He was going to Prague was he not ?122 posts and still no sign of [MENTION=30242]spence[/MENTION]
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
He was going to Prague was he not ?122 posts and still no sign of [MENTION=30242]spence[/MENTION]
Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
He was going to Prague was he not ?
Scouting for a new manager in the Czech leagues ?
But you did say that 'Long Contracts rarely benefit anyone but the Club'. I had thought, that roughly speaking, a manager who is sacked will often get some or all of their remaining contract paid (perhaps until they take another management position), unless there's a specific clause in their contract (eg, must qualify for CL), or unless they're dismissed for gross misconduct etc. If that is the case, then surely the long contract is benefiting the manager?I didn't say that Triggaaar.
Eh? I certainly wouldn't expect you to go into details of any particular manager. It's a general conversation about managers and long clauses. If managers don't keep getting paid after being sacked, I'd have thought you could say that. And if they do keep getting paid, then why are you saying that long contracts aren't good for them?And you know full well I can't go into any detail on how things are calculated or negotiated between all parties each time Managers get sacked by Clubs around the country.
Staring into the abyss off of Charles Bridge.Either that or schlepping round local massage parlours
But you did say that 'Long Contracts rarely benefit anyone but the Club'. I had thought, that roughly speaking, a manager who is sacked will often get some or all of their remaining contract paid (perhaps until they take another management position), unless there's a specific clause in their contract (eg, must qualify for CL), or unless they're dismissed for gross misconduct etc. If that is the case, then surely the long contract is benefiting the manager?
Eh? I certainly wouldn't expect you to go into details of any particular manager. It's a general conversation about managers and long clauses. If managers don't keep getting paid after being sacked, I'd have thought you could say that. And if they do keep getting paid, then why are you saying that long contracts aren't good for them?
I say no more than this.
Despite what newspapers report on how much it cost Man United to sack Jose Mourhino or for Spurs to sack Pochetino
or for Watford to sack Javier Gracia. The length of time remaining on their contracts would have been largely irrelevant.
Newspapers lead us to believe it does. That's only because journalist are too lazy. They just multiply what they believe a Manager's annual salary is by the amount of years left on a contract then they print it.
Then when it is printed people take that as being true. Because they want to believe the sensationalism of those "hefty numbers"
Newspapers blame internet sites for reporting "fake news". They peddle more "fake news" than any other Entity. They always have done
Like many other industries, there’ll be a compromise agreement in most cases.......
Ah, well I haven't read a single word on any of that lot anyway.I say no more than this.
Despite what newspapers report on how much it cost Man United to sack Jose Mourhino or for Spurs to sack Pochetino
or for Watford to sack Javier Gracia.
Ignoring the managers you've mentioned, can you not explain at all why contract lengths are largely irrelevant? If you comment on the industry as a whole, then I don't see how that would be inappropriate for you, but obviously you don't have to comment.The length of time remaining on their contracts would have been largely irrelevant.
Like many other industries, there’ll be a compromise agreement in most cases.......
Well if there's a compromise, then surely it would be a compromise between nothing and their full contract paid up. If they only had 6 months left to run on their contract, then they'd get less than if there were 3 years left. So while it would be no surprise to learn that compromises are reached, that doesn't explain why a long contract doesn't help the manager when sacked.Nail on Head
Which is why I generally don't read them.Newspapers blame internet sites for reporting "fake news". They peddle more "fake news" than any other Entity. They always have done
Fantastic news, I really do think he’s going to be special.
Now he needs some support in the next couple of transfer windows. I think he’s done superbly so far with what he has available but there are very obvious weaknesses in the side and squad. Add in the promising youngsters we have coming through, we could be in a really exciting place in a season of two.
I'm personally wondering if we might play three at the back on occasion next season with Dunk, Webster and the Leeds superstar White. Could be quite a unit!
I'm personally wondering if we might play three at the back on occasion next season with Dunk, Webster and the Leeds superstar White. Could be quite a unit!
You’ll be banned from the whole site if you continue being a complete and utter arse in nearly every thread you contribute to.
Hope this helps.
WooowI'm personally wondering if we might play three at the back on occasion next season with Dunk, Webster and the Leeds superstar White. Could be quite a unit!
I say no more than this.
Despite what newspapers report on how much it cost Man United to sack Jose Mourhino or for Spurs to sack Pochetino
or for Watford to sack Javier Gracia. The length of time remaining on their contracts would have been largely irrelevant.
Newspapers lead us to believe it does. That's only because journalist are too lazy. They just multiply what they believe a Manager's annual salary is by the amount of years left on a contract then they print it.
Then when it is printed people take that as being true. Because they want to believe the sensationalism of those "hefty numbers"
Newspapers blame internet sites for reporting "fake news". They peddle more "fake news" than any other Entity. They always have done
West ham would hardly be a challenging commute........