If what has been stated is true, and he did try and get a couple of our players to go with him, if that doesn't de-stabilise the dressing room, what will? There was supposedly a meeting just last month between the clubs, where we requested/demanded that he wasn't employed by Everton this summer if, as has happened, they got rid of Allardyce. Also, we are allegedly still paying him, just as Everton are still paying Koeman, so his claim for compensation is less likely to stand up - even more so, given that the wording saying that he was no longer Head Coach initially states that him and the club "parted company" and not whose decision it was. The follow-up statement implies that it was the boards decision, but saying that "we were left with little choice" still doesn't clarify the situation, especially given Silva's refusal to commit himself either way in interviews and that it was "between the clubs". I could be wrong, but I think this wouldn't have happened if Kenwright was still owner of Everton.
Employment law is a contract of good faith. When you accept money to do a job you have to do it to the best of your ability - clearly after Everton's approach Silva switched off so was sacked "for cause". Technically he could be sued for breach of the conditions of his contract. Why do you think he has received no pay off or compensation? As you are struggling to understand Watford's position let me try to help you by looking at Everton. Imagine you had your best start to a season for donkey's years and after two months were top of the table (come on use some imagination). Then Liverpool decided they wanted your manager so underhand they approached him and did a deal offering him double the money and millions to spend on players; he agreed to the deal and even offered to bring some of your best players with him - and approached them telling them what he was doing. All this behind the back of your club. Then Everton found out and refused to let him go. He sulks for two months and you win only one match in the next 12 sliding down the table - to the point you are approaching the relegation zone (less hard for you to imagine). The board realises he is no longer trying and the three players he approached have also switched off and are playing rubbish. You sack him. Are you really telling me that if he then goes to Liverpool at the end of the season you will smile seetly and say OK - a fair Kop (do you like the pun?) Of course not. You get lawyers involved and they tell you what compensation you are entitled to from Liverpool and the manager.
If you sacked him for supposed breach of contract by speaking to Everton, then you’d need evidence of that to justify that conclusion. The team playing ****e and him sulking doesn’t constitute evidence....... The same evidence that you’d need to prove that we’d tapped him up. The fact remains that the PL did nothing when you raised the complaint, which makes it obvious that you didn’t have that evidence otherwise they’d have sanctioned us. It’s patently obvious that he did speak to us btw, but proving it is quite another thing. So as it stands, he has a claim against Watford for the value of the remaining 6 months of his contract when you sacked him. You are somehow trying to claim compo for a bloke that you can’t prove breached his contract and he would claim he was sacked for performance issues and you have not paid him since. He would argue it was you breaching the contract terms, as he was due severance, as you couldn’t prove his supposed contract breach. You’ve threatened legal action should we appoint him, good luck with that one, as you terminated his contract and he’s therefore no longer legally employed by you. We’ve apparently told you to do one btw. The compromise here, is that he’ll drop his claim for the £750k he’s due, and you won’t pursue a futile attempt to claim compo for him.
When you came on here you said: "Quick question chaps, how are Watford supposedly after compo for Silva given you sacked him?" Well about a dozen of us have answered that for you. It is apparent you just want to moan and argue about it. Fair enough. However as none of us are lawyers we just have to disagree as it is not for us to resolve it. You now know why we think we will get compensation and time will show whether you or we are right. Knowing our owners they will have gathered a mountain of evidence and it is not surprising if it is not passed to us fans. Everton and Silva have both already admitted the facts with Everton even offering derisory compensation so they have already lost the legal war - it just comes down to whether they are sensible enough to make a decent offer out of court or face FA sanctions. I think we will win hands down and both Silva and Everton will face the consequences of their action.
Moan and argue? I’ve done neither, I was interested to know Watford fans take on it and it’s called a discussion..... Silva and Everton have admitted nothing of the sort and your summation that they’ve somehow lost the legal battle is baseless. You’ve surmised that Watford will win this battle hands down, but have completely failed to explain why, given that his supposed mountain of evidence that they’ve got, didn’t make it to the PL when they made their initial complaint....... Our ‘derisory’ offer btw reached £15m last year and it was to release him from his contract and perfectly legitimate, you appear to be confused as to how this all works......
