Jonas Wins In Court.

Jonas today won his case against Newcastle for discrimination after he was diagnosed with cancer. Ashley has now lost twice in court , firstly with Kevin Keegan and now with Jonas. I hope the senior management in the club look in a mirror and realise just how shockingly they run the club.

http://www.themag.co.uk/2016/04/mik...ity-discrimination-tribunal-newcastle-united/

 

It seems, all one has to do to generate a win in the modern climate is face Newcastle. Gulp.

 

Good on him. Treated disgracefully by the club after loyal service.

Will always remember that celebration after he scored to help keep us up.

Wish him all the best.

 

To be fair, the second charge is ****ing ridiculous. How many clubs don't pick players precisely because they don't want them to trigger some kind of renewal or buy-out clause? It's a facet of the game.

 

Sounds like the clowns only have themselves to blame for this. Charnley and Pardew both mentioned for not giving clear evidence which is hardly surprising.

To be honest the way Jonas was treated was disgusting and I am glad he won even though I really didn't think he could as it seems part and parcel of the modern game to prevent players triggering bonuses.

 

Load of ****e for me - I find it farcical this has been upheld. This could open a real can of worms.

I like Jonas but I think this is wrong. That said i don't know the full facts which I'm sure will be revealed in due course.

 

You were also cited as being a ****.
Nothing to do with the court case itself, Jonas just threw it in there for reference.

 

Well at least they got something right

 

How are you, you old git?

 

This wasn't an easy case to win, surely. There must be club documents actually instructing managers not to play him. Another shambles from the club, hardly surprising.

 

See the case of the former female exec vs Leeds, it seems all one must do to win an unfair dismissal case in football, is to turn up and sound believable.

It's a case of employer vs employee, one word vs another, but add to that the notoriety of the club's owners (see Mike Ashley and Leeds nutter) and the employee will probably easily win. Very different to if me or you filed such a case against our employers.

This is an absolutely unbelievable ruling that sets a stupid precedent. "He didn't pick me because I had a cold"... "He didn't pick me because I was out on the piss in public with pictures of girls all over me... Discrimination against the sexy

 

As I understand it, all of the mirrors have been removed from SJP for precisely that reason. Charnley and his cohorts don't want to look at themselves............... unless its navel gazing.

 

The BBC report differently: "Former Newcastle boss Alan Pardew "was able to deliver his evidence in a confident, convincing and articulate way".

 

Agree here.
On this very board we were calling him a spent force before he got cancer and I for one thought he wasn't good enough for the first team at that time.
Love the bloke immensely but clubs will be scared not to pick some players now with this ruling.

 

Sort of agree, but he always tried and kept trying till the end and he understood the fans and the City. How many would have him in the team now? He would look world class compared to most of these useless, gutless ****wits!!

 

He tried hard. That all that I could ask of a player once he's on the pitch. If a player isn't good enough to be there then that's not him to blame but the manager and the scouting staff's department.

I liked Jonas because he simply tried his best. Good luck to him.

 

Very good Obi. Less old and less fat than you.

Still awaiting Marcelo's arrival patiently.

 

Jonas trying was enough to keep us up last season. The current lot, can't even do that.

 

I think the bit that I find absolutely ridiculous, and leaves a bad taste in terms of how Jonas has treated the club, is the business that it is wrong for the club to have discussions about not picking him in order to not trigger an extension. Unless I'm picking that up wrong? I can't help but think so ****ing what, is that not part and parcel of football? Clubs put these clauses in all the time. Surely it should be acceptable to then not pick them to avoid someone you don't want because they aren't good enough staying at the club and draining valuable resource?

Bottom line is he wasn't good enough. I admire his effort whilst here and for sure if others had his fight coupled with their superior ability, we wouldn't be in the hole we are. However that is not a reason to retain him. The point is we were trying to move forward and buy a better class of player, hoping they had the same work ethic. The fact we completely ****ed that up is neither here nor there IMO.

To be honest I find him bringing this case against him is all a bit of a ****s trick. He had long been considered not good enough before his health issues and he knew this. He's gone down in my estimation.

 

The judge can only have no idea about how form affects a player's selection or has chosen to ignore that evidence. Him having cancer had nothing to do with him not getting games. I can see the club appealing the decision and maybe even having it overturned. If the club have done anything wrong in all this it's that they perhaps didn't support Jonas as much as they should have done through his illness.