| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:00 - Jul 29 with 1931 views | KensalT |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 08:01 - Jul 29 by Beans |
JD did you miss the article in the Sun as well? That was a public statement from Cifuentes via a proxy
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/34606998/qpr-manager-marti-cifuentes-quit/
Had Cifuentes resigned before preseason it would have impacted the compensation and so the clubs took the steps to protect what was owed. I remain happy to follow the reporting from WLS on this as opposed to Kensal T’s
My original point stands, Cifuentes was not an innocent victim who would still be here had we not “sacked him”. He’s at Leicester now. So framing it like “You sack a popular manager doing his job, and the expectation that places on you is you’ve got to improve and get better” is just wrong.
Cifuentes was always leaving and we’ve got the best manager of the bunch available to us and our budget so it’s important to move on and support the team in the way we did last year
How any of that is controversial and enough to be told to fck off and various names, it seems Schopenhauer and Nietzsche writing about The Herd fit well here |
"I remain happy to follow the reporting from WLS on this as opposed to Kensal T’s"
I'm not a reporter.
You made an ill-informed statement. I corrected it and explained to you what the law is.
If you think refusing to acknowledge that makes me wrong then I guess that's up to you.
But if you were capable of thinking it through you would realise that what I said is entirely consistent with what WLS has reported.
The detour into quoting philosophers at the end was a telling giveaway.
Very on-brand with stainrods_elbow.
I've already muted stainrods_elbow and will be adding Beans to that list.
It would be very public spirited of you to provide a list of all your aliases so I could mute them all at once.
That way I will be spared any more of your ill-informed, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual posturing. |  | |  |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:23 - Jul 29 with 1835 views | A40Bosh |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 08:01 - Jul 29 by Beans |
JD did you miss the article in the Sun as well? That was a public statement from Cifuentes via a proxy
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/34606998/qpr-manager-marti-cifuentes-quit/
Had Cifuentes resigned before preseason it would have impacted the compensation and so the clubs took the steps to protect what was owed. I remain happy to follow the reporting from WLS on this as opposed to Kensal T’s
My original point stands, Cifuentes was not an innocent victim who would still be here had we not “sacked him”. He’s at Leicester now. So framing it like “You sack a popular manager doing his job, and the expectation that places on you is you’ve got to improve and get better” is just wrong.
Cifuentes was always leaving and we’ve got the best manager of the bunch available to us and our budget so it’s important to move on and support the team in the way we did last year
How any of that is controversial and enough to be told to fck off and various names, it seems Schopenhauer and Nietzsche writing about The Herd fit well here |
Genuine thoughts on this Marti wants to quit narrative .
Dave Mc and Ian McCullough are both WLS journos.
One tries and puts the club in a bad light by saying that poor Marti is thinking of resigning because of big bad C(hild)EO and gets it as far as the Sun. Albeit no direct quotes from Marti just journo supposeded ITK. So the question is why does Marti even need to do that. He can sit tight and see the season out knowing his stock is reasonable for other clubs. Agents can do the bad mouthing of QPR to potential suitors so Marti does not need to.
So WLS support Marti and dirty their bin and access to the club management.
However…
Last week Dave Mc then gets access to said CEO for lengthy interview.
This doesn’t sit well with me. The club could just as easily be feeding the Marti is thinking of quitting line if they needed a narrative out there ahead of wanting to get rid of him and use Ian as that mouthpiece. I’m not saying they did - I’m just saying you can switch the narrative.
The truth of the matter is that the truth does not ultimately matter because each party has their truth and hence the compromise is the parting of ways with an NDA which will again become evident tonight if the word ‘Marti’ gets raised by anyone from the floor. It would not surprise me if Paul Morrissey even makes an announcement to the room before the broadcast starts to say that no questions will be answered on the former manager so don’t even bother.
I have not even read the review article myself but from the contentious paragraph extract which had been regurgitated on here, I think it is disingenuous of Beans to attack a statement which merely reflects the temperature of some of the fan base who travelled.
