So are Reading really a better project ?

[B.W.]

Absolutely ridiculous - but one that non-recipients should get precious or uptight about?

I'm going to say something surprising here, but I almost agree. My only reservation is your use of the word precious; it seems to me that, given the email is now in the public domain, anyone can draw whatever conclusions they like about it. That isn't being precious; it's merely saying what you think.

 

[B.W.]

Yep, if there are indeed 4 gross misconduct charges as Gus appeared to indicate in his Sky appearance, this particular one I don't think will detain the tribunal that long.

Good to see you getting stuck into a good verbal scrap, thought that was more my style than yours

I suggest that you don't assume that the email is one of the gross misconduct grounds.

 

[symyjym]

I think most fair-minded and reasonable people would excuse and mitigate it given the uniquely unpleasant nature of the Palace dressing room incident and the fact that Gus would have been reeling from the disappointment of the result.

Of course, those people actually looking for reasons to justify a pre-determined decision to sack him won't forgive, that's obvious to all.

Tribunal chairmen are fair-minded people. I've covered a fair few industrial tribunals and I've seen far worse things than this kind of stuff (eg abusive screaming matches) not ruled by them as gross misconduct.

You would have to give me examples of what you have covered first and the status of their employment, and if it was put out into the public domain slamming the company you work for.

Any senior management who represents a big company would have been fired for that so there is no argument in this whether he was on his way out or not. Maybe you haven't experienced employing anyone.

Gus always thought he could do better than us, Bloom thought we could do better than him. Bloom gets a new guy at the helm, the rest is up to Gus. What is so difficult to understand?

 

[London Irish]

I suggest that you don't assume that the email is one of the gross misconduct grounds.

And I'd suggest you and symyjym get your story straight on that one

 

[glasfryn]

You would have to give me examples of what you have covered first and the status of their employment, and if it was put out into the public domain slamming the company you work for.

Any senior management who represents a big company would have been fired for that so there is no argument in this whether he was on his way out or not. Maybe you haven't experienced employing anyone.

Gus always thought he could do better than us, Bloom thought we could do better than him. Bloom gets a new guy at the helm, the rest is up to Gus. What is so difficult to understand?

then why the feck did they not just sack him then?



answer money

 

[symyjym]

then why the feck did they not just sack him then?



answer money

We did not want to sack him, we wanted him to offer his resignation or leave by mutual consent, so he could leave with dignity, like Tanno and Oatway.

Gus is a rich man so I wouldn't worry about him ending up in B&B.

 

[Acker79]

I believe, given how many contradictory stories from supposedly high placed sources, anyone taking the word of one source in this situation and treating it as the gospel truth, shaping their opinion of everything on this one person's word is putting themselves at risk of being embarrassed should the whole truth come out.

However, they have only breached that source's trust if that source has ever made it clear they are telling them in confidence and it isn't meant to be shared. There have already been allusions in this thread that perhaps BW's source wanted him to share what he was telling him to paint gus in a bad light. If that were true, he isn't betraying the source. I've kinda glazed over a lot of posts as everyone is going in circles and seemingly arguing over minutiae, so I don't know if Bw has clarified this, but perhaps his source knows BW is going to share the info and leaks to him because of this. You don't have to be a journo to spread knowledge through the brighton fan base.

 

[symyjym]

I believe, given how many contradictory stories from supposedly high placed sources, anyone taking the word of one source in this situation and treating it as the gospel truth, shaping their opinion of everything on this one person's word is putting themselves at risk of being embarrassed should the whole truth come out.

However, they have only breached that source's trust if that source has ever made it clear they are telling them in confidence and it isn't meant to be shared. There have already been allusions in this thread that perhaps BW's source wanted him to share what he was telling him to paint gus in a bad light. If that were true, he isn't betraying the source. I've kinda glazed over a lot of posts as everyone is going in circles and seemingly arguing over minutiae, so I don't know if Bw has clarified this, but perhaps his source knows BW is going to share the info and leaks to him because of this. You don't have to be a journo to spread knowledge through the brighton fan base.

What is it that BW is supposed to have said?

 

[Acker79]

What is it that BW is supposed to have said?

