David Coote

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Zanjinho said:
I was surprised he didn't walk just walk away initially; do referees get a payout same as managers?
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintanton and Zanjinho
Bindiana said:
Would have been interesting to see what the punishment would have been if it was just the Klopp video. As soon as the other videos came out there was no chance he wasn't getting sacked.
Click to expand...


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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moreinjuredthanowen
Germlands Nozzer said:
The statement from PGMOL says "employment contract", which would suggest to me that he was directly employed.
Click to expand...
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: Germlands Nozzer
JB2 said:
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
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
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.
 
johnsonsbaby said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiresias, Zanjinho, remembercolinlee and 2 others
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?
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee and Ivan Dobsky
Milk.. said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
Ivan Dobsky said:
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.
Click to expand...


Class A is either penetration or assault. So if guilty as charged... essentially as bad as it gets for images.
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee and Ivan Dobsky
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ivan Dobsky
Solid Air 2 said:
tbf not sure PGMOL can police a refs internet usage though PGMOL should be investigated in respect of the poor standard of referring in the PL
Click to expand...
I'm not talking about them checking his internet usage. I'm making a more general point that it seems very unlikely that nobody within the organisation could make the link between him and the white powder given it's easy to tell when someone is on it and further incidents of suspect behaviour.

The Klopp video of him spaced out was several years old, and nobody inside PGMOL had any idea of this side of him - come on. He was suspended for several months in 2017/18 for alleged misconduct with PGMOL claiming his absence as "an injury" hiding the fact that he was being investigated. The nature of the allegations weren't made public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Solid Air 2
johnsonsbaby said:
I'm not talking about them checking his internet usage. I'm making a more general point that it seems very unlikely that nobody within the organisation could make the link between him and the white powder given it's easy to tell when someone is on it and further incidents of suspect behaviour.

The Klopp video of him spaced out was several years old, and nobody inside PGMOL had any idea of this side of him - come on. He was suspended for several months in 2017/18 for alleged misconduct with PGMOL claiming his absence as "an injury" hiding the fact that he was being investigated. The nature of the allegations weren't made public.
Click to expand...
ah with you now
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnsonsbaby
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back