[Albion] Chris Hughton statement

[Machiavelli]

Yep. I remember how poor it was. I was there. And I remember plenty of well argued calls on here saying it was the right time for him to go. Eventually echoed by TBs statement on that Monday.
What I don’t remember, thus the surprise for fans and as it turned out Hughton himself , was the expectation that Bloom would actually do it. Just. Like. That.

It was most unexpected given that he had only officially got rid of Poyet -- and that was for legal reasons -- since stamping his mark on the role. I think (or at the very least hope) Bloom takes the issue of his managerial loyalty extremely seriously and, as he said, it was the most difficult decision he's made as chairman (which I think was an entirely genuine statement). But, he hasn't got to where he is without being utterly ruthless. And, as his nickname suggests, the Lizard is calm and composed in not only his decision-making but also in the timing of it.

 

[Anya1000]

“Surprised” is the interesting word. I can’t interpret it in any more than only three ways:

1 “I paid no attention to the targets that had been set for me by the Board; I hadn’t realised they were important”

2 “The b’stards had more targets for me than they told me. That’s not on”

3 “I got stitched up”

2 and 3 are not mutually exclusive. Personally, I don’t believe 1.

Hmmm Well he met and exceeded the targets..

 

[Anya1000]

Maybe he thought he could rebuild from the disastrous signings made by TB and Co.. Given a chance the following season as he achieved all of his goals....

 

[Anya1000]

It's not an assumption it's fact.

 

[dazzer6666]

I think you're reading too much into that leaving on a mutual basis is not the same as tearing up a contract. Do you honestly think that in every case where managers have left on mutual consent they haven't had a pay-off?

Also, you would only tear up a contract if it is mutually beneficial to both sides.

Sacked - contract paid up (unless sacked for breach of contract obviously). Business’ decision

Mutual consent - big sum paid, up to and including the amount of the contract but allows both parties to avoid being blamed and implies ‘agreed it was time’

Still think TB probably offered a mutual consent deal, Chris might have refused, knowing that a sacking (after keeping us up) would mean maximum sympathy AND cash for him.

He’s been sacked before so he knew how to handle it and given the sympathy vote he’d expect (he was right) there would be no stigma attached from his perspective and it wouldn’t harm his chances of getting another job. TB had made his decision (almost certainly weeks previously) so sacked him anyway, and then looks like the bad guy as everyone turns on him. Sensible stuff from Chris (who continues to act with dignity - imagine if it was Allardyce in the same situation) but right decision from TB.

TB gets his new guy. Chris gets his cash, keeps his reputation and probably gets a new job pretty quickly. Life goes on.

 

[Easy 10]

Hmmm Well he met and exceeded the targets..

You don't know what the targets were.

 

[Anya1000]

Agreed really dissapointed, being nice doesn't get you anywhere maybe part of the reason he got axed unfairly!

 

[dazzer6666]

You don't know what the targets were.

Go on, enlighten us..........(not you [MENTION=21064]easy[/MENTION]10)

 

[Easy 10]

Go on, enlighten us..........

Hey, neither do I. But to blithely say "he met and exceeded the targets" - how does [MENTION=38177]Anya1000[/MENTION] know what those targets were ? "Staying up", was that it ? I doubt it.

I'd have thought having spent another £60-£70m last summer, an inferior points total and league position from 12 months ago would not have ticked too many boxes for TB. ESPECIALLY the manner in which we stunk the division out in 2019.

 

[dazzer6666]

Agreed really dissapointed, being nice doesn't get you anywhere maybe part of the reason he got axed unfairly!

Winning 3 in 23
Almost getting relegated from a comfortable mid-table position mid-season
Clearly indicating that next season would see more of the same
Getting walloped at home in two key games
Starting with a bizarre formation vs Newcastle at home
Not being able to get a tune out of the club record signings

Yep, all down to being a nice guy (which he undoubtedly is)

 

[dazzer6666]

Hey, neither do I. But to blithely say "he met and exceeded the targets" - how does [MENTION=38177]Anya1000[/MENTION] know what those targets were ? "Staying up", was that it ? I doubt it.

I'd have thought having spent another £60-£70m last summer, an inferior points total and league position from 12 months ago would not have ticked too many boxes for TB.