I know everyone hates a fence sitter but I can only pass judgement on facts and in the case of Marti Cifuentes exit there are none available to me.
We won’t know if Marti was a ‘1980s Russian Bride’ from day one - desperate to get to England but very quickly wants to move on to a richer man or whether the club said this and promised that but once he was through the door he realised he had been sold a pup and had an uphill task ahead of him that turned out to be much harder than he thought and the CEO was a demanding boss wanting better results and a disagreement therein ensued on hitting targets.
In three months time if Julian’s QPR are in the bottom three then around the table of the various QPR pubs moaning and arguing and debating and offering of opinions will be given - I suspect without too many punches thrown or pints thrown into someone’s face or offers to go outside.
On social media there is very little debate for some, just shouting down of others viewpoints and insults - which is ridiculous because the arguments are purely based on people not actually knowing what the fxuk is actually going on inside our club. |  |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:58 - Jul 29 with 1746 views | eastside_r |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:00 - Jul 29 by KensalT |
"I remain happy to follow the reporting from WLS on this as opposed to Kensal T’s"
I'm not a reporter.
You made an ill-informed statement. I corrected it and explained to you what the law is.
If you think refusing to acknowledge that makes me wrong then I guess that's up to you.
But if you were capable of thinking it through you would realise that what I said is entirely consistent with what WLS has reported.
The detour into quoting philosophers at the end was a telling giveaway.
Very on-brand with stainrods_elbow.
I've already muted stainrods_elbow and will be adding Beans to that list.
It would be very public spirited of you to provide a list of all your aliases so I could mute them all at once.
That way I will be spared any more of your ill-informed, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual posturing. |
Ha ha KT. I think you might be right about this poster.
I had them down as a club proxy or even CN himself. But the sanctimony and the pseudo-intellectualism perhaps gave him away. I too have had that troll on Ignore for ages and Beans can go the same way.
Annoyed that he got under my skin but pleased what I told him to do.  |  | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 11:42 - Jul 29 with 1647 views | simmo |
Just stop interacting with these weapons. It detracts from what is otherwise a really enjoyable piece and the latest in the away day series, which are great. |  |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 12:07 - Jul 29 with 1591 views | daveB |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 11:42 - Jul 29 by simmo |
Just stop interacting with these weapons. It detracts from what is otherwise a really enjoyable piece and the latest in the away day series, which are great. |
On another day I'be replying to this beans/Charlie character but it's all so transparent the agenda now and pretty pointless getting invovled.
Seems a mad turn of events from beans to go into one over this article which was quite amusing and made me regret not making the trip. |  | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 12:46 - Jul 29 with 1539 views | BristolR |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:58 - Jul 29 by eastside_r |
Ha ha KT. I think you might be right about this poster.
I had them down as a club proxy or even CN himself. But the sanctimony and the pseudo-intellectualism perhaps gave him away. I too have had that troll on Ignore for ages and Beans can go the same way.
Annoyed that he got under my skin but pleased what I told him to do. |
You never seem to see the Elbow and Heinz in the same room at the same time that’s for sure. |  | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 12:50 - Jul 29 with 1520 views | derbyhoop |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 11:42 - Jul 29 by simmo |
Just stop interacting with these weapons. It detracts from what is otherwise a really enjoyable piece and the latest in the away day series, which are great. |
How was the duck? |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 12:57 - Jul 29 with 1485 views | simmo |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 12:50 - Jul 29 by derbyhoop |
How was the duck? |
Completely unnecessary and absolutely delicious. The mere ordering of it should have alerted the NHS cardio department.
I think about it daily. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 13:07 - Jul 29 with 1455 views | TheChef |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 09:42 - Jul 29 by JamieNaz |
Lovely article.
Awaydays is my favourite feature.
I wish I had been able to go.
