...his court case.....talk about hitting a guy when he's down.Murray and Varney have really gone down in my estimations in the last few days but what do they care, we're no longer fans just "customers"...
[cite]Posted By: Oracle[/cite]...his court case.....talk about hitting a guy when he's down.Murray and Varney have really gone down in my estimations in the last few days but what do they care, we're no longer fans just "customers"...
I saw that as well and I have to agree with you. This whole thing stinks. I used to have high regard for Murray and Varney but as far as I'm concerned the way they have dealt with the whole Curbs replacement issue has really tarnished that image.
I could've sworn Varney said on SSN yesterday the club felt they had a moral obligation to continue helping Dowie with the case... It could even have been part of the settlement.
yes and what about Jordan recently giving his brother the heave ho? could that be linked??? plot thickens but not impressed with what the club are doing to dowie unless there is a better reason
No, of course not. It's just that someone else has posted up a link on another discussion to an article in something like the Mail which says that we WILL still be backing Dowie in his case. Just goes to prove the old adage about not believing everything you read in the papers.
When it comes to the court case the truth will out, it will be obvious whether we're still backing him or not. No point wetting our knickers about it now and coming out with statements like "hitting a guy when he's down" when we don't actually know one way or the other yet. I'm not having a go at you personally, just get a bit fed up with the hysterical frenzy the media try to build out of things like this, and the people that gobble it up.
Why should they? It's his problem not ours. If you had an employee who wasn't performing and you got rid of him, would you then carrying on helping him defend a claim from his previous employer? No, I wouldn't either.
Murray spoke yesterday about business not personal decisions and that falls into that category.
[cite]Posted By: Heath Hero[/cite]Why should they? It's his problem not ours. If you had an employee who wasn't performing and you got rid of him, would you then carrying on helping him defend a claim from his previous employer? No, I wouldn't either.
Murray spoke yesterday about business not personal decisions and that falls into that category.
[cite]Posted By: Heath Hero[/cite]Why should they? It's his problem not ours. If you had an employee who wasn't performing and you got rid of him, would you then carrying on helping him defend a claim from his previous employer? No, I wouldn't either.
Murray spoke yesterday about business not personal decisions and that falls into that category.
I can't really comment as I don't know what was or wasn't agreed when the club instructed it's solicitors.
To clarify, my comments about Murray and Varney, are in respect of the way they have handled the whole replacing Curbs issue, not whether or not they are funding Dowie
TheGuardian says that although Dowie will have to fund the case,they will help him to fight it.
Sounds right to me, he was available, we employed him - if there was an issue with his previous club then that is for him, don't forget he will get a tasty pay out from us too.
That said,morally I think we should still be assisting him.
Comments
I saw that as well and I have to agree with you. This whole thing stinks. I used to have high regard for Murray and Varney but as far as I'm concerned the way they have dealt with the whole Curbs replacement issue has really tarnished that image.
I could've sworn Varney said on SSN yesterday the club felt they had a moral obligation to continue helping Dowie with the case... It could even have been part of the settlement.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2002390000-2006530078,00.html
Do we have a problem?...
I'm not saying it is but just because it was reported in the Sun doesn't mean that it isn't.
I'm just not willing to believe anything at the moment unless it comes from the proverbial horse's mouth
When it comes to the court case the truth will out, it will be obvious whether we're still backing him or not. No point wetting our knickers about it now and coming out with statements like "hitting a guy when he's down" when we don't actually know one way or the other yet. I'm not having a go at you personally, just get a bit fed up with the hysterical frenzy the media try to build out of things like this, and the people that gobble it up.
Murray spoke yesterday about business not personal decisions and that falls into that category.
there speaks the lawyer! :-)
I can't really comment as I don't know what was or wasn't agreed when the club instructed it's solicitors.
To clarify, my comments about Murray and Varney, are in respect of the way they have handled the whole replacing Curbs issue, not whether or not they are funding Dowie
Sounds right to me, he was available, we employed him - if there was an issue with his previous club then that is for him, don't forget he will get a tasty pay out from us too.
That said,morally I think we should still be assisting him.