Was there not reports during the previous pre season that abramovich had met with klinsman and sounded him out about the Chelsea job? Could have just been speculation, but was defiantly reported that they were not that happy with jose.
Grant, Jose, Carlo and Ranieri all say they were in charge of transfer dealings with little involvement, as do Chelsea FC authors. They are ALL lying
hhhhh ok let us go back to Jose words and that was in chelsea official website There are only two ways for me to leave Chelsea. One way is in June 2010 when I finish my contract and if the club doesn't give me a new one. It is the end of my contract and I am out. The second way is for Chelsea to sack me. There is not a third way. ok it was not 2010, so option one is not valid ... so what was the other option again ? and that is the words out of Jose's mouth just bcz they agreed a fee, it doesn't mean he was not been kicked out.. chelsea wanted him out desperately they give 10m for him just to shut up and leave the whole idea of mutual consent, is that so an employee has no entitlement to claim unfair dismissal.. serve chelsea well bcz they don't want to lose more money and save Jose well as it keep his pride , better than being called got the sack , although is the same
It doesnt matter, if you work for someone and they dont want you working for them, it doesnt matter if you want to go to or not, you are getting sacked. Mutual agreement is a saving face bull**** phrase. Chelsea wanted Jose gone so it mattered not what Jose wanted, Chelsea terminated his contract regardless of how Jose felt about it. That is being sacked, you may not mind being sacked and think you can get a good job, it is still a sacking. Jose did not terminate his own contract otherwise money would have went the other way, mutual agreement would mean no money being paid out, Jose got money, millions of pounds because his contract was terminated by Chelsea. Sacked all day long
the proof is Jose was paid for having his contract terminated. The will probably have mutually agreed on how much that fee was but that is after the fact of a termination by Chelsea.
right so you interpret compensation (something that has to be done if there is a clause in the contract or the contract is terminated early, termination doesn't necessarily mean sacking) as Jose not wanting to go and Roman forcing him out. still waiting on that concrete proof.
Compensation is only paid out in the event of one party terminating the contract before it has run out Drogs. if Jose terminated his contract he would have owed Chelsea money
you're still failing to grasp the concept of the word 'mutual' aren't you? ...still not providing this concrete proof either, wonder why?
the word mutual is a word thrown about with no factual relevance to the contract. Rafa left Liverpool on a mutual consent termination, he was sacked. Liverpool terminated his contract and he agreed a fee on that termination. Same with Jose. Either way, neither side of the argument can be proved, so its differences of opinion on both sides. And that is some attempted insult that I dont grasp what mutual means when I obviously do, if it annoys you that I disagree, that makes you the arsehole mate
I don't give a **** about Rafa, this is about Jose. The proof on my side, is that Jose has physically confirmed what happened. He's got no reason to lie, although I know you lot love to hate Roman and his itchy trigger finger but please, give up the obsession.
You mean the press conference when he joined Chelsea this time around? He's hardly going to stand up in front of the world on his return and say "yes, I was sacked last time around, but this time I'm sure it will be different". He'd paint a media target on his back before he'd even played a game! Not to mention calling his employers liars for releasing a statement saying he left by mutual consent in 2007. I can't think of any manager in the world who would start a new job by blatantly contradicting a statement released by the club, no matter how long ago it was, and Jose is far from naive when it comes to dealing with the media.