Beans can get in the sea. Fanbase getting fractured again through weird little groups popping up peddling an odd party line and accusations of being disloyal and not sticking together.
Odd people.
Nourry is 27. I also thought I knew a lot when I was 27. |
I think he's now 28 - but clearly much more mature. |  |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 13:09 - Jul 29 with 1451 views | aston_hoop |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 13:07 - Jul 29 by TheChef |
I think he's now 28 - but clearly much more mature. |
Phew, avoided the 27 club.
Great write up Clive, many laughs to be had. Regretting my blocking amnesty this summer though, that is being restored. |  |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:01 - Jul 29 with 1378 views | R_from_afar |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 07:56 - Jul 28 by derbyhoop |
Now, as a French resident, I found myself spitting out my coffee over the descriptions of French cuisine. I don't think any of the UK food magazines will be calling you to review their chosen restaurants, if you're going to be flippant.
And, needless to say, there are rules as to which nouns are masculine and which feminine. But, of course, there are exceptions. Only in France  |
"And, needless to say, there are rules as to which nouns are masculine and which feminine."
A great piece, both entertaining and insightful, but on the subject of foreign languages and grammar, Italian - which I am steadily teaching myself, I might become fluent if I live to be 149 - really takes the biscuit:
Egg is masculine when in the singular - uovo - and - gasp - feminine in the plural, uova. Mad!  |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:06 - Jul 29 with 1348 views | TheChef |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:01 - Jul 29 by R_from_afar |
"And, needless to say, there are rules as to which nouns are masculine and which feminine."
A great piece, both entertaining and insightful, but on the subject of foreign languages and grammar, Italian - which I am steadily teaching myself, I might become fluent if I live to be 149 - really takes the biscuit:
Egg is masculine when in the singular - uovo - and - gasp - feminine in the plural, uova. Mad! |
See also fingers.
Il dito (masculine singular)
Le dita (feminine plural!) | |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:17 - Jul 29 with 1291 views | ericgen34 |
Fantastic read. Thank you very much! It was indeed a great day and very nice to meet of few of you on here!
Down here we're on the Mediterranean diet, much healthier, and also much better wines :) |  | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:20 - Jul 29 with 1274 views | bullshootr |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:06 - Jul 29 by TheChef |
See also fingers.
Il dito (masculine singular)
Le dita (feminine plural!) |
Does that mean Dita von Teese is Italian for hand job?
I'll get my coat (and a box of tissues) | | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 15:42 - Jul 29 with 1174 views | kensalriser |
How do we find this parallel universe in which there's a LfW where everyone agrees with each other group think style?
Genuinely excited by this amazing discovery. Has anyone told Professor Brian Cox? |  |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 16:47 - Jul 29 with 1073 views | slmrstid |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 15:42 - Jul 29 by kensalriser |
How do we find this parallel universe in which there's a LfW where everyone agrees with each other group think style?
Genuinely excited by this amazing discovery. Has anyone told Professor Brian Cox? |
He's a flat-earther in that universe. |  | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 16:47 - Jul 29 with 1066 views | BristolR |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 15:42 - Jul 29 by kensalriser |
How do we find this parallel universe in which there's a LfW where everyone agrees with each other group think style?
Genuinely excited by this amazing discovery. Has anyone told Professor Brian Cox? |
You have to take a turn just before the Beans nebulous | | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 16:50 - Jul 29 with 1055 views | TK1 |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:23 - Jul 29 by A40Bosh |
Genuine thoughts on this Marti wants to quit narrative .
Dave Mc and Ian McCullough are both WLS journos.
One tries and puts the club in a bad light by saying that poor Marti is thinking of resigning because of big bad C(hild)EO and gets it as far as the Sun. Albeit no direct quotes from Marti just journo supposeded ITK. So the question is why does Marti even need to do that. He can sit tight and see the season out knowing his stock is reasonable for other clubs. Agents can do the bad mouthing of QPR to potential suitors so Marti does not need to.
So WLS support Marti and dirty their bin and access to the club management.
