Mons tribunal hearing?

[Greg N'Ash]

Still amounts to the same if he's claiming his pay for 12 months.

The club = you left so we owe you nothing.

him = I deserve a percentage/all of my contract because.....

[Chris Smith]

Still amounts to the same if he's claiming his pay for 12 months.

The club = you left so we owe you nothing.

him = I deserve a percentage/all of my contract because.....

Huge assumptions there, Greg, based on no evidence. That's not like you.

As Bren, says, he's no fool, so there must be enough of a case to take it this far and to keep the lawyers interested.

[Greg N'Ash]

Still amounts to the same if he's claiming his pay for 12 months.

The club = you left so we owe you nothing.

him = I deserve a percentage/all of my contract because.....

Huge assumptions there, Greg, based on no evidence. That's not like you.

As Bren, says, he's no fool, so there must be enough of a case to take it this far and to keep the lawyers interested.

They are assumptions but i think its about money, otherwise why bother? If the club and manager publicly say they've agreed to part ways then either party would have a problem claiming otherwise. It must be about his pay-off i would have thought.

[Chris Smith]

Still amounts to the same if he's claiming his pay for 12 months.

The club = you left so we owe you nothing.

him = I deserve a percentage/all of my contract because.....

Huge assumptions there, Greg, based on no evidence. That's not like you.

As Bren, says, he's no fool, so there must be enough of a case to take it this far and to keep the lawyers interested.

They are assumptions but i think its about money, otherwise why bother? If the club and manager publicly say they've agreed to part ways then either party would have a problem claiming otherwise. It must be about his pay-off i would have thought.

Of course it will be about money in some way but it will be based on the technicalities of contract law. That's why we're in no position to speculate beacuse, other than the headline of it being for a rolling 12 months, none of know what his contract stipulated.

[Greg N'Ash]

well yes but the contract was cancellled mutually apparently.

If you went into your boss and said i want to leave and your boss says fine, i'm quite happy to let you leave, then its very unlikely you'd then say "so how much are you gonna give me for my remaining 12 months? He'd tell you to f***k off frankly. So given that, MON must be claiming some reason why he's owed money or was unhappy with the circumstances of his departure

Of course RL may have said, yes you can leave but you can't join a premiership club for 12 months in which case i could understand his actions.

[Dave]

well yes but the contract was cancellled mutually apparently.

If you went into your boss and said i want to leave and your boss says fine, i'm quite happy to let you leave, then its very unlikely you'd then say "so how much are you gonna give me for my remaining 12 months? He'd tell you to f***k off frankly. So given that, MON must be claiming some reason why he's owed money or was unhappy with the circumstances of his departure

Of course RL may have said, yes you can leave but you can't join a premiership club for 12 months in which case i could understand his actions.

So you agree that none of us actually know anything, that there is clearly something that he feels he has a justifiable claim for (or he and his lawyers wouldn't be bothering) and the rest of it is just another excuse for you to wheel out the greatest hits package?

[damon loves JT]

If I were the Villa I would insist on O'Neill proving his case in a trial by ordeal.

Being stitched into a sack with an ape, a cock, a viper and Robert Hopkins, then thrown in the cut.

If he lives, we pay off his contract in full

[Dave]

Being stitched into a sack with an ape, a cock, a viper and Robert Hopkins, then thrown in the cut.

Nice use of tautology there.

[Greg N'Ash]

thats all i was saying from the start Dave. you don't seek to cancel your contract, have it cancelled and then chase the club for money unless you're unhappy with the circumstances of your departure

Or a Git.

[not3bad]

Or both

[Kevin Dawson]

If he was on a 12 month rolling contract, persumably it runs from the start of the season - so is he doing this for five days wages?

[Hookeysmith]

No we don't know this at all. In your little obsessed mind voices maybe be telling you this along with absolute knowledge that he wanted to buy Keane and McGeady.

Unfortunately the Keane and McGeady purchases were true and the fact they were refused is true also

[CJ]

If he was on a 12 month rolling contract, persumably it runs from the start of the season - so is he doing this for five days wages?

My understanding of his rolling 12 month contract is that at any point in time he has 12 months left on his contract, rather than running from the start of each season. I may be wrong though - can anyone confirm how his contract worked?

[Bosco81]

If he was on a 12 month rolling contract, persumably it runs from the start of the season - so is he doing this for five days wages?

My understanding of his rolling 12 month contract is that at any point in time he has 12 months left on his contract, rather than running from the start of each season. I may be wrong though - can anyone confirm how his contract worked?

That's my understanding, so if we sacked him we would pay him up a year's salary, presumably this case is based on MON expecting the money even though he jacked it in.

[Concrete John]

presumably this case is based on MON expecting the money even though he jacked it in.

Almost definately.  But the bigger question is 'why'?  I guess he either feels he was pushed/forced out (constructive dismissal) or it was more a mutual parting of ways than we've been lead to believe.  All this "He's a git/bastard/money grabber" is fine for rhetoric on a board like this, but he must have some sort of case for it to get this far.