He was sacked because his actions were found to be in serious breach of the provisions of his employment contract. That would surely nullify any payout claims. It's different to managers where you're effectively paying off their contract, i.e. there's no breach of terms on their side.
If it were just the Klopp incident.... I suspect he would have been publicly reprimanded, but not punished. He might have not officiated our games for a few months, but things would pretty soon go back to normal for him. It's the other stuff that put the nail in his coffin.
I’m not posting this to be argumentative but it’s a link to a legal case regarding PGMOL and whether referees are self employed or employees for tax purposes. It’s rather complicated and it’s ongoing so, to me at least, it doesn’t look clear at all. Don’t know what you think, https://www.lewissilkin.com/en/insights/supreme-court-shows-self-employment-the-red-card
Interesting to read. I also found this: https://www.ac-accounts.co.uk/blog/...ferees in charge of,(MOO) between the parties. So it sounds like Premier League referees (presumably including Coote) are employed, while for those further down the pyramid the status is currently unclear, with HMRC claiming they're employees and PGMOL saying they're self-employed.
Coote deserves everything he got. PGMOL had to investigate in private but I do think there needs to be more visibility into how they police for everything - especially corruption.
Lesson in how to make a fool of yourself on social media. Regarding the update, I sincerely hope PGMOL knew nothing about the 'making an indecent image' situation that is now a charge after the way they defended him.
Nothing will happen to Coote over this. He won’t go to jail. If Huw Edward’s can get a suspended sentence and the guy he was getting the images etc from got the same, why will they be different for Coote. why is it that people who get caught with all these child images never seem to go to jail? Any Judge that passes down a suspended sentence needs to have their hard drives examined.
Am I correct in understanding this is actually the worst form of pictures too featuring penetration? How on earth could he possibly defend himself against that? How on earth could any judge not lock him up?
It's apparently 'Class A'. I don't know what that actually means, but if it's the same classification as drugs, then even those Everton and Man U blue-tick simps who were lauding him to the skies for hating Klopp and Liverpool may just be struggling a tad to keep up the cheerleading.
Class A is either penetration or assault. So if guilty as charged... essentially as bad as it gets for images.
I dont understand how a suspend sentence is even considered. Jail time is to light. Any ****er who gets off even watching kids get abused should be invited to take a seat and just pop this metal cap on lad. It will all be over soon.