Yes - sorry - edited it.....I was hoping [MENTION=38177]Anya1000[/MENTION] could enlighten us, as appears to know.......

.....but now seems to think he was fired because he was ‘too nice’.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Maybe he thought he could rebuild from the disastrous signings made by TB and Co.. Given a chance the following season as he achieved all of his goals....

PalaceSaysWhat ?

 

[drew]

Sacked - contract paid up (unless sacked for breach of contract obviously). Business’ decision

Mutual consent - big sum paid, up to and including the amount of the contract but allows both parties to avoid being blamed and implies ‘agreed it was time’

Still think TB probably offered a mutual consent deal, Chris might have refused, knowing that a sacking (after keeping us up) would mean maximum sympathy AND cash for him.

He’s been sacked before so he knew how to handle it and given the sympathy vote he’d expect (he was right) there would be no stigma attached from his perspective and it wouldn’t harm his chances of getting another job. TB had made his decision (almost certainly weeks previously) so sacked him anyway, and then looks like the bad guy as everyone turns on him. Sensible stuff from Chris (who continues to act with dignity - imagine if it was Allardyce in the same situation) but right decision from TB.

TB gets his new guy. Chris gets his cash, keeps his reputation and probably gets a new job pretty quickly. Life goes on.

Tend to agree with this.

 

[Bwian]

Well someone motivated them to get 3 crucial points and some decent performances against Spurs, Wolves, Arsenal and Newcastle and thus stay up...

Didn't that upturn coincide with Bruno's return to the starting 11?

Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Goldstone1976]

On a bottom three budget? Not really, perhaps a decent cup run and make sure you beat Palace too?

Yep.

 

[Bwian]

Yep. I remember how poor it was. I was there. And I remember plenty of well argued calls on here saying it was the right time for him to go. Eventually echoed by TBs statement on that Monday.
What I don’t remember, thus the surprise for fans and as it turned out Hughton himself , was the expectation that Bloom would actually do it. Just. Like. That.

I said to a couple of people after the City game that TB would do the deed in the morning.

Sent from my LYA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Nobby]

That's setting the bar very low. Are you sure maintaining PL status wasn't just the minimum requirement and the target might be something higher?

What like finishing in the top ten
Dunce

 

[Nobby]

On a bottom three budget? Not really, perhaps a decent cup run and make sure you beat Palace too?

Forget it El Pres. Not worth the hassle. I’ve been arguing against this lot for a week.

 

[Baldseagull]

I think you're reading too much into that leaving on a mutual basis is not the same as tearing up a contract. Do you honestly think that in every case where managers have left on mutual consent they haven't had a pay-off?

Also, you would only tear up a contract if it is mutually beneficial to both sides.

Not suggesting no manager that left by mutual consent ever got paid off in some way, but I doubt any left by mutual consent with the full value of their remaining contract, as many sacked managers have.
Contracts will vary, I have no idea if Hughton had any special clauses regarding termination. Moyes had a clause in his contract at Man Utd that allowed them to sack him relatively cheaply if they did not qualify for the Champions League, they waited until qualification was impossible, before they sacked him, because if they had sacked him with qualification still possible, he could have claimed the full value of his remaining contract.
Poyets Gross Misconduct dismissal had to be handled correctly, there was a termination clause in his contract that had a sum of several millions if either he left, or we dismissed him early, I think he was trying to get himself sacked to get the pay off, rather than make the pay off, knowing his stock was high. I suspect the talks with Reading he had might have gone somewhere if that clause was not there or such high value.
Dick Knight always asked for consent because there was no way we could afford to pay up one manager and hire another, exception being Dean Wilkins where he offered him a different role instead, so not sacked. Easier to get that consent for a low pay off when you are known to be potless and any legal challenge might bankrupt the club and be fruitless, and incur the wrath of the clubs supporters, and football supporters in general.

 

[drew]

What like finishing in the top ten
Dunce

Knob by name knob by nature

Who said anything about that high? We finished 15th last season so if this is indeed a project then your target would surely to be higher than that with the minimum obviously being 17th. We had a cup run but you wouldn't say it was inspiring, Bournemouth reserves, struggled against WBA, scrapped past Derby and yes, it was a great day out at Wembley but City hardly got out of 1st gear. As for the league cup, went out tamely to a poor Southampton side.