However…
Last week Dave Mc then gets access to said CEO for lengthy interview.
This doesn’t sit well with me. The club could just as easily be feeding the Marti is thinking of quitting line if they needed a narrative out there ahead of wanting to get rid of him and use Ian as that mouthpiece. I’m not saying they did - I’m just saying you can switch the narrative.
The truth of the matter is that the truth does not ultimately matter because each party has their truth and hence the compromise is the parting of ways with an NDA which will again become evident tonight if the word ‘Marti’ gets raised by anyone from the floor. It would not surprise me if Paul Morrissey even makes an announcement to the room before the broadcast starts to say that no questions will be answered on the former manager so don’t even bother.
I have not even read the review article myself but from the contentious paragraph extract which had been regurgitated on here, I think it is disingenuous of Beans to attack a statement which merely reflects the temperature of some of the fan base who travelled.
I know everyone hates a fence sitter but I can only pass judgement on facts and in the case of Marti Cifuentes exit there are none available to me.
We won’t know if Marti was a ‘1980s Russian Bride’ from day one - desperate to get to England but very quickly wants to move on to a richer man or whether the club said this and promised that but once he was through the door he realised he had been sold a pup and had an uphill task ahead of him that turned out to be much harder than he thought and the CEO was a demanding boss wanting better results and a disagreement therein ensued on hitting targets.
In three months time if Julian’s QPR are in the bottom three then around the table of the various QPR pubs moaning and arguing and debating and offering of opinions will be given - I suspect without too many punches thrown or pints thrown into someone’s face or offers to go outside.
On social media there is very little debate for some, just shouting down of others viewpoints and insults - which is ridiculous because the arguments are purely based on people not actually knowing what the fxuk is actually going on inside our club. |
The link between Dave Mc and Ian Mc is not relevant: it's Dave's site and Ian hasn't contributed to West London Sport since August 2024. Ian's a freelancer who six months after last contributing to WLS got a good story in The Sun about the QPR manager, sourced no doubt from both sides, as any freelancer would.
There's no connection to WLS there and David McIntyre is not someone who "supports" anyone connected to the club (or otherwise). It's just reporting. The "bin dirtying" (new expression for me) is provided, as far as I can tell, by anonymous voices on behalf of the club on social media and here. | | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 21:16 - Jul 29 with 870 views | R_from_afar |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 14:13 - Jul 28 by Beans |
When you say, “Social media has drunk the Kool-Aid, Cifuentes is a snake who was never that good in the first place, but that’s not the prevailing attitude among the travellers I’ve interacted with this summer. You sack a popular manager doing his job, and the expectation that places on you is you’ve got to improve and get better. Among the home and awayers there’s a deal of arm folding and “go on then”, whereas before there was understanding about budgetary restrictions”
That really irritates me and IIfind it so bizarre that you push a narrative that Cifuentes was an innocent party who was forced out of the club and sacked because surely you know that isn’t true. As you know that what the club did was take steps to protect their rights to compensation and they succeeded in that and got £500,000 plus what ever we got for Xavi Calm on top.
Did you not see the story in the Sun where Cifuentes suggested he may quit? Did you not see WLS reporting that the clubs steps were taken to protect our rights to compensation which they were successful in? Do you really believe WLS are wrong in their reporting and that Cifuentes wasn’t looking to drive down or get rid of entirely the compensation fee we would be owed this summer with a list of jobs for him to pitch himself, Norwich, West Brom and then Leicester. Because if not, why present it here as “You sack a popular manager doing his job”?
You say the difference is between social media and the home and awayers. But what you’ve left out there is it’s largely also a difference between those that go on this message board and those that don’t. It’s a common trope for people to complain that papers like the Daily Mail feed Boomers bad opinions and ultimately you are doing exactly the same thing here. As someone reading an article of yours like this one here might have the opinion that Cifuentes was an innocent party who was forced out by Nourry and not someone acting in his own best interests and maximising his chances of moving to a bigger club with a bigger budget.