You are arguing now !! When you simply repeat the same points and just disagree with everyone else it is hardly a discussion. When a club offers a settlement out of court it is an admission of guilt. Now we are just talking about the size of the punishment. We both have no idea what the Pozzos have presented to the FA. Only that the FA have asked if the clubs can find a settlement without their intervention. That won't happen till Everton offer similar to their previous £15m - plus compensation. You even now admit you offered £15m against FA rules to a manager in contract without permission to speak to him. Make up your mind - you saidnot guilty but now accept you are. Who is confused? - Not me. If Everton thought they could win this battle they would already have appointed Silva. They want him and have followed him for over half a year. They only have failed to appoint him as they know it weakens their case further. They are over the proverbial barrel and we all know it.
I’m repeating some of the actual facts as your understanding of them is incorrect. What out of court settlement? We offered Watford £15m for Silva services, a perfectly legal offer, not an out of court settlement. You declined it, as is your right, and he remained in situ as your manager.......until you sacked him 2 months later. Your summation of the situation is flawed due to your misunderstanding of the basic facts of the matter.
You seem unaware that (a couple of weeks ago I think it was) Everton offered Watford £1m. I am not talking about the £15m you offered back in October/ November but that does set the level for any compensation claim. By the way that was not a perfectly legal offer as you claim as it breached FA rules as they had not permission to even speak to Silva - which is why you will lose. It is evident that only you are unaware of the facts.
What £1m offer? How did the £15m offer breach FA rules? We didn’t have permission to speak to Silva, and there’s no proof that we did, hence the reason your complaint last year got nowhere......welcome to the point.
Tobes, please when you post stick to the facts. Watford DID lodge a complaint to the Premier League last year AND threatened legal action against Everton for an illegal approach. It was then that Everton back tracked away and went back and ofered Big Sam an 18 month contract having had him already turn down the 6 month one from them three weeks earlier. The complaint at that stage went no further following their public statement that they would not be hiring Silva as their Manager. However as the weeks passed the damage of the "apparent" illegal approach became clear for all to see and "perhaps" things came to light over it and the FA who had hoped for a "quiet" solution between the clubs has failed to see it materialise and is why Everton HAVE been talking to Watford over this because they were quilty of their actions last year. Everton have also having sacked Big Sam after he turned their season around and effectively returned to what they offered him originally ie 6 months in charge, now "look" like they are going to appoint Silva as they wanted to at the time in November added fuel to the fire "THEY" started. Big Sam would not have taken the job on a six month deal and you would have probably been involved at least in a relegation battle at the least so Everton have "used" big Sam to buy themselves time in appointing Silva and "perhaps" having illegally approached him or his representives could have made him known they would be back for him in the summer. This would "perhaps" explain why Silva suddenly started to non perform at Watford as his heart was not fully in it and knew he would move on anyways an ideal demotivator in anyones book. With all the coaches available and the funds available to your owner it would be more prudent of Everton to appoint someone other than Silva ( if West Ham can appoint Pellegrni supposedly why not Everton?) who would of course obtain another position elsewhere. "If" Watford had been relegated because of this turn around in results after Evertons actions think of the compensation claim then!!!! One final point Tobes the Watford owners have been running football clubs since 1986 how long has your owner been running a football club? Football is a lot different to running other business as alot of people have found out to their cost. This is a lesson your owner might be advised to learn from. Good luck for the next season it would be awful if you were relegated under Silva and you would have no chance of Big Sam coming to the rescue again......
Stick to the facts you say..... What did Everton backing off Silva have to do with the validity or otherwise of Watford’s complaint to the PL? If we’d have been proven to have broken the rules us backing off, would be irrelevant to our guilt....and we’d have been sanctioned for tapping him up. We signed Allardyce on an 18 month contract not 6, so whatever our plans might have beyond the end of the season is merely conjecture. Allardyce was universally disliked at Goodison by the fans, as his football was horrendous. Had he delivered decent football to accompany the 8th place finish that could well have seen a different outcome for him. As for Silva, the fact that we’ve now reignited our interest in the out of contract manager is nothing to do with Watford, as you terminated his contract. As for your owners and their supposed superior knowledge of the game, 9 managers in 5 years would suggest that they’re hardly making inspired decisions. Also, as with players, if there’s an approach and the player or manager says he’d like to go, then it’s virtually always prudent to allow that to happen, as their heart is obviously not in it. Watford chose to hang on to him, and it went pear shaped, had you gone down, then it’d have been the decision to hang on to a manger who didn’t want to be there that’d have been at fault, not our asking the question.......