That he has a high placed source who has told him what happened (thus going against company policy and probably employment law sharing private information) and that gus is so in the wrong we can't even imagine it (well, words to that effect). That Gus going to court would be mistake because the truth will come out ad BW knows the truth is bad for Gus, etc. You realise I'm not criticising BW in that post, right, that there's no need to jump to his defence?

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

I, too, never had a problem with that email, in fact it made me smile.

i actually thought the email made it look like he cared otherwise if he was trying to leave why else would he bother with the rant.

 

[symyjym]

That he has a source who has told him what happened and that gus is so in the wrong we can't even imagine it (well, words to that effect). That Gus going to court would be mistake because the truth will come out ad BW knows the truth is bad for Gus, etc. You realise I'm not criticising BW in that post, right, that there's no need to jump to his defence?

Thanks, it was a genuine question.

Doesn't sound bad to me, certainly doesn't warrent all the fuss about slagging Gus off, he hasn't. It's an opinion he has formed based on what he believes to be the truth, whether others believe that or not is another opinion. That's what forums are all about.

 

[symyjym]

I, too, never had a problem with that email, in fact it made me smile.

Maybe if you were paying him £3k a day you may have thought different

 

[glasfryn]

I believe, given how many contradictory stories from supposedly high placed sources, anyone taking the word of one source in this situation and treating it as the gospel truth, shaping their opinion of everything on this one person's word is putting themselves at risk of being embarrassed should the whole truth come out.

However, they have only breached that source's trust if that source has ever made it clear they are telling them in confidence and it isn't meant to be shared. There have already been allusions in this thread that perhaps BW's source wanted him to share what he was telling him to paint gus in a bad light. If that were true, he isn't betraying the source. I've kinda glazed over a lot of posts as everyone is going in circles and seemingly arguing over minutiae, so I don't know if Bw has clarified this, but perhaps his source knows BW is going to share the info and leaks to him because of this. You don't have to be a journo to spread knowledge through the brighton fan base.

Hmmm!
sounds close to what I have been thinking
bit like Governments float an idea and see where it goes

 

[Icy Gull]

Maybe if you were paying him £3k a day you may have thought different

Without a doubt

 

[The Large One]

Without having read through the past six pages of hysteria, Paul Barber said today that 11 clubs are receiving parachute payments in the Championship.

Eleven.

Top six budget-wise, are we?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

We did not want to sack him, we wanted him to offer his resignation or leave by mutual consent, so he could leave with dignity, like Tanno and Oatway.

Gus is a rich man so I wouldn't worry about him ending up in B&B.

So why did Tony Bloom refuse to accept his resignation?

 

[AZ Gull]

Without having read through the past six pages of hysteria, Paul Barber said today that 11 clubs are receiving parachute payments in the Championship.

Eleven.

Top six budget-wise, are we?

Hmmmm. I wonder where the figure of 11 comes from.

By my reckoning, it would be 8:-

Wigan, Reading and QPR - relegated last season.
Bolton and Blackburn - relegated the previous season (Wolves are now in League One, of course).
Birmingham and Blackpool - relegated in 2010-11 (West ham are back in the Premier League).
Burnley - relegated in 2009-10 (Portsmouth are in League Two and Hull are back in the Premier League).

 

[Icy Gull]

Hmmmm. I wonder where the figure of 11 comes from.

By my reckoning, it would be 8:-

Wigan, Reading and QPR - relegated last season.
Bolton and Blackburn - relegated the previous season (Wolves are now in League One, of course).
Birmingham and Blackpool - relegated in 2010-11 (West ham are back in the Premier League).
Burnley - relegated in 2009-10 (Portsmouth are in League Two and Hull are back in the Premier League).

It appears Barber has got it wrong. I doubt if Blackpool or Burnley are going to spend much of the payments on players this season either.

We may not be top 6 but I doubt we'd be as low as 14th.

 

[Icy Gull]

Without having read through the past six pages of hysteria

Hyperbole

 

[Icy Gull]

So why did Tony Bloom refuse to accept his resignation?

I imagine because Gus wanted a payoff, just a guess though.