For you to persistently spin Cifuentes leaving as a one sided story “sacking a popular manager doing his job” and leave out the other side to tee up a section of the fan base to be itching to jump on the team if it doesn’t get better than it was (which was 2 wins in Cifuentes last 12) well I think it’s just pretty awful really. We saw last season culminating in the Stoke how important it is for the fan base to stick with the team.
The reason all this irritates me is because it can ultimately cost the club and it is based on a false premise that Cifuentes is an innocent party who would otherwise still be here if we hadn’t put him in the garden.
We are the club with what Nourry said on the WLS podcast last week the third smallest wage bill. And you have said yourself the league table is largely a reflection of wage bill. So if a section of the fan base are waiting for things to go wrong (as we know for some run of games this season they will) so they can pill on and turn things toxic and potentially contribute to instability that costs us points this season. That could send us down as with the third smallest wage bill we can’t afford as a fan base to needlessly contribute to instability. We can be looking backwards at a manager based on a false narrative and who anyway is now at a parachute payment club.
We need to stick together. We are one of the smallest budgets this season. We are unfancied. The league one clubs are coming up even and spending fortunes. We need to back the team and not be looking to cry off about Cifuentes when we lose a couple of games. Please stop pushing this false narrative. Cifuentes is gone and he was never going to be here for this season. Let’s back the team. We’ve got a job on our hands and let’s not needlessly destabilise things |
"We’ve got a job on our hands and let’s not needlessly destabilise things".
Look, I'm totally behind Stephan, we are where we are and all that, but after what happened to Cifuentes, a manager who was broadly popular and quite successful given the resources at his disposal, the irony of that statement is sufficiently massive to be seen from space. | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 06:36 - Jul 30 with 669 views | PlanetHonneywood |
MC was free to resign - as would have been his right - because, as I've said before, to prevent him from doing so would be tantamount to forced labour.
Now, let's say MC had two years left on his contract. LCFC approach QPR for his services, then they either pay the release clause in full or, QPR could negotiate.
Now, if as Beans says, we'd get nothing if MC had walked before taking the LCFC job, it ignores two possible causes of action: Firstly, I believe QPR remain entitled to payment of the release clause for the remainder of the period that MC was contracted to work for QPR, but for his resignation. Or, secondly, if he resigned and suddenly rocked up at LCFC a few days later and LCFC say, 'But he'd resigned so we don't need to pay his release clause', this would look fishy and QPR could, I believe, pursue an action against LCFC for inducing a breach of contract.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but despite the Spaniad resigning as BHA's manager job only to take over at Marseille a short while later, the French still had to pay BHA. Thus, in my view, this would have applied if MC/LCFC had done likewise.
Somebody wrote about a restraint clause above. That wouldn't be in MC's contract or any other manager's for that matter. It's used more in the business/technical work sectors where necessary to legitimately protect employers when senior staff leave from either taking clients, using trade secrets, etc., or competing with their former employer from a position of knowing how the former employer trades/deals.
As will likely be the case, MC will be LCFC's manager when we play them. He's taken XC with him (maybe others) and he'll apply what he knows of QPR to beat us. If this were not the case with football managers, then there would be countless matches where managers wouldn't be in the dugout against former clubs and no one would go to manage a club where a clause of this nature would fetter their future prospects.
Oh, and a lot of French food and restos, are vastly overrated in my experience! |  |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 09:06 - Jul 30 with 536 views | KensalT |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 06:36 - Jul 30 by PlanetHonneywood |
MC was free to resign - as would have been his right - because, as I've said before, to prevent him from doing so would be tantamount to forced labour.
Now, let's say MC had two years left on his contract. LCFC approach QPR for his services, then they either pay the release clause in full or, QPR could negotiate.
