Manure running scared

[Drogs]

He's not arse licking united fans he just ain't self-delusional like you lot. He has a unbiased point of view, well its just common sense really something you and DL don't have a lot of..

unreal.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

unreal.

Drogs, I couldn't give a monkeys if Jose was sacked or not.

Your constant denials have kept this going and going and the irony is this is a thread created to supposedly wum Man United fans.

You are the only one who has actually got annoyed.

 

[theevilreddevil]

unreal.

fancy a bum?

 

[Drogs]

Drogs, I couldn't give a monkeys if Jose was sacked or not.

Your constant denials have kept this going and going and the irony is this is a thread created to supposedly wum Man United fans.

bbf, you obviously haven't seen me post before if you think I'm in denial. I also couldn't give a toss whether he was sacked or not, but with the evidence presented to me and the fact Jose has said himself he wasn't, that suggests he wasn't!

I'll apologise for the personal insults but my point still stands, without concrete evidence you haven't got a foot to stand on.

 

[Drogs]

fancy a bum?

no, not my thing cupcake.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

seriously, log off and don't return. Your opinions are all invalid and nobody gives a flying **** about what you post. You are the ultimate ****.

Eloquent, really

If I am the ultimate **** without even trying to be, that's some doing.

And seeing as you replied to almost every post I put on here in the last few days, it's obvious you cared enough to reply so often

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

bbf, you obviously haven't seen me post before if you think I'm in denial. I also couldn't give a toss whether he was sacked or not, but with the evidence presented to me and the fact Jose has said himself he wasn't, that suggests he wasn't!

I'll apologise for the personal insults but my point still stands, without concrete evidence you haven't got a foot to stand on.

**** it dude, its honestly just adversity, you support Chelsea I support Liverpool, there is nothing more to it than that.

No issues here, I am just a ****, that aint no secret but you are no angel yourself but its cool man, really

 

[theevilreddevil]

no, not my thing cupcake.

Where's the solid proof that its not?????

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Jose was not sacked I was wrong.


he was fired.

 

[Diego]

Sacking = Termination of contract against the will of the employee
Mutual Consent = Termination of contract due to agreement between employee and employer

In leymans terms....

Sacking = When you don't want to leave
Mutual Consent = When you want to leave

Sackings are far more acrimonious, can go as far as court due to claims of unfair dismissal (just about the only bit of sense Shwan has written in his life).

Jose's situation was pretty much the same as it was at Madrid, jump or be pushed.

Think about it. Jose is unhappy, Roman is unhappy. Jose is a fan favourite. If he walks out on Chelsea (and the fans) he's the villain, if Roman sacks him then he's the villain. Neither wants to come out of the situation badly so mutual consent is the best way to end things.

When you apply a bit of common sense and rationality - which isn't a profound concept to some on here - it really isn't that difficult a concept to understand.

This would make a lot of sence if the 10 mil "compensation" had not changed hands, how do you explain that?

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

This would make a lot of sence if the 10 mil "compensation" had not changed hands, how do you explain that?

Was it that much

 

[shwan]

Sacking = Termination of contract against the will of the employee
Mutual Consent = Termination of contract due to agreement between employee and employer

In leymans terms....

Sacking = When you don't want to leave
Mutual Consent = When you want to leave

Sackings are far more acrimonious, can go as far as court due to claims of unfair dismissal (just about the only bit of sense Shwan has written in his life).

Jose's situation was pretty much the same as it was at Madrid, jump or be pushed.

Think about it. Jose is unhappy, Roman is unhappy. Jose is a fan favourite. If he walks out on Chelsea (and the fans) he's the villain, if Roman sacks him then he's the villain. Neither wants to come out of the situation badly so mutual consent is the best way to end things.

When you apply a bit of common sense and rationality - which isn't a profound concept to some on here - it really isn't that difficult a concept to understand.

sacking = when club want to kick someone out but the employee refuse to leave and want his full remaining wages or go to unfair dismissal
Mutual Consent = when club want to kick someone out but manage to agree terms so they save money and managers leave with some dignity

but that don't mean he wasn't been kicked out by his club and shown the door

he bloody paid him 10m just to f*ck off & leave

 

[shwan]

Jose was not sacked I was wrong.


he was fired.

...

 

[Gazautd]

Jose was not sacked I was wrong.

he was fired.

...

x2

 

[theevilreddevil]

x3

 

[Diego]

Stop being mean to the Chelsea chaps, can`t you see they are worried about their future. They have a new manager who has been fired from a lot of his previous positions including once by Chelsea and on top of that noboby else seemed to want him, they are only trying to re-assure themselves and each other that the good times are coming back to the bridge.

