This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
A question on the Pulis case etc.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
jamiemartin721  Reading 06 Mar 17 1.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by coulsdoneagle
I'd image me that there was a clause that said if he left us mid season any bonuses due were null and void. He is too savvy to have made such a basic error and Parish is too savvy to not have a clause to protect palace. Well not that savvy, he lost the court case and a lot of money. I suspect he didn't really understand it or contract law, or just assumed that he'd get away with it. Plus for whatever reason, there wasn't a job for him either. His actions, really caused a lot of problems, and we were lucky to get Pardew at Christmas that season, because under Warnock we were going down. Also it ran us into the Malky Mckay debacle.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
 Nobbybm Dartford 06 Mar 17 1.46pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
Well not that savvy, he lost the court case and a lot of money. I suspect he didn't really understand it or contract law, or just assumed that he'd get away with it. Plus for whatever reason, there wasn't a job for him either. His actions, really caused a lot of problems, and we were lucky to get Pardew at Christmas that season, because under Warnock we were going down. Also it ran us into the Malky Mckay debacle. I'd assume the latter - he's done similar to at least 3 other clubs in the past, none of which have really had the means(or inclination) to go legal on him. I think Gillingham were going to but he (allegedly) had acquired a case of 'sensitive' documents which stopped any action in its tracks. My understanding of the bonus in question was it relied on him keeping us up & him still being with us on 1st September - not an unusual combination as it can prevent managers taking a new job between seasons. I guess he thought the two weeks left wouldn't matter especially if he spun a few lines to make it seem he was being reasonable. Unfortunately for him, the judges in the original hearing and the subsequent appeal both believed he deliberately sought to obtain the money under false pretences. I doubt he'll ever have a more expensive fortnight.
Will this be five? It's gonna be five! It IS five! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Crazy_Eagle South London 06 Mar 17 8.40pm |
|
|---|---|
|
like him or not we are still in the Premier League purely down to him.
R.I.P. DJ Hardline CPFC2010 |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| merganser 06 Mar 17 9.04pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Anyone know how vigorous Palace are being in their efforts to get the money? Is the club happy just to bide its time? In his MOTD interview, I thought it was significant when TP said: "congratulations to Palace." Was he showing some good will in the hope that it might pave the way to a lower settlement being mutually agreed with Palace out of court? He does have one card up his sleeve. It will probably look ugly and reflect badly on Palace if the club sends in bailiffs. If Pulis offers to cough up 75 per cent, maybe the club should accept it, shake hands on the deal and draw a line under the matter.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 07 Mar 17 7.34am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by merganser
Anyone know how vigorous Palace are being in their efforts to get the money? Is the club happy just to bide its time? In his MOTD interview, I thought it was significant when TP said: "congratulations to Palace." Was he showing some good will in the hope that it might pave the way to a lower settlement being mutually agreed with Palace out of court? In response to your first two questions no-one here knows the answer although no doubt a few will present their opinions as fact as usual. Regarding Pulis congratulating Palace on their win, whatever beef he may have is with Parish and not the players, many of which he brought in and has a soft spot for
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| tonykaos Ealing 09 Mar 17 12.08am |
|
|---|---|
|
For those that might be interested..... Edited by tonykaos (09 Mar 2017 12.11am)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ParchmoreEagle  Belair 09 Mar 17 12.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
TP simply breached his contract I presume. As for his leaving, IMO it was Parish's attitude at the time to spending money. I recall not much being spent that transfer window. Now Parish is more enlightened. But what do I know?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Palace in the Blood 09 Mar 17 1.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I think the most likely outcome of this is that CPFC will ask for an attachment of earnings from WBA. ie The court will order WBA to pay us from his salary. This will then be deducted from the balance outstanding with interest running from the date of judgement
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| kent675 Bromley, Kent 09 Mar 17 1.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Does Pulis have any avenues open to appeal this, or has he exhausted every chance?
Four wheels drives the body - Two wheels drives the soul |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 09 Mar 17 1.07pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Crazy_Eagle
like him or not we are still in the Premier League purely down to him. And Pardew. Pulis's leaving threw us into a search for a new manager, that resulted in a debacle with McKay, and then having Warnock as the best candidate. Three/four months later we were going down.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Littlebogreek  09 Mar 17 2.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ParchmoreEagle
TP simply breached his contract I presume. As for his leaving, IMO it was Parish's attitude at the time to spending money. I recall not much being spent that transfer window. Now Parish is more enlightened. But what do I know? I don't think its a case of being more enlightened or his attitude, as I understand it, for FFP rules, they take 3 years accounting into consideration, therefore for this season, we had 3 years premiership earnings therefore could spend more without being as constrained.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| eritheagle Erith 09 Mar 17 3.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by kent675
Does Pulis have any avenues open to appeal this, or has he exhausted every chance? He was quoted after the court hearing saying that he intended to appeal. Something bout being wronged, whinge, whinge etc!
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.