rugbyunion
Latest News:

Quinssa WebsiteQuins News from News NowQuins Official Site


Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
blucherquin (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 09:03
This has gone very weird.

Some hard facts:

- JK got a new contract at the start of the year. There’s no way that contract was only until June.

- He is now leaving the club before the end of that contract

- Hes not being made reduandant, there’s another DoR coming

- He didn’t say he was resigning

- The club said it was by “mutual consent”

Some statements that are sensible based on what we know and how employment works:

- He isn’t leaving because he’s got another job, it would look better for him to say so if he was - but he didn’t. And no one has announced he’s joining.

- He and the club were under immense pressure after our 2nd worst season in the professional era and some truly embarrassing performances.

- The club were in a difficult position of their own making because they renewed his contract and now it was going to cost them more money to sack him. (The only way this isn’t true is if the terms of his new contract were so poor financially that he was going to be paid less for the next 2/3 years than he would currently earn in a few months).

- No one is going to willingly give up a large amount of money and secure employment for nothing (really, be honest, no one)

- The club know they will have to pay out money for breaching a contract, so it is in their interest to have an amicable arrangement to moderate those terms in their favour as much as is possible

Now here we’re going back to invention - but based on all the above.

- Crunch time comes because of the pressure, the club sit down with JK and they agree it’s not working. He agrees he will carry the can. They agree terms which involve seeing out the season (for the club, makes no difference, means they can start finding a replacement, for JK, maybe it’s just what he wanted). They agree an amount of his remaining contract that he will get paid. (Which isn’t necessarily the full value, could have had rewards based on targets that won’t be fulfilled if he exits etc).

And as a result of that it’s “by mutual consent”.

It’s possible that isn’t the answer of course but very little else makes financial sense for either party.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/05/2018 15:05 by blucherquin.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
HonkyTonk (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 09:09
I would say that is very likely what has happened, based on what we know

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 09:32
Quote:
HonkyTonk
I would say that is very likely what has happened, based on what we know

Yup that's the most likely scenario.

We can argue semantics around whether that's the same as 'being sacked' but as Blucher says, I doubt this was JK's decision.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Scaramouche (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 09:55
I presume the Renewed Contract had certain targets written into it such as win %, Top Six or even Top 4 etc so curtailing a contract where you have not achieved any targets is fairly straight forward innit?

When I was changing jobs at Director level (when Wardy and the other dinosaurs still roamed the planet) an integral part of any golden handshake was a "Non Competition Clause". Do such things still exist?



If at first you don't succeed, Try, Try and Try again.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
RleQuin (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 10:22
There was no need to give the extension as he had another year to go.
So, I can't understand why he would sign it if there was a chance he couldn't attain the level required (and to be honest when the contract extension was given, JK must have known he couldn't achieve anything this season)
RleQ

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
T-Bone (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 11:01
Quote:
blucherquin
This has gone very weird.
Some hard facts:

- JK got a new contract at the start of the year. There’s no way that contract was only until June.

- He is now leaving the club before the end of that contract

- Hes not being made reduandant, there’s another DoR coming

- He didn’t say he was resigning

- The club said it was by “mutual consent”

Some statements that are sensible based on what we know and how employment works:

- He isn’t leaving because he’s got another job, it would look better for him to say so if he was - but he didn’t. And no one has announced he’s joining.

- He and the club were under immense pressure after our 2nd worst season in the professional era and some truly embarrassing performances.

- The club were in a difficult position of their own making because they renewed his contract and now it was going to cost them more money to sack him. (The only way this isn’t true is if the terms of his new contract were so poor financially that he was going to be paid less for the next 2/3 years than he would currently earn in a few months).

- No one is going to willingly give up a large amount of money and secure employment for nothing (really, be honest, no one)

- The club know they will have to pay out money for breaching a contract, so it is in their interest to have an amicable arrangement to moderate those terms in their favour as much as is possible

Now here we’re going back to invention - but based on all the above.

- Crunch time comes because of the pressure, the club sit down with JK and they agree it’s not working. He agrees he will carry the can. They agree terms which involve seeing out the season (for the club, makes no difference, means they can start finding a replacement, for JK, maybe it’s just what he wanted). They agree an amount of his remaining contract that he will get paid. (Which isn’t necessarily the full value, could have had rewards based on targets that won’t be fulfilled if he exists etc).

