Joey Barton may get sacked
Moderator: Zulus Thousand of em
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
Joey Barton may get sacked
... unless he agreed to have his £55k a week salary halved.
Apparently he is reluctant to accept the cut.
So ... a few points here ...
1. Sam "give me money Mr Gartside & I'll show you how I can build a team" Allardyce decided that Joey Barton was woth a punt at £6m fee plus £55k a week.
2. The club were willing to spend all this on a high-average player with a history of being temramental & difficult. This was not Tierry Henry, it was Joey Barton ffs.
3. He was already charged with the Ousman affair (which comes to court this week I understand).
4. A footballer maintains a value. If Barton is sacked he will be inundated with offers. The Hull's & Stoke's of the world simply can't afford to ignore his ability ... whatever the risk. I just hope to God Bolton are above that.
5. Newcastle appear to be saying "we'll sack you because of what heinous things you've done ... but not if you take a pay cut !!" Go figure.
Is it all a bit less heinous if he earns less ?
6. The scrote himself is reluctant to accept the cut.
I hope they add another 6 years to his sentence following the next trial.
Apparently he is reluctant to accept the cut.
So ... a few points here ...
1. Sam "give me money Mr Gartside & I'll show you how I can build a team" Allardyce decided that Joey Barton was woth a punt at £6m fee plus £55k a week.
2. The club were willing to spend all this on a high-average player with a history of being temramental & difficult. This was not Tierry Henry, it was Joey Barton ffs.
3. He was already charged with the Ousman affair (which comes to court this week I understand).
4. A footballer maintains a value. If Barton is sacked he will be inundated with offers. The Hull's & Stoke's of the world simply can't afford to ignore his ability ... whatever the risk. I just hope to God Bolton are above that.
5. Newcastle appear to be saying "we'll sack you because of what heinous things you've done ... but not if you take a pay cut !!" Go figure.
Is it all a bit less heinous if he earns less ?
6. The scrote himself is reluctant to accept the cut.
I hope they add another 6 years to his sentence following the next trial.
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to
)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to

But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7404
- Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: in your wife's dreams
- Contact:
surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
kevin nolan is so fat, that when he sits around the house he sits around the house
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
But the latter would also involve chucking out an asset they paid £6million to acquire.communistworkethic wrote:surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2378
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:16 pm
- Location: Nearer to Ewood Park than I like
But in the light of Adriano Mutu being ordered by Fifa to pay Chelsea £9.6 million after he was sacked, they might give it a go.mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:But the latter would also involve chucking out an asset they paid £6million to acquire.communistworkethic wrote:surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
I honestly don't know the intricacies of this one. If his jail-term were to infringe on his ability to perform first-team duties, then possibly so. Mummy might know about European Human Rights legislation covering this - effectively whether it would be legal to terminate the contract of someone because they have a criminal record.communistworkethic wrote:surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
Mummy?
You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Lord Kangana wrote:I honestly don't know the intricacies of this one. If his jail-term were to infringe on his ability to perform first-team duties, then possibly so. Mummy might know about European Human Rights legislation covering this - effectively whether it would be legal to terminate the contract of someone because they have a criminal record.communistworkethic wrote:surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
Mummy?
It's not got much to do with human rights - it can certainly be a term of an employment contract that the contract can be unilaterally terminated by the employer in cases of misconduct, including being convicted of a serious criminal offence! We have all seen that 'don't drink and drive' advert in which one of the hypothetical consequences offered by the schizophrenic barman is the bloke losing his job.
But football is unsual in that the employees are also tradeable assets that have often cost money to acquire.
Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
It is a question of Contract Law and not Human Rights legislation.mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Lord Kangana wrote:I honestly don't know the intricacies of this one. If his jail-term were to infringe on his ability to perform first-team duties, then possibly so. Mummy might know about European Human Rights legislation covering this - effectively whether it would be legal to terminate the contract of someone because they have a criminal record.communistworkethic wrote:surely they could cancel his contract for Gross Misconduct if they so wished? So he has a choice, accept less or accept nothing.Lord Kangana wrote:Under employment law I would think that Barton is under no obligation to accept the cut - they'll probably just pay up the rest of his contract and get shut.
God forbid that we should try and sign him. I remember the Lee Bowyer rumours, and e-mailing the club to say I would withdraw my attendance should we sign him. I then recall Big Sam releasing a press statement to the effect that 'fans are not here to dictate the team'. (I hope it wasn't just me he was referring to)
But I'd do the same if we tried to get Barton - a toerag who doesn't seem capable of changing his ways.
Mummy?
It's not got much to do with human rights - it can certainly be a term of an employment contract that the contract can be unilaterally terminated by the employer in cases of misconduct, including being convicted of a serious criminal offence! We have all seen that 'don't drink and drive' advert in which one of the hypothetical consequences offered by the schizophrenic barman is the bloke losing his job.
But football is unsual in that the employees are also tradeable assets that have often cost money to acquire.
I would suggest that Barton's behaviour - as a highly recognised Newcastle Football Club employee - as brought his company into disrepute - which would be a disciplinary matter and most likely deemed gross misconduct - ie lead to termination of contract.
I don't however understand why he has been asked to take a reduction in salary?
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
You won't know of the employment law aspects unless you see the contract.
There is almost certainly a gross-misconduct clause, which would hold good given what he's done, except that it can't be gross-misconduct if you earn one amount but not if you earn less !! it doesn'tb take a Philidelphia lawyer to point that out ... so by offering him this option they lose that justification.
As Mummy says, & I do above, a football player is an assett & it needs the club to be willing to write that value off.
But £6m ... & £55k a week ? You think that was a risk worth taking for an ordinary player with previous ?
There is almost certainly a gross-misconduct clause, which would hold good given what he's done, except that it can't be gross-misconduct if you earn one amount but not if you earn less !! it doesn'tb take a Philidelphia lawyer to point that out ... so by offering him this option they lose that justification.
As Mummy says, & I do above, a football player is an assett & it needs the club to be willing to write that value off.
But £6m ... & £55k a week ? You think that was a risk worth taking for an ordinary player with previous ?
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
-
- Legend
- Posts: 7192
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:31 pm
- Location: London
Well thanks for clearing that up for us, Sluffster!sluffy wrote:It is a question of Contract Law and not Human Rights legislation.mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote: It's not got much to do with human rights - it can certainly be a term of an employment contract that the contract can be unilaterally terminated by the employer in cases of misconduct, including being convicted of a serious criminal offence! We have all seen that 'don't drink and drive' advert in which one of the hypothetical consequences offered by the schizophrenic barman is the bloke losing his job.

