So the official line is that Zola has been sacked for breach of contract. Apparently by voicing public criticism of Sullivan, he was in breach of a contract written by Duxbury; and that is plausible because we all know how, under the Grand Puppet Master, everybody sang from the same hymn sheet! How deliciously ironic it would be if Zola’s mate, Duxbury, has inadvertently provided the ammunition for Sullivan to fire at the Italian!
Sullivan and Gold have been very careful to publicly support Zola. Time and again, they have said that he has their support and that he would be West Ham’s manager for years to come. We all knew that it was bullshit but it is now a matter of public record, as are Zola’s statements that he did not want to be involved in transfer dealings. S&G will say that they took him at his word, so his criticism of the owners for not consulting him about the Dorans bid, and the possible sale of players, was unacceptable. Who knows, he may already have been warned after his “unhelpful” comments following Sullivan’s email after the Wolves debacle.
It looks as if the lawyers are in for another pay day. With any luck, given his track record, Duxbury will offer to represent his old mate Zola!
14 comments:
If Sullivan wins, we the fans win.
Ding Ding there goes the bell. Zola you are out!
Dont know bout you HF but Im finding the supposed media backlash to Zola's sacking quite ridiculous. Its almost as if they want our narrative to be that of a plucky underdog failure.
Almost hammalot? There's no almost about it.
I reiterate...so he wasn't dismissed for under-achieving or falling short of high expectations?!
I've been following the saga quite closely and must have missed where Zola publicly and directly criticised Gold and Sullivan?! Maybe you could enlighten me with some quotes?
Also, it was my understanding that GZ had expressed only that he preferred not to get involved in the financial side or contractual negotiations relating to individual transfers...but expected to be consulted and advise on players that he thought would benefit the club, as any manager would?!
...and I'm pretty sure employers 'dangling a noose' for any employee would be frowned upon at any employment tribunal, don't you HF?!
The 'criticism of the owners' angle is tenuous to say the least! GZ's dignified and controlled reactions to Sullivan's jibes were neither directed at Sullivan nor Gold personally. He was speaking for the players on the one hand and merely expressed his surprise at the lack of communication and support. DS's comments of the team being 'pathetic', coupled with 'we'll consider bids for any player apart from Parker' as well as his damning programme notes for the last game would have brought more extreme reactions from any other manager in the Premier League, but Zola held his dignity!
At the end of the day...they got rid...but I've a feeling the forfeit won't be cheap?! The LMA are intent on seeing to that.
they must've given him a hefty pay-off too as it seems from afar that he could successfully argue he was not in breach considering the unique circumstances he faced and attitude and stance of the new owners. Saying that, I'm happy he's off, let him learn his trade somewhere else, get Bilic or Hughes in and let's get building a team.
Sir Trev's just piped up and said it's a shame Gorgon was sacked. What do you make of his comments HF? I think Trev got a degree while he was playing for us, unlike Julian Dicks.
HF is a total no nothing pathetic racist moron who loves grassing people up to the authorities when people dare post anything rude like he does. BTW delighted the Conservatives are in power lets sort out these social scroungers like HF
I hope he takes us to the fucking cleaners!
Shaun, S&G are citing, as I understand it, Zola's public criticism of the Chairmen's decision to announce that the entire squad, with the exception of Parker, are available for transfer. As owners, it is their right to make these decisions and Zola, if he had concerns, should have expressed those directly and privately, not through the press. All contracts of employment include conditions about bringing the company into disrepute and identify grievance procedures. By going directly to the press, Zola was almost certainly in breach of his contract. The comments of Boa would have made Zola's situation worse. S&G will point to how Zola's comments opened the door for Boa to make his comments, comments that Boa has had to apologise for. If a manager sets the wrong example, is it surprising if his juniors follow that example? On Saturday night, the club had been brought into disrepute on national television as a player told the owner and chairman of the club to wind his neck in. Imagine what would happen if an air hostess working for Ryanair said the same about O'Leary! Imagine what would happen if that air hostess's manager had made the comments before her. Their feet wouldn't touch! You might not like S&G's tactics but they are hard nosed bastards and I suspect Zola allowed himself to be manoeuvered into making a serious mistake. Time will tell.
1337, Brooking got 11 O Levels. No A Levels and no degree as far as I know. Had he taken a degree, it would have been in how to be genial and avoid saying anything bad about anybody. Even if he thought Zola was a complete you know what, he would still say it was a shame. Did he call for Roeder's sacking? Nope. Did he make similarly supportive comments when Pardew was sacked? Yes. Brooking offering support to Zola says nothing.
1348, how am I racist? And what do you mean by "grassing people up"? Do you mean because I asked for Google's support in stopping you from posting obscene pornography on this site? Am I supposed to feel ashamed of that?
1723, what sort of supporter are you? Any money paid to Zola will be money not invested in the squad.
He does have a degree but you wouldn't find that on a wiki page.
I haven't been to a wiki page. He may well have an "Honoury degree" from a university seeking his financial support and a "name" to speak at awards evenings, but he certainly has not been to university. A levels? I don't think so. I have a real degree. And A Levels. And post graduate professional qualifications. Brooking hasn't even got a coaching badge!
I have all your qualifications and can even raise you one. The point is you were wrong and you can't get away from Trev's great managerial record, with or without a Maccy D's badge.
HF, Right...you've made your point about the owner's rights and contracts of employment with do's and don'ts and proper procedure etc. (believe me, I've been there!)
I'm not going to kick the arse out of this, but I have to disagree with you on the 'going to the press' thing. It is my understanding that Zola was taking questions in a manager's mandatory press conference with the usual journo's that he had become familiar with. Somebody reiterated Sullivan's comments to him about bids being considered for all players except Parker, and asked him what his thoughts were.
This is EXACTLY what he said.....
'If I was Mark Noble or Robert Green or Valon Behrami, I wouldn't be very pleased to hear that. It's not pleasant. You don't like it but this is the way it goes. I've been surprised so many times this year, so I am not surprised that I am surprised.'
What do you reckon? It's hardly a damning character assassination of the 2 D's now is it. Not direct. Non-personal.
If the onus is now on West Ham to show beyond doubt and prove that those comments constitute a breach of contract serious enough to warrant dismissal with immediate effect and no pay then they'll have their work cut out! The LMA's team will have a field day!
The absence of propriety is there for all to see, and has been from Day 1 when Sullivan's opening gambit in his FIRST press conference was, 'if I could swap the Birmingham team for the current West Ham team, I would'. DO WHAT MATE?!! Was that his idea of the way forward? His vision of the future? It's obvious now that GZ didn't figure in that vision isn't it?!!
I'm not disagreeing with you Shaun. The case against Zola is tenuous at best if that is ALL Zola said. But Sullivan and Gold are not as stupid as Duxbury, they won't pay legal fees for the sake of it. They must think they have a case.
HF... Yep, that's ALL he said! Fancy hurting our owners feelings with THAT heinous outburst...that doesn't make much sense in broken English anyway!
Let's face it...shipping him out was Sullivan's objective at the outset, whether Gold, or the players, or Zola's Mum liked it or not. We both know they have enough capital reserves between them to pay the likely forfeit that will ensue...after all, they paid Curbs out faster than you could say Mary Millington!!
By the way...that crucifixion image sucks too! I'm no bible-basher, but it's bloody awful mate!!
Post a Comment