The Chelsea Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ramires
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 35K
  • Views Views 3M
I'm curious what's the logic behind Platini's and others thinking when they say technology will ruin football. How many stupid decisions could be avoided, if referees could have access to replays during the game? Just put those extra 2 in front of a TV, and confirm a penalty/foul/handball to the one on the pitch, or if he missed something, let him know.
There would probably be a lot of yellow/red cards for a while, but on the long run, I think players would start focusing again on the game, and not on getting opponents sent off, or winning penalties.
 
I have a real problem with Keane on Haaland (whose career he didn't end btw). I actually don't have that much of a problem with Cantona flying kicking a known racist thug who racially abused him, though he would certainly deserved a ban.
 
so Carniero has left and is seeking legal action.

Chelsea like making things hard for themselves...
 
Mike. said:
so Carniero has left and is seeking legal action.

Chelsea like making things hard for themselves...
Click to expand...

They've been trying to get her back on board since it happened. The problem is that she obviously considers whatever Mourinho said to her to be completely unforgivable.

I doubt she will settle outside of court either because this has to be a moral thing. Constructive dismissal, assuming that's what she's going for, is an absolute nightmare to actually win so if it was just about the money I imagine she would have just taken a lump fee from the club and come back.
 
Last edited:
Subtle said:
They've been trying to get her back on board since it happened. The problem is that she obviously considers whatever Mourinho said to her to be completely unforgivable.
Click to expand...

They backed the wrong horse initially. Shame they started that work too late. Could be more costly than losing an excellent staff member. Needed to reinstate her immediately
 
Subtle said:
They've been trying to get her back on board since it happened. The problem is that she obviously considers whatever Mourinho said to her to be completely unforgivable.

I doubt she will settle outside of court either because this has to be a moral thing. Constructive dismissal, assuming that's what she's going for, is an absolute nightmare to actually win so if it was just about the money I imagine she would have just taken a lump fee from the club and come back.
Click to expand...

It's definitely been exacerbated by Chelsea not immediately coming to her side. She's been considering this for a few weeks now
 
Tyton said:
Because normally the conflict isn't broadcasted on national television.
Click to expand...

It's still an incredibly hard thing to actually get a result on. You have to proof that the club made it impossible for you to keep working, effectively sacking you through indirect means. In her case, she was technically just rotated away from the bench and then the club wanted to reinstate her, so she'll need to prove that conditions at the club, not their actual actions regarding her position, effectively forced her to position to become untenable. None of that was broadcasted life and it is exceptionally hard to prove as the court almost always favours the defendant. The key point here is the onus of proof falls entirely on the dismissed party, if it comes down to a he-said she-said, the club will win 99/100.

Unless you have definitive evidence, you always take the money if it's offered and there's no way the club hasn't dangled hush money in front of her face, so this is almost certainly a matter of morals for her. Makes you wonder what was said behind closed doors.
 
Subtle said:
Makes you wonder what was said behind closed doors.
Click to expand...

If anything was said at all. All reports indicate that she hasn't shown up to work since the Swansea game which means the whole episode plausibly started and ended there

Not defending how the club behaved in this scenario but I can't see how this situation will turn out well for carneiro
 
Subtle said:
It's still an incredibly hard thing to actually get a result on. You have to proof that the club made it impossible for you to keep working, effectively sacking you through indirect means. In her case, she was technically just rotated away from the bench and then the club wanted to reinstate her, so she'll need to prove that conditions at the club, not their actual actions regarding her position, effectively forced her to position to become untenable.
Click to expand...

What broadcasted live was full HD footage of her supervisor hurling expletives while she was doing her job, and afterwards she was effectively demoted. That alone is the evidence that something went down, which already gives her a better case than 99% of people in similar situation. Even if there isn't a paper trail to follow and people won't testify on her behalf, you can't just wave off something like that even with football team of Ernst&Young lawyers.

I wouldn't put my money on her, but its definitely not 99/100 odds.
 
