Quizzes & Puzzles10 mins ago
Football Disgraces Itself Once Again
79 Answers
The news reaches us that Doctor Eva Carneiro has been paid an advised £5million pounds to avoid her publicising the evidence she has against her former employer, Chelsea Football Club.
The club's laughable were it not so offensive, defence is to nit-pick about exactly which offensive term Manager Mourinho used against his colleagues - did her call her a 'daughter of a ***', which could be deemed sexist, or merely a 'son of a ***' - which appears to be offered as acceptable footballing parlance.
So a football club employs a QC at a four-figure-per-hour sum to defend its manager's use of offensive language to a colleague, with the breath-taking premise that the fine line between '***' and '***' was not crossed. Fine, no surprise there.
In common with modern football, the approach of the Neanderthal unreconstructed hierarchy at Chelsea's HQ was to hope the silly little woman would go back in the kitchen if they threw some money at her - heaven knows they have as much as that as have little morality, or simple adult courtesy and manners.
But hang on! What's going on! The girlie hasn't gone away, she's gone to court, and we have to show up and argue there, Oh No!!
But don't worry, we'll throw even more money at her to prevent the serious embarrassment of being exposed as serial misogynists and lousy individuals.
Of course, or ex-manager won't pay a penny, and we can't compel him to do what he should do simply as a mature adult, and apologise for his appalling behaviour - so he can trot off to his other multi-million pound job as another club manager, with his usual turd-in-his-y-fronts face on.
Football does not come out of this with any dignity whatsoever - and once again, the message to Premier League clubs and players is - if your behaviour is atrocious, throw some money, and it will go away.
Your thoughts? Media URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36472713
Description:
The club's laughable were it not so offensive, defence is to nit-pick about exactly which offensive term Manager Mourinho used against his colleagues - did her call her a 'daughter of a ***', which could be deemed sexist, or merely a 'son of a ***' - which appears to be offered as acceptable footballing parlance.
So a football club employs a QC at a four-figure-per-hour sum to defend its manager's use of offensive language to a colleague, with the breath-taking premise that the fine line between '***' and '***' was not crossed. Fine, no surprise there.
In common with modern football, the approach of the Neanderthal unreconstructed hierarchy at Chelsea's HQ was to hope the silly little woman would go back in the kitchen if they threw some money at her - heaven knows they have as much as that as have little morality, or simple adult courtesy and manners.
But hang on! What's going on! The girlie hasn't gone away, she's gone to court, and we have to show up and argue there, Oh No!!
But don't worry, we'll throw even more money at her to prevent the serious embarrassment of being exposed as serial misogynists and lousy individuals.
Of course, or ex-manager won't pay a penny, and we can't compel him to do what he should do simply as a mature adult, and apologise for his appalling behaviour - so he can trot off to his other multi-million pound job as another club manager, with his usual turd-in-his-y-fronts face on.
Football does not come out of this with any dignity whatsoever - and once again, the message to Premier League clubs and players is - if your behaviour is atrocious, throw some money, and it will go away.
Your thoughts? Media URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36472713
Description:
Answers
that will never happen andy. i mean, what do they have to do to be universally condemned - rape someone? nope, judging by the support on here and elsewhere for ched evans. paedophilia? nope, ditto adam johnson. kill someone? nope, ditto lee hughes and luke mcCormick.
11:15 Wed 08th Jun 2016
There can be no doubting Jose Mourinho's many achievements in the game including his great success in European competition with Porto and original spell at Chelsea to name but a few.
However, his surly attitude demonstrated numerous times towards the media and referees/assistant referees is such that nothing is ever his fault. This contempt was played out again in this case.
Andy, Mourinho not only showed Eva up in front of the media but in front of everyone in the stadium. In fact, Eva has been abused by opposing fans whilst attending to players on the pitch underlining the difficulties she often faced but she would not have expected the sideline rantings from a member of the same side let alone the manager.
Football generally these days is seriously blighted from the corruption and scandal at FIFA right through to more and more players who forget how to conduct themselves on and off the pitch.
As for role models, well, yes, I'm not sure how you can define it. As Greavsie would say 'It's a funny ol' game'.
However, his surly attitude demonstrated numerous times towards the media and referees/assistant referees is such that nothing is ever his fault. This contempt was played out again in this case.
Andy, Mourinho not only showed Eva up in front of the media but in front of everyone in the stadium. In fact, Eva has been abused by opposing fans whilst attending to players on the pitch underlining the difficulties she often faced but she would not have expected the sideline rantings from a member of the same side let alone the manager.
Football generally these days is seriously blighted from the corruption and scandal at FIFA right through to more and more players who forget how to conduct themselves on and off the pitch.
As for role models, well, yes, I'm not sure how you can define it. As Greavsie would say 'It's a funny ol' game'.
Arksided - //I'm certainly no fan of Chelsea FC and Jose was out of order but I hope the silly Moo gets nothing and is given the court cost bill. //
An interesting perspective - I am curious to know where it comes from - would you care to elaborate?
As for the court costs, you will be aware that the case did not reach court, so I would presume no court costs are incurred.
An interesting perspective - I am curious to know where it comes from - would you care to elaborate?
As for the court costs, you will be aware that the case did not reach court, so I would presume no court costs are incurred.
Arksided - //She turned her nose up at 1.2 million. If I was offered that anyone can insult me all they like. //
That is the frequent response from a lot of people who hear about this sort of situation, but levity aside, we have to consider that - as advised on the thread - Doctor Carneiro was publicly humiliated and insulted, effectively hounded out of her job, and made to look unprofessional.
