Dinner with Nicola Cortese

[Thedelldays]

If employment law does not exist in football... Why was a rep from the LMA saying it does on the radio only 2 days ago

[Gemmel]

If employment law does not exist in football... Why was a rep from the LMA saying it does on the radio only 2 days ago

 

Well of course it does to an extent, but ultimately it is a fixed term contract as opposed to permenant terms. The law has changed with regard to when a contractor is ultimately a permenant employee, but the upshot is that the maximum exposure to both sides is the value of the contract..... pay that up and there is no issue.

 

Look at Houghton from Newcastle. The reason given is that they wanted someone more experienced.... simple as that, no misconduct, no poor performance etc etc.... Then look at Blackburn, the list is endless.

 

It's when you apply the same rules to permenant staff, that it can get messy.

[Noodles34]

at the end of the day, money talks, in football, in everything.

 

Would you blow 10 blokes for a million? Sure............. but i'd want the money first this time!

[Window Cleaner]

at the end of the day, money talks, in football, in everything.

 

Would you blow 10 blokes for a million? Sure............. but i'd want the money first this time!

 

But then you look at Citeh last night and think what have they wasted 200 million (or whatever it is) on?

Bloke who keeps sanctioning all those purchases must be a pushover.

Never seen an expensive player quite as useless as Balotelli (and I've seen a few duds) Touré nutjob,probably didn't fancy the boxing day game I guess,getting 2 yellows in 2 minutes,3 minutes from time takes effort.

[Thedelldays]

But then you look at Citeh last night and think what have they wasted 200 million (or whatever it is) on?

Bloke who keeps sanctioning all those purchases must be a pushover.

Never seen an expensive player quite as useless as Balotelli (and I've seen a few duds) Touré nutjob,probably didn't fancy the boxing day game I guess,getting 2 yellows in 2 minutes,3 minutes from time takes effort.

 

have they...they are serious contenders for the title and absolutely battered everton..on any other day..city would have scored 5

[Thedelldays]

Well of course it does to an extent, but ultimately it is a fixed term contract as opposed to permenant terms. The law has changed with regard to when a contractor is ultimately a permenant employee, but the upshot is that the maximum exposure to both sides is the value of the contract..... pay that up and there is no issue.

 

Look at Houghton from Newcastle. The reason given is that they wanted someone more experienced.... simple as that, no misconduct, no poor performance etc etc.... Then look at Blackburn, the list is endless.

 

It's when you apply the same rules to permenant staff, that it can get messy.

 

no..there is not "to an extent" football is subject to the spectrum of UK employment law...

what we get told and what happens in the real world of football are (probably) two completely different things

[Gemmel]

no..there is not "to an extent" football is subject to the spectrum of UK employment law...

what we get told and what happens in the real world of football are (probably) two completely different things

 

I don't know if you delibaretly try and start arguments and constantly contradic yourself, but you seem to be a master at it.

Very similar to the armed forces, football "to an extent" is subject to the spectrum of UK employment law (For contract staff - managers players etc.)

[Thedelldays]

I don't know if you delibaretly try and start arguments and constantly contradic yourself, but you seem to be a master at it.

Very similar to the armed forces, football "to an extent" is subject to the spectrum of UK employment law (For contract staff - managers players etc.)

 

im not..just repeating what a rep from the LMA was saying on the radio 2 days ago, when this very subject was broached..

 

oh..and football is a game..nothing similar with the armed forces at all (which again, complies with UK employment law)

Edited 21 December, 2010 by Thedelldays

[Gemmel]

im not..just repeating what a rep from the LMA was saying on the radio 2 days ago, when this very subject was broached..

 

oh..and football is a game..nothing similar with the armed forces at all (which again, complies with UK employment law)

 

LOL... I am not getting into an argument about employment law on a football forum, but on the basis that I have already described and provided examples of how it differs (To an extent) based on it being predomiantly "Contract" based, then we can close that one of.

 

And a subject close to your heart, should prove my point comparing the armed forces.

 

Women on Subs.

[Window Cleaner]

LOL... I am not getting into an argument about employment law on a football forum, but on the basis that I have already described and provided examples of how it differs (To an extent) based on it being predomiantly "Contract" based, then we can close that one of.

 

And a subject close to your heart, should prove my point comparing the armed forces.

 

Women on Subs.

 

Oh no not the GI Jane argument again.

[Wes Tender]

And to counter that, here is the wisdom of a certain Sherlock Holmes, who although a fictional character, came up with a good aphorism here.

 

"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

No necessarily. It usually means there is something else that you haven't though of.

 

Quite possible that many have not thought of everything that could have been a factor, as nobody on here knows for a fact exactly what is a fact and what is conjecture, idle specualtion or rumour.

 

But the aphorism still holds good.

[Thedelldays]

LOL... I am not getting into an argument about employment law on a football forum, but on the basis that I have already described and provided examples of how it differs (To an extent) based on it being predomiantly "Contract" based, then we can close that one of.

 

And a subject close to your heart, should prove my point comparing the armed forces.

 

Women on Subs.

 

health and safety.

 

thanks

 

go on as much as you want.. a REP from the LMA (when discussing allardyce) stated that football is subject to the full sectrum of UK law..

what ever the UK armed forces do has nothing to do with any of this..

 

unless, the LMA are lying or wrong..?

[VectisSaint]

And to counter that, here is the wisdom of a certain Sherlock Holmes, who although a fictional character, came up with a good aphorism here.

 

"When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Careful, associating wisdom with a pseudo-skate is a very dangerous thing to do, after all it was Conan Doyle who actually penned the phrase.

[Spudders]

ok maybe my bit about employment law was not quite right, but what I was trying to say is that someone in football isn't just going to be sacked for a silly reason. There are processes in place (employment law, football league regulations or whatever) to ensure that if a manager is sacked for a totally stupid reason, they can go to some sort of body and complain they were unfairly treated.

 

My main point is that the reason for the sacking will have HAD to be worthy of a sacking and the fact that it was done discreetly would indicate to me that Pards got what he deserved and scampered off quietly with his tail between his legs. I wish we still had him here, but I have no sympathy for him at all.

Edited 21 December, 2010 by Spudders
tail not tale. Duh!!

[Gemmel]

health and safety.

 

thanks

 

go on as much as you want.. a REP from the LMA (when discussing allardyce) stated that football is subject to the full sectrum of UK law..

what ever the UK armed forces do has nothing to do with any of this..

 

unless, the LMA are lying or wrong..?

 

You are either very dim or you just want to be argumentative, but thanks for confirming that there are subtle differences with the armed forces employment law.

 

With regard to what was said by the LMA, it obviously depends in what context he was talking, but to all intense and purposes, managers and players are contractors not employees (Not withstanding IR35 and all that) and as such can be terminated against the value of their contract, on a whim.

That is not true for full time employees, who would have to be taken through a formal process, unless the two parties can agree a compensation package.

 

This isn't rocket science or anything new, its just the way football is.... The same for IT contarctors etc etc.

 

So there are subtle differences in the UK employment law for the armed forces. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

As for the LMA lying, no of course not, it just depends on the context in what they were saying

[Thedelldays]

You are either very dim or you just want to be argumentative, but thanks for confirming that there are subtle differences with the armed forces employment law.

 

With regard to what was said by the LMA, it obviously depends in what context he was talking, but to all intense and purposes, managers and players are contractors not employees (Not withstanding IR35 and all that) and as such can be terminated against the value of their contract, on a whim.

That is not true for full time employees, who would have to be taken through a formal process, unless the two parties can agree a compensation package.

 

This isn't rocket science or anything new, its just the way football is.... The same for IT contarctors etc etc.

 

So there are subtle differences in the UK employment law for the armed forces. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

As for the LMA lying, no of course not, it just depends on the context in what they were saying

why are you being abusive and calling me dim..? was there any need for that

 

to repeat...the REP from the LMA stated that football was subject to the FULL spectrum of UK employment law..

cant really see what other context to take that in...

 

you may well be a bit wrong here...it IS ok to admit it

[Gemmel]

why are you being abusive and calling me dim..? was there any need for that

 

to repeat...the REP from the LMA stated that football was subject to the FULL spectrum of UK employment law..

cant really see what other context to take that in...

 

you may well be a bit wrong here...it IS ok to admit it

 

This should cover it off for you... and actually covers both Managers on a contract and the armed forces. You will notice the headline and hence why football and the armed forces are covered by employement law to "An extent"

 

Don't bother admitting your mistake, you have bored me enough already, on something i suspect you knew along, but just fancied arguing.

 

Workers not entitled to certain statutory rights

 

Some workers are not entitled to some statutory rights (see under heading Rights at work). They are:-

• anyone who is not an employee, for example, an agency or freelance worker. However, most workers are entitled to certain rights such as the national minimum wage, limits on working time and other health and safety rights, the right not to be discriminated against and paid holiday.
  

If you are not an employee but an agency/freelance worker, a casual worker, a trainee or self employed, you should seek help from an experienced adviser, for example, a Citizens Advice Bureau. To search for details of your nearest CAB, including those that can give advice by email, click on nearest CAB.

• employees who normally work outside the UK
  
• members of the police service. However, members of the police service are covered by discrimination law
  
• members of the armed forces. However, members of the armed forces are covered by discrimination law
  
• merchant seamen and share fishermen
  
• some workers in the transport industry are not entitled to paid holidays or limits on their working hours by law and have to rely on their contract
  
• trainee doctors are not entitled to paid holidays and have to rely on their employment contract. They are also limited to working a 58 hour week, rather than 48 hours.
  

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/index/life/employment/basic_rights_at_work.htm

[Thedelldays]

ok Gemmel... I trust your google searches more than what the REP from the LMA said on national radio

 

good work

[Gemmel]

ok Gemmel... I trust your google searches more than what the REP from the LMA said on national radio

 

good work

 

Its the citizen advice bureau you plum (With the link so you can validate yourself)

[Plumstead_Saint]

Even fixed term contractual employment is subject to UK Employment Law.

Surprise surprise, ALL employment in the UK is subject to UK employment law.

Fixed term contract workers now have similar rights to permanent employeres including notice, redundancy, holiday and sick rights.

The only way to be exempt is to not be an employee - to be self-employed as a contractor.

Footballers would not be able to claim they are self-employed contractors unless they can show that their contracted work is with more than ONE company or employer.

They changed the law on that one about 5 years ago to stop IT worlers claiming to be self-employed to avoid tax, while doing all there work for one company.

HTH

[doddisalegend]

ok maybe my bit about employment law was not quite right, but what I was trying to say is that someone in football isn't just going to be sacked for a silly reason. There are processes in place (employment law, football league regulations or whatever) to ensure that if a manager is sacked for a totally stupid reason, they can go to some sort of body and complain they were unfairly treated.

 

My main point is that the reason for the sacking will have HAD to be worthy of a sacking and the fact that it was done discreetly would indicate to me that Pards got what he deserved and scampered off quietly with his tail between his legs. I wish we still had him here, but I have no sympathy for him at all.

 

I suppose it depends on what people think is a silly reason I suppose. Houghton and Allardyce were both sacked becuase the Chairman/owners wanted them gone their faces no longer fitted, people could argue that niether of them needed to be sacked. Of course that would never happen here.

[Spudders]

I suppose it depends on what people think is a silly reason I suppose. Houghton and Allardyce were both sacked becuase the Chairman/owners wanted them gone their faces no longer fitted, people could argue that niether of them needed to be sacked. Of course that would never happen here.

 

Yeah true, that's a good point. I guess we could also get into the whole discussion of the differences between someone being sacked / dismissed for improper conduct, compared with being let go / paid-off as they are not part of the plan.

 

Ultimately whilst we don’t know all the facts, we can make some common sense assumptions (which some people on here often seem to forget)

 

1) Nicola would NOT put his plans into jeopardy by making a move that was detrimental to his plans unless he was forced into doing so

2) Nicola is astute enough to know that had he wanted to get rid of pards, the summer would have been the most obvious time to do so giving him time to find a replacement. He did not, therefore we can also assume number 3……..

3) Nicola had planned on Pards being here for the season

4) Therefore the reason for the changes were forced not planned

[doddisalegend]

Yeah true, that's a good point. I guess we could also get into the whole discussion of the differences between someone being sacked / dismissed for improper conduct, compared with being let go / paid-off as they are not part of the plan.

 

Ultimately whilst we don’t know all the facts, we can make some common sense assumptions (which some people on here often seem to forget)

 

1) Nicola would NOT put his plans into jeopardy by making a move that was detrimental to his plans unless he was forced into doing so

2) Nicola is astute enough to know that had he wanted to get rid of pards, the summer would have been the most obvious time to do so giving him time to find a replacement. He did not, therefore we can also assume number 3……..

3) Nicola had planned on Pards being here for the season

4) Therefore the reason for the changes were forced not planned

 

And thats the crux of it but without the facts we will never know (you could argue we don't need too). A lot of people are assuming that NC wouldn't do this on the spur of the moment becuase it's not a logical thing to do, clearly forgetting people aren't always logical. Ashely might be completle bonkers but he must have felt he was doing the best thing for Newcastle the same with the new Blackburn owners yet most people would say they weren't and their timming was bad. Interestingly Pardew said this after the liverpool match

 

"Chris Hughton is very, very unfortunate not to be sitting here discussing this win but this game is not easy and can be cruel. I had a very similar issue at Southampton."

[NickG]

have they...they are serious contenders for the title and absolutely battered everton..on any other day..city would have scored 5

 

their takeover, not from administration and no team etc was 3 1/2 years ago.

[derry]

Told him what? That Alan had an affair? Because that is cr*p.

 

That BR were poor and were easy to beat. The comment was on the highlighted item.

Edited 21 December, 2010 by derry

[NickG]

Even fixed term contractual employment is subject to UK Employment Law.

Surprise surprise, ALL employment in the UK is subject to UK employment law.

Fixed term contract workers now have similar rights to permanent employeres including notice, redundancy, holiday and sick rights.

The only way to be exempt is to not be an employee - to be self-employed as a contractor.

Footballers would not be able to claim they are self-employed contractors unless they can show that their contracted work is with more than ONE company or employer.

They changed the law on that one about 5 years ago to stop IT worlers claiming to be self-employed to avoid tax, while doing all there work for one company.

HTH

 

true - most rights are same for period of contract.

[derry]

I find that "Adam's father" is a bit loose lipped about things he should be quiet about if all these quotes credited to him are to be believed.He must know that Weston is just going to repeat them to someone who then repeats them on this forum. Posters have been banned for telling tales out of class.

 

Adam's father said that BR were poor and we should have scored eight. The AP rumours need no comment from anyone.

[Wes Tender]

And thats the crux of it but without the facts we will never know (you could argue we don't need too). A lot of people are assuming that NC wouldn't do this on the spur of the moment becuase it's not a logical thing to do, clearly forgetting people aren't always logical. Ashely might be completle bonkers but he must have felt he was doing the best thing for Newcastle the same with the new Blackburn owners yet most people would say they weren't and their timming was bad. Interestingly Pardew said this after the liverpool match

 

"Chris Hughton is very, very unfortunate not to be sitting here discussing this win but this game is not easy and can be cruel. I had a very similar issue at Southampton."

 

It would have been very interesting had the journalist pressed him on that point for further elaboration. But then again he surely must have done so and the further comment was probably edited out, because either Pardew would have breached some non-disclosure agreement, or he didn't want it examined too closely, afraid that he might have stumbled to explain himself and laid himself open to counter claims by the club that would be detrimental to both parties.

 

So as it is, he rather cunningly hinted that the reason for his departure was just some quirky falling out with the hierarchy at the Club, thus trying to ingratiate himself with the Toon army, who had until then probably thought that the sacking was for other reasons. However, the more savvy of them will satisfy their curiosity by doing some digging on forums like this and piece together a rather chequered career that Pardew has had, where several times he has parted company with clubs he has managed with a cloud hanging over him.

[hypochondriac]

That BR were poor and were easy to beat. The comment was on the highlighted item.

 

When I said that is rubbish I was referring to the Pardew bit.

[Viking Warrior]

Gemmel

 

Much of what you have leaned from Google is correct (although when it comes to the CAB they only hear once side of the story when advising disenfranchised employees)

i do not know what the exact contractual status is for footballers in this country . many foreign footballers appear to have nom residence tax status judging by issues intimated by that bunch of crooks down the road.

 

Tevez is another example where his contractual status is somewhat blurred

The general spirit of Employment law applies to most industries including footbal whether this is UK or EEC legislation.

 

In respect of football managers and players it is the nature of the contract that is important what has and what hasnt been included

in the individuals contract. Remember an employee can only claim for unfair dismissal if they have been in the job for over a year (qualifying period) and two years for redundancy/ not many managers get to claim for unfair dismissal certainly Big Sam couldnt claim it . Unless he was going down the wrongful dismissal route but thats a different element of law.

 

Footballers do use employment laws to seek fairness. Take the Blackpool player that sued his employers for wrongful deduction of wages? Blackpool got promoted and x player got a pay increase and bonus but sued the club as they didnt pay him a contractual term that he would also get a bonus if the club didnt get relegated. they didnt and they eventually paid up this bonus.

