Anyone sits behind the wheel and is over the limit is deserving of the Punishment they get. A passenger in my opinion who is aware that the driver is over the limit has not covered themselves in glory however it’s the person behind the wheel who is responsible except in the case where an adult has maybe has influence over younger people into driving or puts a gun to the drivers head in an extreme case. The one thing that pops into my head about Keogh is that perhaps he had idea to head to another pub and suggested the younger lads drive instead of getting taxis. As club captain he should have been the one talking sense to them and if encouraged it, then I can see the clubs stance in sacking him. That’s the only reason I could see that he would be one the main reasons for the mess. if I take an example of my own job, around Xmas I might get a chance to take the team out for a Christmas lunch and a few drinks. If it was my job to make sure everyone was ok and they got taxis home, and I then get into a car with one of the younger team members who is blind drunk instead of making sure they got a taxi, I’d have no problem with the company holding me to account instead of the younger folks if it ended in a mess. If it was left in Keoghs hands to make sure there was no messing and everyone got taxis, then you can see clubs stance, however I agree the sacking is more to do with his value to the club compared to the younger lads. It’s a bad look for Derby in my opinion however I think they can justify it.
There is a lot of surmising as to what their reasoning is or what the morality of it is, how long he has been there and been captain, previous good record etc. But there are plenty situations where a single action is deemed grounds for automatic dismissal. The club and Keogh have a contract, which they will say he has breached and they have grounds to dismiss. In that sense their reasons for invoking the clause is irrelevant, only whether the clause has been breached or not.
To be honest, I think we're seeing another example of the huge over importance people in football put in the captain's armband. It was a team bonding night where the club knew players would be drinking,that they put on transport shows this. Them claiming they expect an employee who was drinking to not just be responsible for his own actions but the actions of 20 other lads should be ridiculed not just because everybody knows why they really sacked him,but also because it places more blame on Keogh for the actions of his team mates than it does on the club who organised the night. I'm not blaming the club here by the way,they did pu on taxis I a big believer I people taking responsibility for their own actions which is why I think its shit that they're getting people on board with that line of shite,and if his team mates have anything about them they'll remind the public that they're responsible for their own actions,not Richard Keogh. But it was a more general question I asked because while there seems to be a lot of football fans that think Keogh deserves to be sacked (fair enough) a lot of the same people didn't want Firmino or Rooney sacked.
Would this be covered under employment law or is this more a self employed person who's contracted to a football club? Fair enough if they're treated as an external contractor for the purposes of law but I expect that they are not considering they would meet all of the laws that would apply in Ireland (assuming similar in UK) in relation to being an employee regardless of what their contract says (when they work, their right to work for someone else etc.). Assuming they are employees that would bring all of the companies internal procedures and policies into play when the court case comes round. Keogh's solicitors will rightly be pointing to the fact that their client was treated differently to the other employees who had actually committed far more serious offences. It will therefore be entirely on the club to prove that the matter was dealt with in line with their own policies and procedures and that a fair and consistent approach is followed with all employees regardless of their nationality, age etc. - Only my opinion but there's no way that they can say that they have been fair and transparent in how they have dealt with this and they will be certainly found to be in breach of their rights. What will be interesting is how the PFA go on this one, by backing Keogh they'll likely find themselves in a position where they'd have to point out that he's being treated different to the other two players but by publicly saying that are they potentially jeopradising two other players futures with the club.
I know you're a solicitor mate and my legal experience is having watched every episode of Suits,so you're obviously far more qualified to analyse this than me. But (and maybe stupidly) I honestly can't see how their reasoning is going to be irrelevant here. They're an employer,he's an employee and they're bound by labour laws like every other employer. Keogh will appeal and won't claim he hasn't breached the clause that got him sacked,but that he's being descriminated against because of his age and value compared to the two other lads who passed the grounds for dismissal threshold further than he did in the same incident. It seems very obvious to me he has a case,I've seen these cases be brought numerous times by colleagues who'd also signed contracts and breached a clause that gave the company grounds for termination. When this case is heard they'll have to explain their reasoning for sacking him and not the other two.
I do though wonder was Keogh ‘put in charge’ by someone higher up in the club to make sure things did not go off the rails at some stage during the night. Agreed that if he was just there in his capacity as a player however regardless of being captain, he had no specific role on the night, then it’s harsh to judge him to higher standards than the other younger lads! All in all, the man’s career is done and they are looking at getting out of paying him any more as he is worth nothing to him.
Yeah love the way the opposition players try so hard to stop him leaving??Authorities over there don't seem too bothered in trying to cut it out
Italian FA are a fuckin disgrace. I'll beat Digger to it and say that society in general....is a fuckin disgrace.
Anyone else wondering whats going on with keepers this season? I cant ever remember so many number 1's getting injured. Alisson, Ederson, Lloris, De Gea, Heaton, Henderson, Begovic have all missed games injured. A lot of them are calf injuries too - a result of keepers expected to be sweepers as well as mind the nets?
Bernardo silva gets 1 match ban for his tweet . Funny how the FA waited until after our game . Happy he’s out of the Chelsea game .
It's worked out much better for us to have him out for the Chelsea game now with us having beaten them so hopefully Chelsea can take 3 points off them now too, tough team to play against.
Timing of the ban I s very strange alright. Chelsea have played well recently against run of the mill teams. Since LFC defeat they have beaten Brighton, Newcastle and Palace at home, with Southampton, Burnley and Watford away. I reckon City will give them a pasting as they are at home.
Correct but I know who I think our biggest rival is and I'll be hoping the lead is still 8 points after the city-cheslea game
The timing of this is extraordinary. It has clearly been held back until after our match, the FA have obviously decided (with agreement from City) that they don't want to influence the title race directly. Making it up as you go along is not on, a decision should have been made weeks ago, as it happens it benefits us now as we beat them with him in the team and they face Chelsea without him.