And as a result of that it’s “by mutual consent”.

It’s possible that isn’t the answer of course but very little else makes financial sense for either party.

The most sensible summary on here by a long way

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Cookie (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 11:35
Quote:
Scaramouche
I presume the Renewed Contract had certain targets written into it such as win %, Top Six or even Top 4 etc so curtailing a contract where you have not achieved any targets is fairly straight forward innit?
When I was changing jobs at Director level (when Wardy and the other dinosaurs still roamed the planet) an integral part of any golden handshake was a "Non Competition Clause". Do such things still exist?

The most common scenario in football is that the contract is paid up in full. However, if the manager wants to take another job within the period he is paid out for, he is obliged to repay the golden handshake, or the club has continued to pay his salary weekly/monthly, those payments stop.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Yareet (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 14:12
Quote:
Scaramouche
I presume the Renewed Contract had certain targets written into it such as win %, Top Six or even Top 4 etc so curtailing a contract where you have not achieved any targets is fairly straight forward innit?
When I was changing jobs at Director level (when Wardy and the other dinosaurs still roamed the planet) an integral part of any golden handshake was a "Non Competition Clause". Do such things still exist?

Non competes certainly exist but they have to be be carefully written. The employer cannot be seen to restrict the trade of the employee (for example) it is likely that saying “You cannot work in another DoR or rugby coaching job anywhere ever” would possibly be unenforceable.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Cookie (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 15:45
Quote:
Yareet
Quote:
Scaramouche
I presume the Renewed Contract had certain targets written into it such as win %, Top Six or even Top 4 etc so curtailing a contract where you have not achieved any targets is fairly straight forward innit?
When I was changing jobs at Director level (when Wardy and the other dinosaurs still roamed the planet) an integral part of any golden handshake was a "Non Competition Clause". Do such things still exist?

Non competes certainly exist but they have to be be carefully written. The employer cannot be seen to restrict the trade of the employee (for example) it is likely that saying “You cannot work in another DoR or rugby coaching job anywhere ever” would possibly be unenforceable.

But if Quins paid up his contract, he couldn't work in the AP/Championship whilst effectively being paid by two clubs simultaneously. That in itself would be conflict of interest.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
DazzaS (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 19:38
according to Mr Ellis the figure for getting rid of them is "fake news". his actual words!

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Scaramouche (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 21:15
Evidence?



If at first you don't succeed, Try, Try and Try again.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
DazzaS (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 21:20
Quote:
Scaramouche
Evidence?

There will be audio on the quinssa website which will prove he said it.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Quinky Kin (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 21:31
Quote:
Cookie
Quote:
Yareet
Quote:
Scaramouche
I presume the Renewed Contract had certain targets written into it such as win %, Top Six or even Top 4 etc so curtailing a contract where you have not achieved any targets is fairly straight forward innit?
When I was changing jobs at Director level (when Wardy and the other dinosaurs still roamed the planet) an integral part of any golden handshake was a "Non Competition Clause". Do such things still exist?

Non competes certainly exist but they have to be be carefully written. The employer cannot be seen to restrict the trade of the employee (for example) it is likely that saying “You cannot work in another DoR or rugby coaching job anywhere ever” would possibly be unenforceable.

But if Quins paid up his contract, he couldn't work in the AP/Championship whilst effectively being paid by two clubs simultaneously. That in itself would be conflict of interest.

The payment received from Quins wouldn't be salary, it would be compensation. There's also a tax benefit to that method.

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Quinky Kin (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 21:43
Quote:
talkshowhost86

But you stay on that bandwagon QK. I'm sure once we wrap up 11th next weekend you'll come up with a zinger of an explanation as to how that shows JK and co have done an excellent job.

Maybe that because 11 has two 1s in it, that means we've finished 1st twice...thus making JK the greatest DOR of all time. There you go you can have that one for free.

How bizarre.

Quins have performed badly this season. Terribly. With one game to go it's not unreasonable to judge them. Note that I state "Quins", as it's a team sport and a team performance. Included in that is JK, so it's fair to say that he has performed badly. Through the middle part of the season I was supportive of him and thought much of the criticism was unjustified, being based on a presumed outcome of the season - that tends to be how these things work. Now I'm happy to agree that his performance was below standard.

