What's new

Player watch: Danny Rose

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
On what basis is it gross misconduct?

If you speak out against your employees in a negative light in public it's gross misconduct, that's a sack able offence and written in pretty much every contract these days. There's been countless offences where people have made remarks about their company on social media for example only to be fired for it.
 

ultimateloner

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2004
4,539
2,149
i dont necessarily have a problem with his words......my issue is say them to Poch/Levy in their office, to their face. Saying it in a national newspaper 3 days before the start of the season is basically one huge FU to the club, the manager and his teammates.

He knows this is a damaging distraction, but did it anyway.

Yeah I'm sure his intention is self interest and that takes prominence over the club.
It makes sense from his perspective. You dont become a multi-millionaire if you are nice and soft.
As a PL player you are one in a million and to succeed you need to be aggressive in everything; whether it's business or personal.

I think it's easy for fans to over-think the effects of these things. Regardless of what he says the club will do whatever is most economical/optimal (and if thats at the expense to the player's future then so be it; we've kept players against their will in the past e.g. Modric) so these are all just side shows.
 

ultimateloner

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2004
4,539
2,149
He insinuated the players who aren't in the first 11 aren't good enough.

We are meant to be an inclusive team where everyone works for each other and respects the contribution that each player makes. A lot of the pre-season work is about bonding the players as much as fitness and tactics. Danny Rose has just publicly driven a wedge between the players.

If he wasn't injured I'd say that he'd played his last game for us.

I disagree. I think players/coaches look after themselves first and foremost, and will go wherever is best for them (measured by money/medals). Therefore bonding/club atmosphere is over-rated.

If i was in the Spurs dressing room and I'm a starter I wouldn't give 2 shits what Rose said. I know it's a smoke screen to get a bigger pay check. As far as I'm concerned if he is good enough he plays with me if not he could fuck right off.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
39,837
50,713
To anyone saying Rose should be kept, I don't think its wise to do so. Mostly because of the fans, partly it depends on the actual reaction of the squad. Some may of praised Rose, but I suspect not everyone is impressed with his behavior.

But, he sitting on the bench fans are going to boo him, he gets on the field he'll be booed. I'm not sure that is going to help the team. Rose is a very good player but we played our best stuff last season without him.

Shaw is young, talented with a very high ceiling, he's worked with poch before and Mou hates him. He is gettable and would be good competition for Davies. Rose is 27, he has few more top years in him, thats it really.

The problem is, not sure Ma utd will go for him now he's injured. On fact it appears they wont. If Man utd put him up to it, they played him so well. Disrupts what we are doing, leaves us with a pissed off player in the hope we sell cheaply in Jan..


If Shaw would take a slight pay cut (or if ManU will cover it to offload him - and lets face it Mourinho hates him) I'd take that swap all day long, especially now, Rose's idiotic strop seems to have made his position pretty untenable.
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2004
11,916
16,436
Has Danny been dangled over the same shark tank Levy used for Modric that time?
Sharks? I thought he had to settle for mutated Sea Bass.

U0F0vK4.jpg
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
If Shaw would take a slight pay cut (or if ManU will cover it to offload him - and lets face it Mourinho hates him) I'd take that swap all day long, especially now, Rose's idiotic strop seems to have made his position pretty untenable.

He wouldn't even need to take a pay cut. Rose is meant to be on £65K a week, Shaw is on £70K.
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Dec 23, 2004
11,916
16,436
I agree they respect Poch but I don't think it is as tight as it used to be.Believe what you like but I believe there will be a lot of discontent over the next few weeks which will see some poor results. The player Leicester signed was McGuire who wanted to come to us and we wanted him but they paid him 100k a week.
I can only imagine what you'd have to say if we'd spent £17m and £80k p/w on a cart horse from a relegated team.
 

mightyspur

Now with lovely smooth balls
Aug 21, 2014
9,760
27,014
Lets all have a whip round for Danny, i'll do the just giving page, anyone fancy doing the London marathon? Unicef are a disgrace, how can they justify channeling all that money to those children in Africa when we have footballers on measly £60k per week salaries - shocking.
I appreciate you are being facetious, but it's not really the same thing is it. If you worked in an industry and was considered one of the best at what you do and your peers were doing exactly the same at other companies but being paid twice or three times more than you, you would obviously have an issue.

Players don't play football because they love the club they play for (at least most don't), they play because it is their job and they obviously want to maximise the amount they earn in their relatively short careers. I have no issue with that.
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
If you speak out against your employees in a negative light in public it's gross misconduct, that's a sack able offence and written in pretty much every contract these days. There's been countless offences where people have made remarks about their company on social media for example only to be fired for it.

Yes but not always and it depends on the circumstances. What particular comment do you think warrants GM? How do you know if that is included in Rose's contract? Why do you think it would benefit Tottenham to fire him? What analogous case is there to this? There have been plenty of social media cases where an employer was found to have acted unfairly even when the comments were quite grave and inappropriate.

Putting aside the elephant in the room, which we all know Rose isn't an admin assistant at a bank who can be easily replaced at no extra cost: there is a political and practical issue here (not to mention financial) which would make calling him to a disciplinary meeting and firing him a pure fantasy.
 