Prufrock wrote: Like money hasn't always talked. You might not like it, or disagree, but it's the truth. It's a basic incentive, people always have, and always will want what's best for themselves and their families
[quote="bobo the clown"]You won't know of the employment law aspects unless you see the contract.
There is almost certainly a gross-misconduct clause, which would hold good given what he's done, except that it can't be gross-misconduct if you earn one amount but not if you earn less !! it doesn'tb take a Philidelphia lawyer to point that out ... so by offering him this option they lose that justification.
As Mummy says, & I do above, a football player is an assett & it needs the club to be willing to write that value off.
But £6m ... & £55k a week ? You think that was a risk worth taking for an ordinary player with previous ?[/quote]
That font of all knowledge the AntiChrist did
Any wonder he ain't at Ewock Park yet
And some on here still would have him back!!!!!
There is almost certainly a gross-misconduct clause, which would hold good given what he's done, except that it can't be gross-misconduct if you earn one amount but not if you earn less !! it doesn'tb take a Philidelphia lawyer to point that out ... so by offering him this option they lose that justification.
As Mummy says, & I do above, a football player is an assett & it needs the club to be willing to write that value off.
But £6m ... & £55k a week ? You think that was a risk worth taking for an ordinary player with previous ?[/quote]
That font of all knowledge the AntiChrist did

Any wonder he ain't at Ewock Park yet

And some on here still would have him back!!!!!

-
- Icon
- Posts: 5210
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:04 pm
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 19597
- Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:49 am
- Location: N Wales, but close enough to Chester I can pretend I'm in England
- Contact:
I haven't actually bought my season-ticket yet ... & won't if we do sign this retard.
One bad decision too far, that would be.
My hope is that it's just paper-talk.
mk
One bad decision too far, that would be.
My hope is that it's just paper-talk.
mk
Not advocating mass-murder as an entirely positive experience, of course, but it had its moments.
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
"I understand you are a very good footballer" ... "I try".
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
I hope the club don't call my bluff on this one.
I've decided to take up the offer of the £299 tickets, and have already popped in my application.
Am now worried that I may have to retract, or compromise my own principles.
I've decided to take up the offer of the £299 tickets, and have already popped in my application.
Am now worried that I may have to retract, or compromise my own principles.

You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
-
- Passionate
- Posts: 2378
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:16 pm
- Location: Nearer to Ewood Park than I like
Of course it's paper talk. Barton hasn't even stood trial for the Dabo incident yet. He could be banged up for ages. It's also written by serial liar Alan Nixon.bobo the clown wrote:I haven't actually bought my season-ticket yet ... & won't if we do sign this retard.
One bad decision too far, that would be.
My hope is that it's just paper-talk.
mk
- TANGODANCER
- Immortal
- Posts: 44175
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:35 pm
- Location: Between the Bible, Regency and the Rubaiyat and forever trying to light penny candles from stars.
-
- Immortal
- Posts: 15355
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 11:42 pm
- Location: Vagantes numquam erramus
Hopefully he won't have a knife with him though (if thats what you're driving at)TANGODANCER wrote:"Barton may get sacked".....as in The Count of Monte Christo? ....

You can judge the whole world on the sparkle that you think it lacks.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Yes, you can stare into the abyss, but it's staring right back.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests