "I needed a sofa and they bought me a lamp?")

Gillette and Hicks may not know it, and Rafa may not either, but isn't interviewing your replacement before you leave several steps along Constructive Dismissal Highway? You wonder (with sympathy) whether Rafa's heels would be dug in quite so hard if he heard he had a chance in summer for the Barcelona or (particularly) Real Madrid job. If he left now he'd win the battle for the hearts and minds of the fans and press and leave with the memory of two Euro finals in three years rather than trying over the next few seasons to claw back the vast distance between his team and the league title.

[blurred]

Not sure the comparison between Glazier's trying to sack Ferguson and Hicks/Gillette trying to sack Benetez stands much real comparison to be honest, their relative levels of success don't stand comparison (that's not to say that they wouldn't in 20 years time....)

It would be the same, in as much as it'd be new owners from a foreign country coming in and dispensing with a successful, established and popular manager. He's not yet up there in the pantheons of the greats, Benitez, but that's not to say that it wouldn't be a disastrous PR move as would ousting Fergie.

[Batman]

scuse me a moment, im off to post on the 17 page MEGSON OUT thread on rednshite kop or whatever it's called

[blurred]

scuse me a moment, im off to post on the 17 page MEGSON OUT thread on rednshite kop or whatever it's called

Erm...?

[bobo the clown]

Gillette and Hicks may not know it, and Rafa may not either, but isn't interviewing your replacement before you leave several steps along Constructive Dismissal Highway?

Not in the rarified world of Football at this level.

This isn't your or my job.

He has a contract. If it's terminated then he execises the termination clauses therein. End of.

Regarding "normal life", then still, really, no ... these could be argued to be reasonable contingency plans given that the guy had, in honesty, acted in Gross Misconduct by complaining about the Company owners in full glare of the media. He then compounded that by his insolent behaviour at that press conference.

As a very senior manager the owners would have been in their rights to consider dismissal, after due process. Also as a senior manager they would have been remiss not to have taken contingency steps in case that became a reality.


In the fantasy world that is football, there is nothing in any of this which is particularly different than a manager discussing terms with a new player who may well take the place of a current team member.

What IS extraordinary is that Hicks chose to tell people about this, though we don't know the context of that revelation.

Even if there were Contructive Dismissal grounds then it's for nought, as you can only claim that AFTER leaving.


Anyway, none of this alters the basic premis that Benitez is a prick.

[boltonboris]

Gillette and Hicks may not know it, and Rafa may not either, but isn't interviewing your replacement before you leave several steps along Constructive Dismissal Highway?

Not in the rarified world of Football at this level.

This isn't your or my job.

He has a contract. If it's terminated then he execises the termination clauses therein. End of.

Regarding "normal life", then still, really, no ... these could be argued to be reasonable contingency plans given that the guy had, in honesty, acted in Gross Misconduct by complaining about the Company owners in full glare of the media. He then compounded that by his insolent behaviour at that press conference.

As a very senior manager the owners would have been in their rights to consider dismissal, after due process. Also as a senior manager they would have been remiss not to have taken contingency steps in case that became a reality.


In the fantasy world that is football, there is nothing in any of this which is particularly different than a manager discussing terms with a new player who may well take the place of a current team member.

What IS extraordinary is that Hicks chose to tell people about this, though we don't know the context of that revelation.

Even if there were Contructive Dismissal grounds then it's for nought, as you can only claim that AFTER leaving.


Anyway, none of this alters the basic premis that Benitez is a prick.

According to a leading Employment Law company last night, if he was to quit now, he would still have grounds to sue the club for the full terms of his contract and also for compensation for being put in that position in the first place.. somewhere along the lines of £11 million - £9million of that being his wages and potential bonuses

[fatshaft]

Regarding "normal life", then still, really, no ... these could be argued to be reasonable contingency plans given that the guy had, in honesty, acted in Gross Misconduct by complaining about the Company owners in full glare of the media. He then compounded that by his insolent behaviour at that press conference.

As a very senior manager the owners would have been in their rights to consider dismissal, after due process. Also as a senior manager they would have been remiss not to have taken contingency steps in case that became a reality.

You may well be right bobo, but they have not taken any disciplinary action against him, they would have had to have set the ball rolling on that at the time if they were to subsequently interview Klinsmann. So I imagine now they can't go back and take retrospective action against him, he has a strong hand I think.

[boltonboris]

Regarding "normal life", then still, really, no ... these could be argued to be reasonable contingency plans given that the guy had, in honesty, acted in Gross Misconduct by complaining about the Company owners in full glare of the media. He then compounded that by his insolent behaviour at that press conference.

As a very senior manager the owners would have been in their rights to consider dismissal, after due process. Also as a senior manager they would have been remiss not to have taken contingency steps in case that became a reality.

You may well be right bobo, but they have not taken any disciplinary action against him, they would have had to have set the ball rolling on that at the time if they were to subsequently interview Klinsmann. So I imagine now they can't go back and take retrospective action against him, he has a strong hand I think.

Firmly in your camp here Fatshaft, but there is no proof that can determine wether that is right or wrong - My personal opinion is that the 'clear the air talks' were more of a rollockingthan anything else

[bobo the clown]

Regarding "normal life", then still, really, no ... these could be argued to be reasonable contingency plans given that the guy had, in honesty, acted in Gross Misconduct by complaining about the Company owners in full glare of the media. He then compounded that by his insolent behaviour at that press conference.

As a very senior manager the owners would have been in their rights to consider dismissal, after due process. Also as a senior manager they would have been remiss not to have taken contingency steps in case that became a reality.

You may well be right bobo, but they have not taken any disciplinary action against him, they would have had to have set the ball rolling on that at the time if they were to subsequently interview Klinsmann. So I imagine now they can't go back and take retrospective action against him, he has a strong hand I think.

Yes, but what I am saying is that, given the nature of a football managers contract, they won''t just sack him, they'll pay him off. In this particular case, big-time contract lawyers for him & the club and they'd agree a (very generous) settlement. So that .... in terms of a compromise agreement ... these agreed terms overtake the t&c's of the exit. He will do just fine.

If he was in the 'real world' he could resign, claim he had little option and would win. With about 4 years service he'd get his notice (3 months in a normal case), plus maybe a further 12 weeks ... all capped at about £310pw !! Total payment a max of about £7k.

This may raise if he can claim discrimination. In theory 'limitless' ... in practice, multiplied about 4x.They can't sack him for being a deigo, or being a mentally handicapped git. Or being gay (aren't most Spanish waiters ?), or a Roman Catholic etc. But otherwise discrimination factoring doesn't apply.

The compensation would be modified due to his contributary aspect and off he'd toddle. I guess they'd decide he was 50% to blame, so would get about £3,500 in his hand. Oh, just would he spend it all ?

If I was Gillette, or Hicks & I wanted to save money I'd invite him to persue the 'normal' unfair dismissal route, but of course, this won't happen.

I doubt we'lll be seeing him in a Liverpool Employment Tribunal any time soon.

[boltonboris]

I just can't get to grips with 'Liverpool' & 'Employment' in the same topic!!!