The Paul Lambert thread - poll reset after our capitulation to Hull

[pauliewalnuts]

Maybe for the reasons mentioned, it was cheaper and/or quicker to pay him off rather than go through the full process. Ultimately we'll never know for sure.

That's my point though really: it did go through the full process, before a QC, and we ended up paying him something.  We don't know how much, or what for, but we paid him something and that can only mean some of what he claimed was found to be true.

It doesn't, though.

As Richard E said earlier in the thread, sometimes it is easier to just offer a payment to make the whole thing go away, we really can't draw any conclusions either way.

[dave.woodhall]

It's usually at around this stage of the debate that someone points out the high rate of successful tribunal claims.

[Richard E]

It's usually at around this stage of the debate that someone points out the high rate of successful tribunal claims.

Which could only be someone who hasn't read any stats on the subject!

[peter w]

It says it all about Lambert that the thought of getting O'Neill back in isn't nearly as repulsive as it should be.

[Legion]

Yes it is.

[brian green]

Not having Lambert as our manager is a matter of football judgement.   Not having Martin O'Neill as our manager is a matter of principle.   In my opinion Lambert is a brainless blockhead, no more no less. In my opinion Martin O'Neill committed an act of premeditated spite against the club.   No comparison between the two.

[hilts_coolerking]

It doesn't, though.

As Richard E said earlier in the thread, sometimes it is easier to just offer a payment to make the whole thing go away, we really can't draw any conclusions either way.

Yes it does.  If we were willing to pay we could have done that at the start or during mediation.  Makes no sense to go all the way to tribunal and then pay.

Besides, if an employee lodges a formal complaint about his former employer, it goes through mediation and then to a tribunal and the employee then gets compensation my first thought is not, 'None of his complaints were upheld'.  That's counter-intuitive to say the least.

I know we'd all like to think the club had no case to answer but such indications as we have don't point that way at all.

[Mister E]

...  In my opinion Lambert is a brainless blockhead, no more no less. In my opinion Martin O'Neill committed an act of premeditated spite against the club...

Mine too.

[dave.woodhall]

It's usually at around this stage of the debate that someone points out the high rate of successful tribunal claims.

Which could only be someone who hasn't read any stats on the subject!

Lizz...Lizz...

[olaftab]

Looks at though Pearson has been sacked.

[Richard E]

About 12% of ET Claims succeed at trial, although that is a bit misleading as it does not take into account the ones that were nailed on to succeed but were settled by the Employer.

[walsall villain]

Looks at though Pearson has been sacked.

I reckon if you are going to ditch it's now or never. Much as I want a change at Villa I can't see much point if, say, there is only 10 games left.
Hopefully Leicester are one who have gone, just need QPR and Burnley to be worse than us too.

[PeterWithesShin]

I said in the other thread, I reckon it is as much for his behavior as it is for results.

[pauliewalnuts]

That stuff with Pearson yesterday was just weird.

He honestly looked (in the interview after) like he was having some sort of a breakdown.

[brian green]

I would venture to guess that mental breakdown is an ever present danger in present day football.   I always thought that Fergie would go off his trolley but the colour of his complexion and his eyeballs seems to indicate he found an effective anaesthesia,