If I was in her position - obviously having enough hard evidence to humiliate Chelsea to wazzoo and back, I would have done exactly the same thing as she did.
Dr. Carnerio was never going to enjoy the courtesy of an apology from the Neanderthal ignorant chauvinist that is Jose Mourinho, but at least she could shame the club into paying her off, and proving complete vindication of her actions in the process with a (doubtless unmeant) apology from the club.
I am sure the money is a very sweet reward for being on the wrong end of an immature dreadful man and his ever-unstopped nasty tongue and temper - I am delighted with the outcome.
I'd love to think it would send a message to Premier League football about joining the world of mature adults, but I doubt that would ever happen!
That is the frequent response from a lot of people who hear about this sort of situation, but levity aside, we have to consider that - as advised on the thread - Doctor Carneiro was publicly humiliated and insulted, effectively hounded out of her job, and made to look unprofessional.
If I was in her position - obviously having enough hard evidence to humiliate Chelsea to wazzoo and back, I would have done exactly the same thing as she did.
Dr. Carnerio was never going to enjoy the courtesy of an apology from the Neanderthal ignorant chauvinist that is Jose Mourinho, but at least she could shame the club into paying her off, and proving complete vindication of her actions in the process with a (doubtless unmeant) apology from the club.
I am sure the money is a very sweet reward for being on the wrong end of an immature dreadful man and his ever-unstopped nasty tongue and temper - I am delighted with the outcome.
I'd love to think it would send a message to Premier League football about joining the world of mature adults, but I doubt that would ever happen!
Arksided - //I've never being a fan of Jose but if at United he allows the players to play unlike LVG playing them with the handbrake on I might be swayed to liking him. //
I am not a football fan, but I am married to a Premier League club season ticket holder, and I fully appreciate that supporting a club can carry various burdens, not least of which can be the hell of reality against the heaven of expectation.
I am also a firm believer in separating the individual from their achievements - so I would not wish any ill to Man U as a team, but if I were a fan, my joy at their success would be slightly muted by the odious personality of the man who helps them achieve it.
I am not a football fan, but I am married to a Premier League club season ticket holder, and I fully appreciate that supporting a club can carry various burdens, not least of which can be the hell of reality against the heaven of expectation.
I am also a firm believer in separating the individual from their achievements - so I would not wish any ill to Man U as a team, but if I were a fan, my joy at their success would be slightly muted by the odious personality of the man who helps them achieve it.
//My thoughts? that's one hell of a lot of ranting to read on my phone!//
oh jesus yes - give this man BA !
// As for the court costs, you will be aware that the case did not reach court, so I would presume no court costs are incurred.// AH
O god listen to this ! It makes the judges of this country ( not my usual favourites ) look like veritable real life Solomons - even the crap ones
er Yes Andie or perhaps No Andie
It DID reach court - day one in fact when "the case was stated"
various points arise - the out of court offer should not have been made public as it was without prejudice - they always are - and the judge is not meant to have knowledge of it.
The £1.2m was presumably a life time estimate of her ( the leddy not the hija de pota ) earnings if she never worked again
the exacerbating factors were not saying sorry
and implying and then confirming that she had broken club rules and medical rules when she hadnt
I can see why she was irritated at being told she was a bad doctor because she attended a patient when in fact she was a good doctor to look after the safety of her patient.
Court costs are NOT normally awarded in an employment tribunal
and I am not sure what the effect of a payment into court has in the employment tribunal. Normally it means that the plaintiff pays ALL the costs from that date if the final award is less than the payments into court.
no costs balances the fact that the employer may employ a QC ( and win ) against an employee who normally represents himself
As for the solicitors screwing up a case
and then a QC coming along and saying - these are the facts ? for chrissakes you are onto an absolute loser .....and we are in court in three hours ....
this is commonplace. ( far commoner than you think )
as for comparing this to footballers wages - completely irrelevant
people pay to see Barlow or which ever released con it is
no one pays to see Dr Carneira run onto the pitch and put a plaster on a weeping footballers knee
oh jesus yes - give this man BA !
// As for the court costs, you will be aware that the case did not reach court, so I would presume no court costs are incurred.// AH
O god listen to this ! It makes the judges of this country ( not my usual favourites ) look like veritable real life Solomons - even the crap ones
er Yes Andie or perhaps No Andie
It DID reach court - day one in fact when "the case was stated"
various points arise - the out of court offer should not have been made public as it was without prejudice - they always are - and the judge is not meant to have knowledge of it.
The £1.2m was presumably a life time estimate of her ( the leddy not the hija de pota ) earnings if she never worked again
the exacerbating factors were not saying sorry
and implying and then confirming that she had broken club rules and medical rules when she hadnt
I can see why she was irritated at being told she was a bad doctor because she attended a patient when in fact she was a good doctor to look after the safety of her patient.
Court costs are NOT normally awarded in an employment tribunal
and I am not sure what the effect of a payment into court has in the employment tribunal. Normally it means that the plaintiff pays ALL the costs from that date if the final award is less than the payments into court.
no costs balances the fact that the employer may employ a QC ( and win ) against an employee who normally represents himself
As for the solicitors screwing up a case
and then a QC coming along and saying - these are the facts ? for chrissakes you are onto an absolute loser .....and we are in court in three hours ....
this is commonplace. ( far commoner than you think )
as for comparing this to footballers wages - completely irrelevant
people pay to see Barlow or which ever released con it is
no one pays to see Dr Carneira run onto the pitch and put a plaster on a weeping footballers knee
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.