Don_Felipe

Well-Known Member
Feb 8, 2004
2,294
3,918
George Graham got sacked for a lot less... But no way we'd sack a player worth £50m+


(especially seeing as his wages are so cheap :))
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
Yes but not always and it depends on the circumstances. What particular comment do you think warrants GM? How do you know if that is included in Rose's contract? Why do you think it would benefit Tottenham to fire him? What analogous case is there to this? There have been plenty of social media cases where an employer was found to have acted unfairly even when the comments were quite grave and inappropriate.

Putting aside the elephant in the room, which we all know Rose isn't an admin assistant at a bank who can be easily replaced at no extra cost: there is a political and practical issue here (not to mention financial) which would make calling him to a disciplinary meeting and firing him a pure fantasy.

:confused: I haven't said anything about firing Rose which would be silly - just making a point about gross misconduct in which you seem to think that he hasn't caused which he plainly has.
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
:confused: I haven't said anything about firing Rose which would be silly - just making a point about gross misconduct in which you seem to think that he hasn't caused which he plainly has.

Well one leads on from the other and you haven't made it plain that he has committed GM or answered any of the questions above. I haven't said he hasn't committed it, I'm just curious as to why you are adamant he has; especially as I'm going to hazard a guess that you haven't seen his contract and haven't shown why this is worse than many of the cases where employees have been dismissed for speaking out publicly about their employers, with far more inflammatory words.

Having read the whole transcript of his interview, what exactly do you think he said which would amount to GM?
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
Well one leads on from the other and you haven't made it plain that he has committed GM or answered any of the questions above. I haven't said he hasn't committed it, I'm just curious as to why you are adamant he has; especially as I'm going to hazard a guess that you haven't seen his contract and haven't shown why this is worse than many of the cases where employees have been dismissed for speaking out publicly about their employers, with far more inflammatory words.

Having read the whole transcript of his interview, what exactly do you think he said which would amount to GM?

I don't need to make it plain, look up the meaning of gross misconduct and you'll see that Danny Rose hasn't acted appropriately or professional. In what world is it professional to criticise your chairman and fellow pro's in public, in what world is it professional to speak out about your wages in public?, in what world is it professional to criticise the club's transfer policy in public?

Let's not play that game of evidence because it's stupid, have you seen his contract? What evidence do you have that his contract doesn't contain that should he speak out against his employees he will not suffer some kind of punishment. You know we can both go down this road but what it comes to is using your common sense therefore It really doesn't need to be debated, ask yourself this question, why do you think he was fined 2 weeks wages?
 

Coyboy

The Double of 1961 is still The Double
Dec 3, 2004
15,506
5,032
I don't need to make it plain, look up the meaning of gross misconduct and you'll see that Danny Rose hasn't acted appropriately or professional. In what world is it professional to criticise your chairman and fellow pro's in public, in what world is it professional to speak out about your wages in public?, in what world is it professional to criticise the club's transfer policy in public?

Let's not play that game of evidence because it's stupid, have you seen his contract? What evidence do you have that his contract doesn't contain that should he speak out against his employees he will not suffer some kind of punishment. You know we can both go down this road but what it comes to is using your common sense therefore It really doesn't need to be debated, ask yourself this question, why do you think he was fined 2 weeks wages?

I accept it was unprofessional but not that it was tantamount to GM; and you were the one who cited his contract and that this was an open and shut case of GM without answering my questions above or quoting the exact words DR used which would justify summary dismissal.

I don't need to look up GM. I do this for a living and know for a fact that cases like these, or in fact, those involving far more inflammatory and inappropriate language have resulted in inconsistent decisions in Tribunals and appellate courts precisely because cases involving GM are generally fact specific.

But you're boring me now because you keep chanting the same insubstantiattd BS suggesting you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
I accept it was unprofessional but not that it was tantamount to GM; and you were the one who cited his contract and that this was an open and shut case of GM without answering my questions above or quoting the exact words DR used which would justify summary dismissal.

I don't need to look up GM. I do this for a living and know for a fact that cases like these, or in fact, those involving far more inflammatory and inappropriate language have resulted in inconsistent decisions in Tribunals and appellate courts precisely because cases involving GM are generally fact specific.

But you're boring me now because you keep chanting the same insubstantiattd BS suggesting you haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Dude I'm not going to spoon feed you what comments I think is GM, you want me to quote the exact comments fucking hell lol - I've already answered the questions by paraphrasing what he said, if you're too thick to understand such a basic post and basic concept then that's your problem, use some common sense.

You do this for a living, that doesn't impress me at all especially since I've seen people dismissed for speaking out against their employers making similar derogatory comments on social media so looks like it's your word against mine, for the record I don't really care if you've dealt with cases with far more inflammatory comments, congratulations, if I were you I'd be looking for a career change if I were you. :sneaky:
 

Hakkz

Svensk hetsporre
Jul 6, 2012
8,196
17,270
I appreciate you are being facetious, but it's not really the same thing is it. If you worked in an industry and was considered one of the best at what you do and your peers were doing exactly the same at other companies but being paid twice or three times more than you, you would obviously have an issue.

Players don't play football because they love the club they play for (at least most don't), they play because it is their job and they obviously want to maximise the amount they earn in their relatively short careers. I have no issue with that.

Very likely. Still I wouldn't go cry about it in a newspaper.
 
Top