 

[shwan]

Stop being mean to the Chelsea chaps, can`t you see they are worried about their future. They have a new manager who has been fired from a lot of his previous positions including once by Chelsea and on top of that noboby else seemed to want him, they are only trying to re-assure themselves and each other that the good times are coming back to the bridge.

indeed ..it is the love story of the unwanted
no one want to join chelsea with Crazy Abra on board
and no one want to sign a self centered big ego manager who call himself the special one !!

what better pathetic love story you want? the lover story of the creepy couple

 

[Swarbs]

why wouldn't he say that? Not exactly an abnormal thing to say, he wasn't sacked, neither the club nor him said it. I don't know why this bothers you lot so much.

as for your second part I'll revert to my comment to sisu - concrete evidence please. That telegraph article do

Seriously? Why wouldn't he call his current employers liars at his unveiling by revealing confidential information about his previous exit from the club?! Can't imagine why he wouldn't want to embarrass the people paying him millions of pounds a year.

Can't say it particularly bothers me, it just interests me how defensive Chelsea fans can get about these things. Ginger Marks did the same thing about the Terry affair, refusing to believe he'd had an affair even after it was admitted in court. Don't know why you all have such blinkered views of your players and Mourinho that you can't even admit the potential for these things to happen, or consider any sort of argument without covering your ears and shouting "SHOW ME THE PROOF!"

Sacking = Termination of contract against the will of the employee
Mutual Consent = Termination of contract due to agreement between employee and employer

In leymans terms....

Sacking = When you don't want to leave
Mutual Consent = When you want to leave

Actually no. Mutual agreement is when you want to leave. Mutual consent is when one party initiates the termination and the other party consents to it.

When mutual consent is reached, the situation can still go to an employment tribunal and be considered as unfair dismissal if one party was placed under undue pressure. Such as if, for example, the employee was offered a £10 million package and told they would only receive that money if they agreed to leave the company.

"The mutual consent of both parties can bring an Employment Contract to an end, but even here an employee may argue later that unfair dismissal occurred; the employer will then be required to show clear evidence that the agreement was in fact mutual (such as the use of a Compromise Agreement where, following legal advice, both parties will agree to end the employment relationship)"
http://www.fosters-solicitors.co.uk/employment/employer-termination

And do you really think Jose was unhappy at Chelsea the first time around? When the fans loved him and he had a massive budget to spend on the players he wanted? The only thing that could have made him unhappy would have been Abramovich making his position untenable. Which would have been constructive dismissal.

 

[BBFs Unpopular View]

Seriously? Why wouldn't he call his current employers liars at his unveiling by revealing confidential information about his previous exit from the club?! Can't imagine why he wouldn't want to embarrass the people paying him millions of pounds a year.

Can't say it particularly bothers me, it just interests me how defensive Chelsea fans can get about these things. Ginger Marks did the same thing about the Terry affair, refusing to believe he'd had an affair even after it was admitted in court. Don't know why you all have such blinkered views of your players and Mourinho that you can't even admit the potential for these things to happen, or consider any sort of argument without covering your ears and shouting "SHOW ME THE PROOF!"



Actually no. Mutual agreement is when you want to leave. Mutual consent is when one party initiates the termination and the other party consents to it.

When mutual consent is reached, the situation can still go to an employment tribunal and be considered as unfair dismissal if one party was placed under undue pressure. Such as if, for example, the employee was offered a £10 million package and told they would only receive that money if they agreed to leave the company.

"The mutual consent of both parties can bring an Employment Contract to an end, but even here an employee may argue later that unfair dismissal occurred; the employer will then be required to show clear evidence that the agreement was in fact mutual (such as the use of a Compromise Agreement where, following legal advice, both parties will agree to end the employment relationship)"
http://www.fosters-solicitors.co.uk/employment/employer-termination

And do you really think Jose was unhappy at Chelsea the first time around? When the fans loved him and he had a massive budget to spend on the players he wanted? The only thing that could have made him unhappy would have been Abramovich making his position untenable. Which would have been constructive dismissal.

That would go some ways to explaining a 10 million payout.

Funny that one of Jose's gripes was not being given the money he wanted for signings

 

[Drogs]

Seriously? Why wouldn't he call his current employers liars at his unveiling by revealing confidential information about his previous exit from the club?! Can't imagine why he wouldn't want to embarrass the people paying him millions of pounds a year.

Can't say it particularly bothers me, it just interests me how defensive Chelsea fans can get about these things. Ginger Marks did the same thing about the Terry affair, refusing to believe he'd had an affair even after it was admitted in court. Don't know why you all have such blinkered views of your players and Mourinho that you can't even admit the potential for these things to happen, or consider any sort of argument without covering your ears and shouting "SHOW ME THE PROOF!"

In what way would it be embarrassing? Why would Chelsea not want to admit they sacked him either? You said we let our blindness get in the way which is ****ing priceless, the agenda some of you have with Roman is what's blinding.

Oh and how dare I ask for proof . (which has still not been provided, just shwan spouting ****e illiterately about 'abra' and sisu providing fail links, none of which confirming a single thing)