1, Watford wrongly assumed issue was over. They therefore did not pursue it as relevant and After Everton "publically" distanced themselves from Silva FA left it to clubs to resolve. ( Remember Liverpool/ Southampton Van Dyke last summer?) 2 , As I stated it was plan "C" with Big Sam = only way you could get him was 18 month and "perhaps" never intended him to stay beyond summer. Different point, if for all your dislike to him had he had full season with you, you WOULD be in Europe for the next one... 3, The present mess surronding your interest in him shows your hand fully that he was and is the one you have always wanted. 4, Do yourself a favour before making a fool out of yourself with the weak 9 in 5 argument. Research would show you that 6 of those managers for varied reasons left because of reasons other than being sacked by the owners and..... having successfully ran football clubs for more than 30 years anyone who criticises them should at least give them credence that if they did not make inspired decisions, on the whole, they would not still be successful in keeping 2 teams in their top flight leagues. Your guy spent a fortune last summer (unsuccessfully), sacked his new manager, illegally tapped up an employed manager, then sacked a guy who gave you a succesful season after the mess it started in and then goes back to a man who you legally could not employ, very "INSPIRED" that looks from the outside Tobes!!!! 5, As previously stated to you Tobes, employment law looks back at the root cause of the issue which began in late October 2017 and involved Everton's "approach" that is a fact which you can not twist or defend as history can not be changed however much we would like it to be and is why Everton HAVE been talking to Watford and which you have not offered an inspired reason for them doing so.
Facts are simple Everton made an illegal approach and will pay for it. How much? To be determined. Silva breached his contract and got sacked for it. Good riddance. The end. As for the old 9 managers in 5 years bore-story. It is actually 6 years. One of those lasted a month and quit due to heart problems. Another was effectively an interim manager lasting two weeks. Our current manager would not be here but for Everton's illegal approach. Six managers in six years does not sound quite so dramatic though does it? Still 9 in 6 years is factually correct if it bothers you. How about Everton? Since May 2016 - TWO years ago you have had Unsworth AND Royal, Koeman, Unsworth, Allardyce and maybe Slither. I make that 6 in 2 years - blimey that makes us look stable.
I suppose the VVD comparison is potentially valid, but that would depend on what evidence you had, as Liverpool were caught bang to rights, and there’s been no mention of what supposed evidence you have.......aside from him sulking......we’ll see how it pans out. Assuming that is, that we’re actually in for him..... I only brought up the ‘9 in 5’ as you took a cheap shot btw, I didn’t realise that it was such a sore point
That might be a valid point if you explained it further. Was this too complicated for you or are you able to deny any of it? Facts are simple Everton made an illegal approach and will pay for it. How much? To be determined. Silva breached his contract and got sacked for it. Good riddance. The end.
We are happy with the Pozzos and their choices on manager - seems to be you lot who get sore on the subject. But get your facts right - except you never seem to. You are a shambles of a so called big club - no wonder you have been left trailing in the wake of the big six.
I think you are not being totally realistic in saying that 'We are happy with the Pozzos and their choice of manager' Leo. Whether we like it or not 9 managers in 5 years has disrupted continuity at our club and does not send out a good message. Loyalty works 2 ways - if Silva was speaking to Everton whilst under contract to us then it is to be condemned, but no more so than if the Pozzos were talking to someone else as a possible replacement behind the existing managers back - which they appear to have done more than once. If you had been offered the chance of holding onto Sean Dyche, and giving him free reign plus economic security in the background - where would we be now ? - Burnley with money, and I would not say no to that. The same goes for Jokanovic and Flores - they were both managers who should have been given more time. Every year we see the same thing - players and managers who switch off towards the end of the season thinking about where they will be next season. I have no problem with Everton employing Silva - we have no right to be telling him where he can go, or Everton who they should be employing. As for the question of compensation - the whole thing would have been much simpler if we had sacked him as soon as it became clear what had happened - absolutely independent of results, but we didn't.
Sorry Cologne, whilst I agree with some of the points you raise it was Jokanovic's financial demands that meant he did not get a dealer further than his one until the end of the promotion winning season. As for Flores he was the one who activated the mid point break clause "he" insisted on being put in place in his two year contract so that is not something that can be held against the club. Separately Flores like a lot of the coaches we have employed has still not gone on to last more than two seasons at other clubs, just a coincidence?