 

Most playing staff footballers will have non disclosure clauses in their contract and like big business compromise agreements will be used as a parting of the ways as per AP

 

On another note Casual workers. There is no mutually obligation to provide or accept work on either party. is this a reason we never saw anything of Pulis as he was only a casual worker?

[sadoldgit]

It would have been very interesting had the journalist pressed him on that point for further elaboration. But then again he surely must have done so and the further comment was probably edited out, because either Pardew would have breached some non-disclosure agreement, or he didn't want it examined too closely, afraid that he might have stumbled to explain himself and laid himself open to counter claims by the club that would be detrimental to both parties.

 

So as it is, he rather cunningly hinted that the reason for his departure was just some quirky falling out with the hierarchy at the Club, thus trying to ingratiate himself with the Toon army, who had until then probably thought that the sacking was for other reasons. However, the more savvy of them will satisfy their curiosity by doing some digging on forums like this and piece together a rather chequered career that Pardew has had, where several times he has parted company with clubs he has managed with a cloud hanging over him.

 

Or they might just come to the conclusion that the CEO didn't like him, wanted someone who was more, erm, compliant to his wishes, and sacked him?

[John B]

Or they might just come to the conclusion that the CEO didn't like him, wanted someone who was more, erm, compliant to his wishes, and sacked him?

 

Which is the most likely scenario

[NickG]

most important attirbutes for manager are being respected and trusted by the chairman

[Window Cleaner]

most important attirbutes for manager are being respected and trusted by the chairman

 

what like Stuart Gray and Steve Wigley you mean,one of Lowe's great qualities, the cheaper they came the more he respected them.

[NickG]

weird!

[Alanh]

most important attirbutes for manager are being respected and trusted by the chairman

 

Was that sarcastic? If not I can't agree. The most important qualities for a manager are getting winning performances from his squad. Without that even the best relationship with a chairman will not save a manager from the chop.

[NickG]

Was that sarcastic? If not I can't agree. The most important qualities for a manager are getting winning performances from his squad. Without that even the best relationship with a chairman will not save a manager from the chop.

 

not sarcastic. Manager won't start to do well without a good working relationship with chairman. Won't be trusted, won't get funds etc. Of course he needs to win, but that is often an unknown.

[sadoldgit]

what like Stuart Gray and Steve Wigley you mean,one of Lowe's great qualities, the cheaper they came the more he respected them.

 

Have you ever had to manage on a budget? Did you notice that we didn't spend much on players either but we still managed to get some quality in. These people have to start somewhere and as they were known by the club they would have known if they were any good or not. I think the plan was to get in a coach and have a DOF come in and do the other work. Both Wigely and Gray were/are good coaches. THey might not have been the best decsions but when you are working to a tight budget they are the kind of decsions that get made. If it meant we could pay a little more on players/wages the decisions also don't look quit so bad. And in hindsight I would say the decision to emply Redknapp was far worse than the previous poor decisions.

[sadoldgit]

Was that sarcastic? If not I can't agree. The most important qualities for a manager are getting winning performances from his squad. Without that even the best relationship with a chairman will not save a manager from the chop.

 

But Pardew did that and still found himself out of the door. It all depends on the Chairman. If he is prepared to stand back and let the manager manage, and the results are good, no problem. When the Cahirman/CEO thinks he knows more about football than the manager and wanst to get involved, then you have a recipe for trouble. We have had a few of the latter in recent times sadly.

[Thedelldays]

But Pardew did that and still found himself out of the door. It all depends on the Chairman. If he is prepared to stand back and let the manager manage, and the results are good, no problem. When the Cahirman/CEO thinks he knows more about football than the manager and wanst to get involved, then you have a recipe for trouble. We have had a few of the latter in recent times sadly.

 

you have no idea what so ever what goes on behind the scenes...

 

you are another one that reads things in the paper then makes up your mind on what actually happened

[Window Cleaner]

Have you ever had to manage on a budget? Did you notice that we didn't spend much on players either but we still managed to get some quality in. These people have to start somewhere and as they were known by the club they would have known if they were any good or not. I think the plan was to get in a coach and have a DOF come in and do the other work. Both Wigely and Gray were/are good coaches. THey might not have been the best decsions but when you are working to a tight budget they are the kind of decsions that get made. If it meant we could pay a little more on players/wages the decisions also don't look quit so bad. And in hindsight I would say the decision to emply Redknapp was far worse than the previous poor decisions.

