Surely any club thinking of employing Poyet....

[seagullwedgee]

.... would ask him some pretty searching questions about why he was fired. And then surely they would seek to ratify that with BHAFC to check.

So, if Poyet had done anything seriously bad, he would be unemployable wouldn't he?

I mean if the gross misconduct was actually a judgment issue, like differing views about how forthright someone could be in managing people for example, then he would probably be OK, because the employing club might be after someone with a very firm method.

But if the gross misconduct was something serious, surely that would come out at interview and mean he had no chance of getting a permanent job in UK football.

Am I the only one who was hearing the strong rumour at the Bolton home game, that the misdemeanour was potentially allegedly maybe possibly (but maybe not for the purposes of legal balance) a very serious one.

I can't help thinking if Sunderland wanted him they would have appointed him straight away. Clearly their decision has now been deferred until at least 2 weeks after he personally was interviewed, which is good as saying "thanks, you interviewed well, but we won't be hiring you".........

Very strange......

 

[BrightonCottager]

I've just started a thread asking much the same thing because my team may end up with him.

 

[Fef]

Chairman: "So, Gus, why were you given the boot by Brighton?"

Candidate: "Ees complicated."

 

[Pavilionaire]

I agree that if Sunderland really wanted Gus I'd have thought they've have offered by now. Quite conceivably Fulham could sack Jol and appoint Gus, ditto Newcastle with Pardew.

 

[Kaiser_Soze]

Football is one of those few industries where your previous conduct is overlooked if you're deemed to be good enough. Marlon King, Joey Barton and a few others have all served prison sentences and gone on to be re-employed. Whatever has happened with Gus, it won't make him unemployable by any stretch.

 

[drew]

Of course it may be in TB's interest that Poyet gets a job soon as that may dissuade him from pursuing legal action. Either way, TB can't put anything detrimental in writing but whose to say what is said over the phone!!!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

What could be worse than allegedly stealing or fiddling your expenses or hitting a player as he comes off the field? Both managers got jobs after those misdeamours although the first one was cleared after an investigation but his sacking still stood.

Wasn't Pardew allegedly sacked for going with player's wives at West Ham & Southampton?

 

[seagullwedgee]

Why can TB not state the facts in writing in a job reference.

If it were something financial for example (and I am not saying that it is, because no-one has any better info than the next person) then TB would be legally bound to state such facts, and would himself be contravening employment law if he did not disclose the facts, when asked by an authorised employer.

That's why I'm raising this whole thread. Poyet seems to be showing no signs of appealing, the gathering rumours of the alleged gross misconduct suggest an appeal might be pointless, and Gus is turning all his attention to future employment, and is going nowhere slowly. His attempts to secure new employment will quite quickly bring this boil to bursting point...........

 

[Thunder Bolt]

There were 4 charges of breach of contract. We know one of them was refusing to handle the retained list. Hardly a criminal offence.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

To be honest, part of me wishes he'd hurry up and get another job to stop the constant speculation on here.

Only then, it would be full of people concerned about how he's coping in the Premier League (assuming he's going there) and how long he's got until he's sacked. Again.


Gus IN. Somewhere, please!

 

[JCL - the new kid in town]

.... would ask him some pretty searching questions about why he was fired. And then surely they would seek to ratify that with BHAFC to check.

So, if Poyet had done anything seriously bad, he would be unemployable wouldn't he?

I mean if the gross misconduct was actually a judgment issue, like differing views about how forthright someone could be in managing people for example, then he would probably be OK, because the employing club might be after someone with a very firm method.

But if the gross misconduct was something serious, surely that would come out at interview and mean he had no chance of getting a permanent job in UK football.

Am I the only one who was hearing the strong rumour at the Bolton home game, that the misdemeanour was potentially allegedly maybe possibly (but maybe not for the purposes of legal balance) a very serious one.

I can't help thinking if Sunderland wanted him they would have appointed him straight away. Clearly their decision has now been deferred until at least 2 weeks after he personally was interviewed, which is good as saying "thanks, you interviewed well, but we won't be hiring you".........

Very strange......

