http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25486597
Just come out and admit you want him to quit so you don't have to pay him off!
Just come out and admit you want him to quit so you don't have to pay him off!
Tan tells Mackay to resign or be sacked.
- Thread starter BaZ87
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 19,507
- Location
- LU7
If Mackay does resign, which he won't, he could probably sue for constructive dismissal and get compensation that way.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 19,507
- Location
- LU7
Tan's behaviour is surely pushing the odds in Mackay's favour.
Did anyone see MOTD 2 Extra this afternoon? The Daily Mail 'Journalist' guest in the studio referred to Tan as a 'crazy owner' I reckon that if Tan does have to pay out to get rid of Mackay then he can get some cash back from the newspaper for slanderous comments
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 1,917
- Location
- Manchester
Wow. He'll get another job, WBA I assume.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/wales/25526438
loool
How long before Vincent gets bored of 'Soccer' and sells his shares. No doubt well after the club has been ruined.
Will the fans actually stop paying to go to games though? Probably not because they're too stupid.
loool
How long before Vincent gets bored of 'Soccer' and sells his shares. No doubt well after the club has been ruined.
Will the fans actually stop paying to go to games though? Probably not because they're too stupid.
I think a court might view it as fair comment to be honestDid anyone see MOTD 2 Extra this afternoon? The Daily Mail 'Journalist' guest in the studio referred to Tan as a 'crazy owner' I reckon that if Tan does have to pay out to get rid of Mackay then he can get some cash back from the newspaper for slanderous comments
That'll be them down then.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 1,916
Well I think we all saw this coming imminently, it's just a surprise it didn't come after the Liverpool game.
For Mike Ashleys failings Newcastle seem pretty well setup to me.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
People are somewhat ignoring that Mackay got more backing than anyone.... and is doing very poorly. Liverpool, an easy game, of course not, but they were diabolical in defence in the first half. Southampton, again a hard game but pretty soft goals to concede.
AFAIK Cardiff spent around £50mil, are 1 point ahead of Palace who spent around 15mil and who have changed manager. They are 2 points behind Hull who spent around 10mil and are doing much better.
When you factor in Palace's form since the manager change, they are currently on course to finish miles and miles above Cardiff.
Cardiff are getting worse, have spent pretty much 5 times what Hull have and are doing worse, look a worse team and on top of that the manager was pushing for yet more spending.
Sorry but I can't really see an owner seeing how much he has backed the team and thinking further spending is a better option than a new manager. Can the results and improvement in performances at Palace, Fulham and Sunderland be completely ignored and should he decide to back Mackay further?
3 of the bottom 6 have fired their managers and they have all improved their form, either a little or dramatically. One has fired their manager so recently nothing has changed, West Ham are now sitting 2nd bottom and probably fairly close to firing their manager...... what makes it the case that Mackay is brilliant and undeserving of being fired?
What does the history of the league suggest, that every manager who gets a team promoted from the championship is automatically capable at prem league level, or have we seen time and time again managers that can win the championship but struggle very badly in the premier league?
People are acting like he's the best manager in the league and has had zero backing from the owner.
50mil suggests the exact opposite, and they aren't performing well at all. Other clubs who spent MUCH less, who fired not prem league quality managers and put in place guys who are capable at this level are doing much better..........
History, results and money all says the right decision is firing the manager, not backing a big spending manager who is failing to spend even more. Replacing the manager often works, backing a manager who isn't doing well after big spending, with further spending, has almost never worked.
AFAIK Cardiff spent around £50mil, are 1 point ahead of Palace who spent around 15mil and who have changed manager. They are 2 points behind Hull who spent around 10mil and are doing much better.
When you factor in Palace's form since the manager change, they are currently on course to finish miles and miles above Cardiff.
Cardiff are getting worse, have spent pretty much 5 times what Hull have and are doing worse, look a worse team and on top of that the manager was pushing for yet more spending.
Sorry but I can't really see an owner seeing how much he has backed the team and thinking further spending is a better option than a new manager. Can the results and improvement in performances at Palace, Fulham and Sunderland be completely ignored and should he decide to back Mackay further?
3 of the bottom 6 have fired their managers and they have all improved their form, either a little or dramatically. One has fired their manager so recently nothing has changed, West Ham are now sitting 2nd bottom and probably fairly close to firing their manager...... what makes it the case that Mackay is brilliant and undeserving of being fired?
What does the history of the league suggest, that every manager who gets a team promoted from the championship is automatically capable at prem league level, or have we seen time and time again managers that can win the championship but struggle very badly in the premier league?
People are acting like he's the best manager in the league and has had zero backing from the owner.
50mil suggests the exact opposite, and they aren't performing well at all. Other clubs who spent MUCH less, who fired not prem league quality managers and put in place guys who are capable at this level are doing much better..........
History, results and money all says the right decision is firing the manager, not backing a big spending manager who is failing to spend even more. Replacing the manager often works, backing a manager who isn't doing well after big spending, with further spending, has almost never worked.