 

Well if I were managing on a budget at the time of appointment of Stuart Gray I might not have spent 4 million on a physical wreck from Ecuador and his cousin.I might have got a proven manager in that I wouldn't necessarily have to pay off(at 1 million £+) a few weeks later. I might even think before I did stupid things because they were the cheap option. No-one can defend Lowe over the appointment of Stuart Gray....no-one.

[NickG]

agree we should get rid of Lowe

[Thedelldays]

Have you ever had to manage on a budget? Did you notice that we didn't spend much on players either but we still managed to get some quality in. These people have to start somewhere and as they were known by the club they would have known if they were any good or not. I think the plan was to get in a coach and have a DOF come in and do the other work. Both Wigely and Gray were/are good coaches. THey might not have been the best decsions but when you are working to a tight budget they are the kind of decsions that get made. If it meant we could pay a little more on players/wages the decisions also don't look quit so bad. And in hindsight I would say the decision to emply Redknapp was far worse than the previous poor decisions.

 

do you ever stop going on about the lowe era...

unleeeesssss.......rupert...?

[ottery st mary]

:rolleyes:I was wondering if Ruperts pen pal still writes to him....

 

Well at least a xmas card...one would hope ..for the great man..

 

 

Let us not bring all this stuff up again.....we will get that idiot going on about Ra Ra girlzz and Ruperts Majorettes.

 

 

PS bring back jonah...miss him soooo much..

 

Happy xmas campers

Edited 22 December, 2010 by ottery st mary
Forgot jonah and xmas

[John B]

do you ever stop going on about the lowe era...

unleeeesssss.......rupert...?

 

Well we were in the Premier League for most of the time when he was Chairman but you probably are too young to remember that !!!

 

It is nearly six years ago that we we there and it will probably be at least another six before we return.

 

I did enjoy last season as I thought we had a basis of good team which would get promoted but 10th at Christmas in League 1 is not making me that happy

[saintscottofthenortham]

I'v been having trouble sleeping of late. Now, I come on here and read 'sadoldgit's' posts. His endless drivel about Lowe and Pardew and his Anti-Cortese BS send me off to the land of nod every time. I might sell it, it's that f*****g good.

 

****... it's only 3 o'clock and i'v just read hi/skmssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss

[Window Cleaner]

 

 

PS bring back jonah...miss him soooo much..

 

Happy xmas campers

 

don't think Mark's about much now, haven't seen anything from him anywhere for a while now.Even under another name his stuff would be easy to recognise.

[ottery st mary]

don't think Mark's about much now, haven't seen anything from him anywhere for a while now.Even under another name his stuff would be easy to recognise.

 

Windows...He reminds me of you so much ..A nice guy with so much knowledge..

 

Good with computers but rubbish with accountancy.

 

Would/Could, he luv NC as much as he loved the Dark Lord Rupes.

 

Right time of the year to mention Noddy Holder from Slade with that wonderful xmas song..just luv it..

 

Happy xmas Windows you are a French star..

[up and away]

But Pardew did that and still found himself out of the door. It all depends on the Chairman. If he is prepared to stand back and let the manager manage, and the results are good, no problem. When the Cahirman/CEO thinks he knows more about football than the manager and wanst to get involved, then you have a recipe for trouble. We have had a few of the latter in recent times sadly.

 

The more I am hearing about this, the more I believe Cortese did let him manage and it was all self inflicted. Go back over all of Leftbacks posts and although he knew what was going on, did not say much at all. You had all the expletives aimed at Les Reed for knowing nothing and poking his nose in. He admitted pre-season was screwed up, but blamed that on Cortese without any specifics.

 

If Pardew had pulled it off and got these players to the correct fitness levels, I reckon all the other teams would be forgetting about even trying for top spot. There is no doubt we played our best ever football under Pardew, but lacking fitness to give us consistency over the season. I think Pardew could go on and be a success even at Newcastle, something I derided previously. If Pardew had used the resources at his disposal, I don't think any of this would have happened. But for this to develop as it did, I get the feeling there is some bad blood in the history here!

 

If Pardew stayed he could well of done very well, but for the errors he made, I can't see any CEO not giving him the sack.

[benjii]

There is no doubt we played our best ever football under Pardew

 

You what?