Now, if as Beans says, we'd get nothing if MC had walked before taking the LCFC job, it ignores two possible causes of action: Firstly, I believe QPR remain entitled to payment of the release clause for the remainder of the period that MC was contracted to work for QPR, but for his resignation. Or, secondly, if he resigned and suddenly rocked up at LCFC a few days later and LCFC say, 'But he'd resigned so we don't need to pay his release clause', this would look fishy and QPR could, I believe, pursue an action against LCFC for inducing a breach of contract.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but despite the Spaniad resigning as BHA's manager job only to take over at Marseille a short while later, the French still had to pay BHA. Thus, in my view, this would have applied if MC/LCFC had done likewise.
Somebody wrote about a restraint clause above. That wouldn't be in MC's contract or any other manager's for that matter. It's used more in the business/technical work sectors where necessary to legitimately protect employers when senior staff leave from either taking clients, using trade secrets, etc., or competing with their former employer from a position of knowing how the former employer trades/deals.
As will likely be the case, MC will be LCFC's manager when we play them. He's taken XC with him (maybe others) and he'll apply what he knows of QPR to beat us. If this were not the case with football managers, then there would be countless matches where managers wouldn't be in the dugout against former clubs and no one would go to manage a club where a clause of this nature would fetter their future prospects.
Oh, and a lot of French food and restos, are vastly overrated in my experience! |
Sorry mate, but you're wrong.
Restraint of trade clauses are used in sport:
https://littletonchambers.com/what-constitutes-restraint-of-trade-in-football-pl
Post-termination restrictions are more
common in manager contracts. Clubs understandably want to prevent
ex-managers poaching ex-players and coaching staff for their new clubs.
Whilst those restrictions are arguably legitimate to ensure contractual
stability and avoid short-term, player/coaching staff departures, any
such restriction must be “proportionate” in duration, usually
of no more than 12-months (i.e. 2 transfer windows). In the author’s
view that would be a reasonable period to allow clubs to find
replacement staff or tie down existing staff to new deals.
An alternative way for clubs to protect
themselves is for the manager contract to include an express notice
period clause coupled with garden leave. As such the manager is given
notice and placed in the “garden” on full pay, so that the
contract does not end but, of course, the manager cannot join a
competitor club during his notice without being in breach of contract,
an eventuality which will usually be accounted for by way of a
considerable contractual liquidated damages clause payable by the
manager (and/or his new club) to the former club. As for a
post-termination restriction, the length of the notice/gardening leave
provision is key to enforceability. For the same reasons set out for
post-termination restrictions, 12-months would seem to the very top-end
of reasonableness. | | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 10:15 - Jul 30 with 451 views | sdm1508 |
I do wonder if we are going to have our Usual Suspects moment where we discover that Beans and Stainrods Elbow post from the same IP address. 
The total lack of self-awareness, the high and mighty, always right attitude, it's fine to have an opinion as long as it matches mine, tone of the writing is uncanny | | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 19:42 - Jul 30 with 256 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 09:06 - Jul 30 by KensalT |
Sorry mate, but you're wrong.
Restraint of trade clauses are used in sport:
https://littletonchambers.com/what-constitutes-restraint-of-trade-in-football-pl
Post-termination restrictions are more
common in manager contracts. Clubs understandably want to prevent
ex-managers poaching ex-players and coaching staff for their new clubs.
Whilst those restrictions are arguably legitimate to ensure contractual
stability and avoid short-term, player/coaching staff departures, any
such restriction must be “proportionate” in duration, usually
of no more than 12-months (i.e. 2 transfer windows). In the author’s
view that would be a reasonable period to allow clubs to find
replacement staff or tie down existing staff to new deals.