But then you could argue that given how high profile the case was that Sunderland would ask BHAFC first before bothering to interview surely so would know about it in advance?

 

[Lady Whistledown]

Do any employers give bad references though?

I thought the standard format if someone was crap was just to write something like "I can confirm that Mr Jeremiah Shagpile was employed by Griffin Simpson Wetherby Hale for a continuous period from June 2009 until August 2013", and leave it there.

Whereas if you're good, they're effusive in their praise?

 

[Brighton Mod]

I agree that if Sunderland really wanted Gus I'd have thought they've have offered by now. Quite conceivably Fulham could sack Jol and appoint Gus, ditto Newcastle with Pardew.

and Poyets CV has written on it? He did a lot for Brighton, no, I view it the other way round, our club did a lot for him and put with his antics for long enough. If his players had not had bailed him against Palace at home in the league, he would have gone then. The only element missing in our promotion last year was the manager.
If he moves on to a prem team fine, but I guarantee like Di Canio he will be found out very quickly.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

What I don't understand in all this, is that if it was an open secret that Poyet was going to leave at the end of the season (as it is claimed to be), why didn't he sit tight, keep quiet and tow the party line until such time that he needed to?

Obviously we don't know all of the facts behind his dismissal, but surely it would have been avoidable if he'd acted differently. I have no doubt that if he decided to walk at the end of last season, even with nothing else lined up, he would have a PL job by now. As it stands, chairman are (quite rightly) more wary of taking him on, and he could still end up waiting for one, if another candidate ends up at Sunderland.

 

[Beach Hut]

Sunderland would have appointed him by now if they were serious as he is a free agent as such and Di Matteo was allegedly very cool on being interviewed.

Conclusion is obvious no-one really wants this job as totally similar to Wolves a few seasons back ergo Ball will be appointed as a compromise purely to keep them up.

 

[sparkie]

We can't be sure about Sunderland.

Maybe he just didn't impress.

What if honest Radio Poyet had said he would need time to make a decision as he was waiting to see what happened at Fulham.

Wouldn't have gone down well, and is just an example that he could fail to get the Sunderland job for many reasons.

 

[Rugrat]

Do any employers give bad references though?

I thought the standard format if someone was crap was just to write something like "I can confirm that Mr Jeremiah Shagpile was employed by Griffin Simpson Wetherby Hale for a continuous period from June 2009 until August 2013", and leave it there.

Whereas if you're good, they're effusive in their praise?

Being inconsistent with references is very dangerous. Most large employers now will give the same bland reference for everyone. Daft but true.

Sunderland would have appointed him by now if they were serious as he is a free agent as such and Di Matteo was allegedly very cool on being interviewed.

Conclusion is obvious no-one really wants this job as totally similar to Wolves a few seasons back ergo Ball will be appointed as a compromise purely to keep them up.

It feels like he's passed on Poyet but I'd be surprised to see Ball get it, although leaving him in charge till at least the weekend is odd. I've got a feeling they're back to the drawing board. Meulensteen doesn't appear to have been eliminated yet either.

 

[Vegas Seagull]

Do any employers give bad references though?

I thought the standard format if someone was crap was just to write something like "I can confirm that Mr Jeremiah Shagpile was employed by Griffin Simpson Wetherby Hale for a continuous period from June 2009 until August 2013", and leave it there.

Whereas if you're good, they're effusive in their praise?

If you really want to know you phone up for a verbal reference & consequently find out a LOT more...

 

[Brovion]

It's quite interesting. During the summer any time there was any speculation on here about what it was that the Three Amigos had done that got them all suspended the thread would be pulled and dire warnings would be posted that Larry Law was going to squash you like a bug. However, as the truth hasn't come out (and probably never will), the same question is naturally being asked by Poyet's potential employers - and their fans. I wonder if the same legal people who kept such a beady eye on NSC are charging their clients overtime now they have loads more messageboards to police?

 

[Rugrat]

If you really want to know you phone up for a verbal reference & consequently find out a LOT more...

In many businesses, giving a verbal reference would lead to severe bollacking at the very least.