Tyton said:
What broadcasted live was full HD footage of her supervisor hurling expletives while she was doing her job, and afterwards she was effectively demoted. That alone is the evidence that something went down, which already gives her a better case than 99% of people in similar situation. Even if there isn't a paper trail to follow and people won't testify on her behalf, you can't just wave off something like that even with football team of Ernst&Young lawyers.

I wouldn't put my money on her, but its definitely not 99/100 odds.
Click to expand...

If we went into the courtroom with Ernst and Young accountants masquerading as lawyers then 99/100 odds will be in her favour instead
 
Alcaraz said:
If we went into the courtroom with Ernst and Young accountants masquerading as lawyers then 99/100 odds will be in her favour instead
Click to expand...

Like every multinational corporation, EY has more than one leg to stand on.
 
The problem Chelsea also have is the other heavyweight bodies have chimed in. Given how much of this was public, she has a much stronger case than usual. The actual money cost will be irrelevant. Chelsea could definitely have paid her a couple of million, not even worried about it. But as Subtle says, considering the kind of sums she would win, this is not about money. What this will do (and i suspect this is her aim) is send a message that you cannot abuse and demean your staff. It will also heavily harm Chelsea's rep
 
Bujakaa said:
Sorry, I dont want to mean or something like that. But I think that Eva is pushing this thing too hard. The main problem is that she is female. Thats why he gets that attention and goes to court. I think it is wrong and opinion about her lowers a lot. It is sport, these things happen. People get jelled at and so on. If his would happened to a man, no one whould have bat an eye about it. That is what bothers me, with her action she now brings down the team and puts pressure on them. I know that Mourhino should have done things differently from the beggining but still. But lets wait and see.
Click to expand...

This is actual bollocks. She got binned for doing her job, and got abused by her manager, In any job, not matter the your gender, that is nailed on constructive dismissal. If you think the issue is because she is female then you are just being another sexist idiot tbh.

How it effects the team is completely irrelevant.

Would you be defending this if it had been racial abuse?
 
sunilvk7 said:
What would be the worst case scenario for Chelsea? Just few 100 thousand dollars compensation?
Click to expand...

Significant for her, drop in the bucket for Chelsea. This isn't about money, otherwise this would be over.
 
Bujakaa said:
But to take this way, it is so wrong. This is sport, a lot worse things happens, also in the locker room that we never hear. Anyone who have done sport knows that. I have been through it, had one of the hardest youth basketball coach in my country, but **** in the end we knew that he wants the best for us and team to succeed. We hated and also loved him. Also things completly change in the heat of moment and at gamedays. Most of these things happen from emotion in the moment. Sometimes u need to turn the other cheek.
I seriously dont think that this would change things so much how anyone handles their staff. There was nothing so abousev and demean in that act.
Click to expand...

No, no thats not how it works.

SHE WAS BENCHED FOR TREATING A PLAYER. Her job is the welfare of the player, not Jose's ego.

In no world of sport is that part of the game. Hence why you can sue a club for it.

There is falling out, and there abusing your staff. What you are talking about is in no way comparable.
 
Bujakaa said:
But to take this way, it is so wrong. This is sport, a lot worse things happens, also in the locker room that we never hear. Anyone who have done sport knows that. I have been through it, had one of the hardest youth basketball coach in my country, but **** in the end we knew that he wants the best for us and team to succeed. We hated and also loved him. Also things completly change in the heat of moment and at gamedays. Most of these things happen from emotion in the moment. Sometimes u need to turn the other cheek.
I seriously dont think that this would change things so much how anyone handles their staff. There was nothing so abousev and demean in that act.
Click to expand...

Which is why you could just, just, about excuse him shouting at her at the time. That's very much borderline.

Coming back in, in the cold light of morning the next day, and demoting her is not a heat of the moment style decision. He is culpable for it and, like Mike said, the club ****** up by backing Mourinho at the start. That escalates it from an emotional disagreement between 2 employees to something more institutional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top