An alternative way for clubs to protect
themselves is for the manager contract to include an express notice
period clause coupled with garden leave. As such the manager is given
notice and placed in the “garden” on full pay, so that the
contract does not end but, of course, the manager cannot join a
competitor club during his notice without being in breach of contract,
an eventuality which will usually be accounted for by way of a
considerable contractual liquidated damages clause payable by the
manager (and/or his new club) to the former club. As for a
post-termination restriction, the length of the notice/gardening leave
provision is key to enforceability. For the same reasons set out for
post-termination restrictions, 12-months would seem to the very top-end
of reasonableness. |
Well, as I was specifically referring to this para in your original post, "...It's called a restraint of trade clause...It allows an employer to prevent an employee joining a direct competitor after their employment ends...", I beg to differ.
I read your comment as you saying, club A can say to manager B, after you leave, you can't manage a club we deem a competitor. That would amount to such a fetter, that no one would sign it; before we consider if it's proportionate and fair. Also, at the time of signing, you don't know who'll be a competitor when you leave and that might also sever the clause.
Not sure how else I can read it to be fair and I'm sure you can correct me: but has a club ever sought to prevent a manager take a new role because they don't like the new club? But when we play LCFC, MC will be using all he knows about QPR to beat ys.
I do agree, there might be a clause preventing him from poaching - but that won't stop an agent from approaching the old manager's new club!
In relation to the action QPR took in placing MC on garden leave, I recall saying at the time, it's only legal if there's such a clause in MC's contract. However, the issue is if he were employed and someone wanted him, then QPR could insist on the full amount of the release clause. Whereas once he is on garden leave and someone wants him, the potency of the release clause dilutes with each passing day. | |
| |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 20:19 - Jul 30 with 222 views | KensalT |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 19:42 - Jul 30 by PlanetHonneywood |
Well, as I was specifically referring to this para in your original post, "...It's called a restraint of trade clause...It allows an employer to prevent an employee joining a direct competitor after their employment ends...", I beg to differ.
I read your comment as you saying, club A can say to manager B, after you leave, you can't manage a club we deem a competitor. That would amount to such a fetter, that no one would sign it; before we consider if it's proportionate and fair. Also, at the time of signing, you don't know who'll be a competitor when you leave and that might also sever the clause.
Not sure how else I can read it to be fair and I'm sure you can correct me: but has a club ever sought to prevent a manager take a new role because they don't like the new club? But when we play LCFC, MC will be using all he knows about QPR to beat ys.
I do agree, there might be a clause preventing him from poaching - but that won't stop an agent from approaching the old manager's new club!
In relation to the action QPR took in placing MC on garden leave, I recall saying at the time, it's only legal if there's such a clause in MC's contract. However, the issue is if he were employed and someone wanted him, then QPR could insist on the full amount of the release clause. Whereas once he is on garden leave and someone wants him, the potency of the release clause dilutes with each passing day. |
Maybe I'm not expressing it very well but it is essentially the case that clubs can block a former manager from working for a direct competitor. Not forever, but certainly for a period up to 12 months.
(Leicester were still in the PL when Marti was put on gardening leave but I think it was obvious by then where they were heading)
It's not the sort of thing that tends to get publicised so it's difficult to think of a direct example.
But think of how many PL managers in recent years have been sacked early in the season, get linked by the bookies to every job going and yet sit out the whole season before trying to get back in the game next summer.
I can't prove it but I would guess some form of restriction on their subsequent employment had a bearing on the matter.
In truth courts don't like restraint of trade and the LMA can afford the best lawyers so it probably doesn't get exercised too often.
FWIW - think about the Marti example.
All the reports suggest we got £500k compensation for him to join Leicester.
To my mind that seems a little light.
Reports suggest we first tried to recruit Marti in 2022 but couldn't afford whatever Hammarby were insisting on.
We subsequently appointed Mick Beale. He jumped ship and the reports I read suggest we got £1m from Rangers.
It seems to me very unlikely that when we did eventually recruit Marti his buyout clause would have been less than the £1m we demanded for Beale. Especially since we had to pay Hammarby to get him in. OK, he was almost at the end of his contract in Sweden but I'm sure we still had to pay something for him.