How on earth could you suggest anyone would say, at this stage of the season, that he's done an excellent job? JK's record speaks for itself: as a head coach he achieved quite a lot; as a DOR he had one season showing slight improvement and one showing a major downturn.

I realise that because I disagree with you at times, and call you out on your unfounded assumptions, then by trying to make out that my opinions are unreasonable will in some way undermine me. But simply because your early season predictions came true this does not make you a) more knowledgeable than anyone else, or b) some kind of authority on rugby or c) the oracle. You've also shown that your worldwide knowledge of employment issues is somewhat overstated, but I won't hold that against you.

I'll put it simply: you have your opinion, I have mine. We're not about to agree on many things, and I can live with that. So let's not get into verbal arguments - you'll lose, and I really have no need for, nor care for meaningless victories. Let's stick to discussions about rugby, and keep them as fact-based as possible. I'm sure that will make CAW a much better place for everyone who uses it.

Of course if you wish to make sarky comments and try to undermine me for ever more, there's nothing I can do about it. I personally think it makes you look silly and pathetic, but that's just my opinion.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
blucherquin (IP Logged)
01 May, 2018 22:15
You two should really get a room and sort out this sexual tension

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
RodneyRegis (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 07:30
Quote:
Quinky Kin
Quote:
talkshowhost86

But you stay on that bandwagon QK. I'm sure once we wrap up 11th next weekend you'll come up with a zinger of an explanation as to how that shows JK and co have done an excellent job.

Maybe that because 11 has two 1s in it, that means we've finished 1st twice...thus making JK the greatest DOR of all time. There you go you can have that one for free.

How bizarre.

Quins have performed badly this season. Terribly. With one game to go it's not unreasonable to judge them. Note that I state "Quins", as it's a team sport and a team performance. Included in that is JK, so it's fair to say that he has performed badly. Through the middle part of the season I was supportive of him and thought much of the criticism was unjustified, being based on a presumed outcome of the season - that tends to be how these things work. Now I'm happy to agree that his performance was below standard.

How on earth could you suggest anyone would say, at this stage of the season, that he's done an excellent job? JK's record speaks for itself: as a head coach he achieved quite a lot; as a DOR he had one season showing slight improvement and one showing a major downturn.

I realise that because I disagree with you at times, and call you out on your unfounded assumptions, then by trying to make out that my opinions are unreasonable will in some way undermine me. But simply because your early season predictions came true this does not make you a) more knowledgeable than anyone else, or b) some kind of authority on rugby or c) the oracle. You've also shown that your worldwide knowledge of employment issues is somewhat overstated, but I won't hold that against you.

I'll put it simply: you have your opinion, I have mine. We're not about to agree on many things, and I can live with that. So let's not get into verbal arguments - you'll lose, and I really have no need for, nor care for meaningless victories. Let's stick to discussions about rugby, and keep them as fact-based as possible. I'm sure that will make CAW a much better place for everyone who uses it.

Of course if you wish to make sarky comments and try to undermine me for ever more, there's nothing I can do about it. I personally think it makes you look silly and pathetic, but that's just my opinion.

He won't lose, you'll just use your normal tactic of requesting evidence that nobody could possibly give. I don't think I've ever seen you 'win' a debate.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
DOK. (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 08:25
Quote:
blucherquin
You two should really get a room and sort out this sexual tension

I think I'm going to have to have the same rule as for puns on threads. Quinky and Rodney can only lock horns if the thread has been unused for 48 hours! smiling smiley

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Scaramouche (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 09:13
Correct pun-ishment.



If at first you don't succeed, Try, Try and Try again.

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 11:41
Quote:
Quinky Kin

So let's not get into verbal arguments - you'll lose, and I really have no need for, nor care for meaningless victories.

(Sm22)(Sm6)smiling bouncing smiley

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Quinky Kin (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 12:01
Quote:
RodneyRegis

He won't lose, you'll just use your normal tactic of requesting evidence that nobody could possibly give. I don't think I've ever seen you 'win' a debate.

And yet it's often so easy to prove you wrong Rodney... remember "Why don't Quins have injury jokers?" (they do). Or the classic "We didn't get any points against LI?" (We did). Hence it seems quite reasonable to ask for evidence of your claims as you have a history of... let's call it "mis-interpreting the facts".

