Tribunal (Morton vs snake employers) - Page 12 - General Morton Chatter - TheMortonForum.com Jump to content
TheMortonForum.com

Tribunal (Morton vs snake employers)


TONofmemories

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Why would we need to mention a compensation figure? We're entitled to the outstanding balance of McKinnon and Taylors' contracts.

 

I don't know how it works in football but if someone was sacked from a job, then got another job of similar salary straight away, this would be taken into account with any compensation claim. Turn it around and the fact that Morton replaced McKinnon almost immediately with JJ, I'd expect that to be taken into account regarding compensation. I'll be very surprised if we made a claim for compensation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooft. The panel hasn’t held back there. About as comprehensive a vindication for Morton and as devastating a finding for Falkirk (not just on the substance but on the character of all the main players) as you could imagine. The tone of it is remarkable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how it works in football but if someone was sacked from a job, then got another job of similar salary straight away, this would be taken into account with any compensation claim. Turn it around and the fact that Morton replaced McKinnon almost immediately with JJ, I'd expect that to be taken into account regarding compensation. I'll be very surprised if we made a claim for compensation.

You should have just stopped after "I don't know how it works." I can only assume you were part of the legal team advising the opposition who lacked credibility?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should have just stopped after "I don't know how it works." I can only assume you were part of the legal team advising the opposition who lacked credibility?

And he calls others 'Thick'....

 

Thick would be getting laughed off a message board, coming back as someone else and then denying it when found out...

TIME FOR CHANGE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how it works in football 

 

It shows, given the utter drivel that you then posted.

 

When Bettie the cleaning lady changes job, she hands in her notice and leaves. Rentokil don't have to pay £250k to her former employers to secure her registration. The entire contract and compensation structure is entirely different in (and between) professional sports than in any other sector. 

The site is supposed to be a place for the extended 'family' of Morton supporters - having an affinity with people that you don't know, because you share a love of your local football club. It's not supposed to be about point scoring and showing how 'clever' or 'funny' you are, or just being downright rude and offensive to people you don't know, because you can get away with it. Unfortunately, it seems the classic case of people who have little standing/presence in real life, use this forum as a way of making themselves feel as if they are something. It's sad, and I've said that before..

 

So, having been on Morton forums for about 15 years I guess, I've had enough... well done t*ssers, another Morton supporter driven away. You can all feel happy at how 'clever' you are

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crawford Rae - contray to some post earlier in the thread from people who really should have known better - did NOT give Falkirk carte blanche to nick the manager for free, but rather said that he was going nowhere without compensation.

 

 

Yep - as clear a vindication of Crawford’s handling of this as you could get. And McKinnon’s (and especially Lang’s) ignorance of the implications of his contract is astonishing. Unbelievable, actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that as well. And he did have a point where he said he was only offered a one-year deal for a 3-year plan. We could've even offered a 2-year deal with clauses depending on position/performance and been able to bin him if things weren't going well, cheaply. 

 

Aye, I wondered about the reference to the three year thing too. Probably just obfuscation from him, but given that we know that McKinnon instigated a move then it does make you wonder what on earth could justify that...although I suppose being a massive arsehole would be a decent answer.

 

One of the most striking things in it is the suggestion that McKinnon not only nobbled the Rudden deal, he didn't bother his arse in the days/week beforehand. Fuckin horrible rat cunt.

AWMSC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how it works in football but if someone was sacked from a job, then got another job of similar salary straight away, this would be taken into account with any compensation claim. Turn it around and the fact that Morton replaced McKinnon almost immediately with JJ, I'd expect that to be taken into account regarding compensation. I'll be very surprised if we made a claim for compensation.

 

Football is a special case. It was even more special pre-Bosman and pre-Webster. One day the compensation system will fall apart as well, particularly at our level of football. But that day is not today. Falkirk will pay up. They're not taking us to Strasbourg.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, I wondered about the reference to the three year thing too. Probably just obfuscation from him, but given that we know that McKinnon instigated a move then it does make you wonder what on earth could justify that...although I suppose being a massive arsehole would be a decent answer.

 

One of the most striking things in it is the suggestion that McKinnon not only nobbled the Rudden deal, he didn't bother his arse in the days/week beforehand. ****in horrible rat ****.

It’s interesting that his “it’ll all come out in the wash” stuff didn’t come out in the wash... instead he was labelled “particularly unimpressive” and not a credible witness. Good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s interesting that his “it’ll all come out in the wash” stuff didn’t come out in the wash... instead he was labelled “particularly unimpressive” and not a credible witness. Good.

 

This is why people need to take his "but but but muh three year plan" mewling and file it in the bin. He's a snake liar.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really like the part which reads,

 

"Mr McKinnon was particularly unimpressive in his evidence and we were unable to accept that he was a sufficiently credible witness for his evidence to be relied upon by us..."

 

Not a great reputation to have when trying to negotiate with players or their agents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that as well. And he did have a point where he said he was only offered a one-year deal for a 3-year plan. We could've even offered a 2-year deal with clauses depending on position/performance and been able to bin him if things weren't going well, cheaply.

As far as I know the initial one year deal took into account that we were also paying off the previous management team. But he could always have negotiated the point or not taken on the job on those terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only complaint is the use of “judgement” instead of “judgment” in the tribunal’s report, but you can’t have everything.

 

In fairness it's peppered with typos and looks like nobody bothered proofing it. In fact a lot of it could have come out of a P4 "news jotter." Everything below, including extraneous full stops, is copied directly from the document:

 

He had not expected to hear back from Falkirk on 31st August but during the lunch period Mr McKinnon contacted him and was uptight and wanted to speak to him, so he arrived at the training ground about 1.30pm with his contract in hand, looking agitated, Mr Rae told him that he had blocked an approach from Falkirk to speak to him about the vacant manager’s job at Falkirk..

-----

By at very least the Thursday evening Mr Campbell had contacted Mr Sherry who in turn had contacted Mr McKinnon (something Mr Campbell must clearly have known was going to happened) to tell them that Falkirk were going to be in touch with Greenock Morton to arrange to speak to him.

-----

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It shows, given the utter drivel that you then posted.

 

When Bettie the cleaning lady changes job, she hands in her notice and leaves. Rentokil don't have to pay £250k to her former employers to secure her registration. The entire contract and compensation structure is entirely different in (and between) professional sports than in any other sector. 

 

To be fair, neither Bettie or Rentokil have committed any breaches of contract. 

 

Thanks for playing anyway champ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the only British analog would be a non-compete clause - which often results in things like gardening leave or sitting out of the industry for a year - but that's still not the same thing.

EOho8Pw.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...