I don't know what the exact circumstances around Marti going on gardening leave were. But if all he had to do was sit tight and run down his notice period then he could have left at the end of his contract as a free agent.
The fact that we still got some compensation suggests to me that we must have had further leverage, and a restraint of trade clause is the most plausible explanation.
So with reference to your final paragraph I don't think we did get full value for Marti's release clause:
"In relation to the action QPR took in placing MC on garden leave, I recall saying at the time, it's only legal if there's such a clause in MC's contract. However, the issue is if he were employed and someone wanted him, then QPR could insist on the full amount of the release clause. Whereas once he is on garden leave and someone wants him, the potency of the release clause dilutes with each passing day." [Post edited 30 Jul 20:24]
| | | |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 20:53 - Jul 30 with 169 views | A40Bosh |
| Pre-season and Perpignan – Awaydays on 20:19 - Jul 30 by KensalT |
Maybe I'm not expressing it very well but it is essentially the case that clubs can block a former manager from working for a direct competitor. Not forever, but certainly for a period up to 12 months.
(Leicester were still in the PL when Marti was put on gardening leave but I think it was obvious by then where they were heading)
It's not the sort of thing that tends to get publicised so it's difficult to think of a direct example.
But think of how many PL managers in recent years have been sacked early in the season, get linked by the bookies to every job going and yet sit out the whole season before trying to get back in the game next summer.
I can't prove it but I would guess some form of restriction on their subsequent employment had a bearing on the matter.
In truth courts don't like restraint of trade and the LMA can afford the best lawyers so it probably doesn't get exercised too often.
FWIW - think about the Marti example.
All the reports suggest we got £500k compensation for him to join Leicester.
To my mind that seems a little light.
Reports suggest we first tried to recruit Marti in 2022 but couldn't afford whatever Hammarby were insisting on.
We subsequently appointed Mick Beale. He jumped ship and the reports I read suggest we got £1m from Rangers.
It seems to me very unlikely that when we did eventually recruit Marti his buyout clause would have been less than the £1m we demanded for Beale. Especially since we had to pay Hammarby to get him in. OK, he was almost at the end of his contract in Sweden but I'm sure we still had to pay something for him.
I don't know what the exact circumstances around Marti going on gardening leave were. But if all he had to do was sit tight and run down his notice period then he could have left at the end of his contract as a free agent.
The fact that we still got some compensation suggests to me that we must have had further leverage, and a restraint of trade clause is the most plausible explanation.
So with reference to your final paragraph I don't think we did get full value for Marti's release clause:
"In relation to the action QPR took in placing MC on garden leave, I recall saying at the time, it's only legal if there's such a clause in MC's contract. However, the issue is if he were employed and someone wanted him, then QPR could insist on the full amount of the release clause. Whereas once he is on garden leave and someone wants him, the potency of the release clause dilutes with each passing day." [Post edited 30 Jul 20:24]
|
Kensal, I think that there is most likely a middle ground between what you are Jon are saying.
I would be very surprised that in the top four leagues of the English game and probably elsewhere that the agents and solicitors involved in contracts for managers would allow a restraint of trade clause to be embedded in a manager’s contract - probably more so now than ever before because a manager is more likely to be sacked these days rather than move on - especially the premier league. I suspect that there is wording in the contract that covers the event that a manager initiates the termination of their own contract to move elsewhere that ensures that any move to an alternate employer results in compensation for the club in the same way most managers probably are not just “sacked” with one weeks notice and have a large percentage of their outstanding contract paid off over a period of time.
Which, I suspect, is exactly why there is an information embargo on Senor Cifuentes exit from the club. It is clear we got money from Leicester /Marti but it has been known for a number of months that Leicester City would be a direct competitor (to the extent that we will both be in the same league) this season.
Your other point about managers disappearing for a period before being reappointed I put down more to the fact that the kind of money they are on allows them to just lick their wounds, go home and spend time with the family and annoy the Mrs for a couple of months and then decide to get off their arse and start looking for a new job. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