You really do have a bad case of recurring foot-in-mouth disease.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
InsertQuinsPunHere (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 12:40
"MODERATOR! They're at it again"

(seriously guys, it's dull)

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Fearless Fred (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 12:57
Quote:
InsertQuinsPunHere
"MODERATOR! They're at it again"
(seriously guys, it's dull)

thumbs down

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
QuinAlan (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 13:35
OT I know, but is Quinky Kin married to Rodney Regis or Talkshowhost, or is this an elite threesome..??

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
blucherquin (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 13:39
Quote:
QuinAlan
OT I know, but is Quinky Kin married to Rodney Regis or Talkshowhost, or is this an elite threesome..??

They’re all the same person - like Fight Club (#spoiler)

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Bedfordshire Boy (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 13:39
Or an elite boresome?

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 16:05
Quote:
InsertQuinsPunHere
"MODERATOR! They're at it again"
(seriously guys, it's dull)

Apologies for debating the topic of the thread.

If only we'd filled it with puns instead eh?

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
GP2110 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 16:38
There is a way to discuss issues without making it personal. Avoiding sarcasm and insults tends to help.

 
Re: �2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
talkshowhost86 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 16:55
Quote:
GP2110
There is a way to discuss issues without making it personal. Avoiding sarcasm and insults tends to help.

Agree about it getting personal and agree about the insults. Everyone on here doles our the sarcasm so not sure how you can single anyone out for that.

Anyway..:back to the topic (funny how those who are allegedly bored by the debate are happy to debate about the debate by the way) with the news from Ellis last night at least the 2.5m figure isn't correct. I just hope the money is there to replace everyone in the coaching staff if needed.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
GP2110 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 16:52
I think the money will need to be there to replace coaches - simply because I think the club will find it near-impossible to find a DoR that does not want to put his own stamp on the coaching staff.

As said on another thread, if the club really is looking at a hands-on coach DoR - I think we should be doing everything to tempt Lancaster. I would also be very happy with Shaun Edwards. Either would be a big upgrade in experience and expertise in my view.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
GP2110 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 16:54
(p.s. I wasn't necessarily blaming you for sarcasm. Just using examples of how things can go sour when it gets personal(Sm42)).

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Quinky Kin (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 17:12
Quote:
GP2110
I think the money will need to be there to replace coaches - simply because I think the club will find it near-impossible to find a DoR that does not want to put his own stamp on the coaching staff.
As said on another thread, if the club really is looking at a hands-on coach DoR - I think we should be doing everything to tempt Lancaster. I would also be very happy with Shaun Edwards. Either would be a big upgrade in experience and expertise in my view.

I think Edwards would be a good person to have on board, but not sure if D0R would be the best role.

It will be interesting to see if the new DoR makes a clean sweep, or decides to keep any or all of the coaches. It may be that individually some of them are very good (Rowntree seems to have pedigree for example), but as a team they simply don't function, or the bad outweigh the good. It's easy for us fans to criticise but in reality we don't see nearly enough to decide how good our coaches work - we only see what the players produce.

On that note too, maybe the DoR will try to offload some of the players?

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
GP2110 (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 17:30
I think it is quite hard to offload players - unless they want to go.

Far more likely is that renewals are affected - as Care indicated when he spoke. That means it may take a season or two for the new man to make the necessary changes. That doesnt mean, however, that we should have to wait for improvement. Our squad is FAR better than the league table suggests.

Simply learning how to defend will make a massive difference and will give us a big lift. That is why someone like Edwards could be good.

 
Re: £2.5 Million bill to pay off unwanted coaches
Quinky Kin (IP Logged)
02 May, 2018 20:10
Quote:
GP2110
I think it is quite hard to offload players - unless they want to go.
Far more likely is that renewals are affected - as Care indicated when he spoke. That means it may take a season or two for the new man to make the necessary changes. That doesnt mean, however, that we should have to wait for improvement. Our squad is FAR better than the league table suggests.

Simply learning how to defend will make a massive difference and will give us a big lift. That is why someone like Edwards could be good.

Yep, agreed on all points. On the point about players leaving, I was thinking along the lines of what happened with Yarde - it would be pretty easy to make a player aware that he's not part of the long term plans; that might see a few names being up for grabs as mid-season transfers, injury cover at other clubs etc. From a player's perspective that's probably better than warming the bench or not even in a match day squad, unless they're seeing out their final contract.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?