Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:12 am  

flipper wrote:

McManaman not to face any retrospective action on that tackle, must have been a fair challenge then. My appreciation of what is an isn't acceptable in football gets foggier by the day. You get players like Bale talking about 'contact' and being entitled to go down for the slightest touch, you have all in wrestling at corners that goes unpunished and then you have leg breakers being let of scot free too

All you have to do is look at Bale and he hits the deck....just like Ashley Young does.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:36 pm  

Roddy B wrote:

A bit daft that, really. It says he was earning £3.5m a year which wouldn't put him up there. Putting a manager up there with his pay off included is just stupid. Furthermore, it says they're his earnings for this season but he's been unemployed all year so surely they'd count as last season's earnings?

These type of reports are usually dealing with the figures of a year ago.

AFAIK Chelsea don't pay off their ex managers with a lump sum. They continue to pay them their monthly salary up until they get another job, but after that the payments stop. I'm not sure whether that would make any difference to LFC as Dalglish isn't likely to get another managerial job.

If LFC did pay Dalglish that lump sum, of course it should be included in his earnings.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:14 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

These type of reports are usually dealing with the figures of a year ago.

AFAIK Chelsea don't pay off their ex managers with a lump sum. They continue to pay them their monthly salary up until they get another job, but after that the payments stop.

That would have to be agreed with the outgoing manager. There is no way that would be legal to do as a policy without the agreement of the outgoing manager.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:25 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

That would have to be agreed with the outgoing manager. There is no way that would be legal to do as a policy without the agreement of the outgoing manager.

Don't think it will be left to when the blokes being showed the door. I think it will all be included in his contract that he signs at the start.

Even if LFC and Dalglish didn't have an agreement what would happen should he be fired, I don't see why they'd be forced to pay out the rest of his contract in one lump sum on his dismissal. But maybe LFC needed his payments paid off straight away because if he was kept on it would count against FFP?

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:31 am  

Saddened! wrote:

As I suspected at the time, there is actually nothing wrong with the player at all. Newcastle have done their best to get McManaman banned and failed. At the game they said he was too distressed to be seen by the medical staff. Then he flew back to Newcastle (Something they wouldn't have let him do if he really had a serious injury) because he was in too much pain to have the injury assessed in Wigan. Today he's got too much swelling to have the injury assessed, but they are optimistic that he's not actually got a career ending knock. He'll probably play next weekend.

Exactly. Turns out he has a bit of bruising. I had that from celebrating the winner.

It's a badly timed challenge that I agree should probably see a ban but we all know the rules on how things work. Where was the media outrage at Rio kicking Torres or Rooney elbowing James McCarthy in the face totally off the ball a few seasons ago?

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:33 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

These type of reports are usually dealing with the figures of a year ago.

AFAIK Chelsea don't pay off their ex managers with a lump sum. They continue to pay them their monthly salary up until they get another job, but after that the payments stop. I'm not sure whether that would make any difference to LFC as Dalglish isn't likely to get another managerial job.

If LFC did pay Dalglish that lump sum, of course it should be included in his earnings.

The way it seems is that Dalglish is one of the highest paid managers in the world; he isn't - he isn't even paid.

If you're going to do a highest earners list, for me, it should only include a) their annual wage; and b) managers currently in employment.

Dalglish was clearly paid off a settlement fee/remainder of his contract. He doesn't earn £10m a year and he wasn't the highest paid manager in Britain when he was in employment. For me, it's misleading, and most gormless Mancs will read it as Liverpool paid him £10m a year, or Liverpool were paying more to him annually than any other club in Britain were paying their manager. It's simply not true.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:49 am  

Interesting article on the new parachute payments and mentioning that the Football League are considering introducing a salary cap. Given the state that a lot of clubs are in outside the top flight that would be long overdue for me. Can't see how a professional sport can operate without the same regards for costs and expenses that other businesses have to maintain. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013 ... e-payments

Interesting article on the new parachute payments and mentioning that the Football League are considering introducing a salary cap. Given the state that a lot of clubs are in outside the top flight that would be long overdue for me. Can't see how a professional sport can operate without the same regards for costs and expenses that other businesses have to maintain. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013 ... e-payments

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 12:31 pm  

Roddy B wrote:

The way it seems is that Dalglish is one of the highest paid managers in the world; he isn't - he isn't even paid.

If you're going to do a highest earners list, for me, it should only include a) their annual wage; and b) managers currently in employment.

Dalglish was clearly paid off a settlement fee/remainder of his contract. He doesn't earn £10m a year and he wasn't the highest paid manager in Britain when he was in employment. For me, it's misleading, and most gormless Mancs will read it as Liverpool paid him £10m a year, or Liverpool were paying more to him annually than any other club in Britain were paying their manager. It's simply not true.

When Forbes do their highest paid CEO's list there will be a few among the top who made most of their earnings through massive share options or selling off a huge stake they owned.

Dalglish managed to get a pay off of his contract when he was fired so he managed to take more money last season than managers who are higher rated.

If Mourinho somehow managers to walk away from Real with a pay off of his remaining contract, then walks in and starts earning fifteen million a year from CFC/PSG do you expect they are going to ignore the pay off? Of course not. They will include all the money he's earned from football that year. Having a contract paid up still results in money hitting the bank, so it should clearly be included in lists like these.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:28 pm  

Who cares whether he was the highest earner or not? He's no longer in charge and since the fortunes and image of LFC has improved. Even if he was paid off it was a worth every penny.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:25 pm  

Fresh Prince of Chesh-air wrote:

Who cares whether he was the highest earner or not? He's no longer in charge and since the fortunes and image of LFC has improved. Even if he was paid off it was a worth every penny.

You were 8th under Dalglish, won the FL Cup and were FA Cup finalists.

You're 7th at the moment under Brenton. Knocked out of the FA Cup by the mighty Oldham Athletic and knocked out of the League Cup at Anfield by Swansea City.

Your image has improved because Suarez hasn't been accused out of biting anyone or racially abusing anyone and people now just focus on his stupid diving and random kicking of people.

Massive, massive improvements.