You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > A question on the Pulis case etc.
April 26 2024 9.57am

A question on the Pulis case etc.

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

 

jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 06 Mar 17 1.21pm

Originally posted by coulsdoneagle

I'd image me that there was a clause that said if he left us mid season any bonuses due were null and void.

He is too savvy to have made such a basic error and Parish is too savvy to not have a clause to protect palace.

Well not that savvy, he lost the court case and a lot of money. I suspect he didn't really understand it or contract law, or just assumed that he'd get away with it. Plus for whatever reason, there wasn't a job for him either.

His actions, really caused a lot of problems, and we were lucky to get Pardew at Christmas that season, because under Warnock we were going down. Also it ran us into the Malky Mckay debacle.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Nobbybm's Profile Nobbybm Flag Dartford 06 Mar 17 1.46pm Send a Private Message to Nobbybm Add Nobbybm as a friend

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Well not that savvy, he lost the court case and a lot of money. I suspect he didn't really understand it or contract law, or just assumed that he'd get away with it. Plus for whatever reason, there wasn't a job for him either.

His actions, really caused a lot of problems, and we were lucky to get Pardew at Christmas that season, because under Warnock we were going down. Also it ran us into the Malky Mckay debacle.

I'd assume the latter - he's done similar to at least 3 other clubs in the past, none of which have really had the means(or inclination) to go legal on him. I think Gillingham were going to but he (allegedly) had acquired a case of 'sensitive' documents which stopped any action in its tracks.

My understanding of the bonus in question was it relied on him keeping us up & him still being with us on 1st September - not an unusual combination as it can prevent managers taking a new job between seasons. I guess he thought the two weeks left wouldn't matter especially if he spun a few lines to make it seem he was being reasonable. Unfortunately for him, the judges in the original hearing and the subsequent appeal both believed he deliberately sought to obtain the money under false pretences.

I doubt he'll ever have a more expensive fortnight.

 


Will this be five? It's gonna be five! It IS five!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Crazy_Eagle's Profile Crazy_Eagle Flag South London 06 Mar 17 8.40pm Send a Private Message to Crazy_Eagle Add Crazy_Eagle as a friend

like him or not we are still in the Premier League purely down to him.

 


R.I.P. DJ Hardline

CPFC2010

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View merganser's Profile merganser Flag 06 Mar 17 9.04pm Send a Private Message to merganser Add merganser as a friend

Anyone know how vigorous Palace are being in their efforts to get the money?

Is the club happy just to bide its time?

In his MOTD interview, I thought it was significant when TP said: "congratulations to Palace."

Was he showing some good will in the hope that it might pave the way to a lower settlement being mutually agreed with Palace out of court?

He does have one card up his sleeve. It will probably look ugly and reflect badly on Palace if the club sends in bailiffs.

If Pulis offers to cough up 75 per cent, maybe the club should accept it, shake hands on the deal and draw a line under the matter.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 07 Mar 17 7.34am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by merganser

Anyone know how vigorous Palace are being in their efforts to get the money?

Is the club happy just to bide its time?

In his MOTD interview, I thought it was significant when TP said: "congratulations to Palace."

Was he showing some good will in the hope that it might pave the way to a lower settlement being mutually agreed with Palace out of court?

In response to your first two questions no-one here knows the answer although no doubt a few will present their opinions as fact as usual.

Regarding Pulis congratulating Palace on their win, whatever beef he may have is with Parish and not the players, many of which he brought in and has a soft spot for

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View tonykaos's Profile tonykaos Flag Ealing 09 Mar 17 12.08am Send a Private Message to tonykaos Add tonykaos as a friend

For those that might be interested.....
There is a little bit of info regarding the court case here. Its a bit long winded, but you'll make out the bones of it even if your not a solicitor.

[Link]

Edited by tonykaos (09 Mar 2017 12.11am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
ParchmoreEagle Flag Belair 09 Mar 17 12.29pm

TP simply breached his contract I presume. As for his leaving, IMO it was Parish's attitude at the time to spending money. I recall not much being spent that transfer window. Now Parish is more enlightened. But what do I know?

 


[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Palace in the Blood's Profile Palace in the Blood Flag 09 Mar 17 1.01pm Send a Private Message to Palace in the Blood Add Palace in the Blood as a friend

I think the most likely outcome of this is that CPFC will ask for an attachment of earnings from WBA. ie The court will order WBA to pay us from his salary. This will then be deducted from the balance outstanding with interest running from the date of judgement

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View kent675's Profile kent675 Flag Bromley, Kent 09 Mar 17 1.02pm Send a Private Message to kent675 Add kent675 as a friend

Does Pulis have any avenues open to appeal this, or has he exhausted every chance?

 


Four wheels drives the body - Two wheels drives the soul

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 09 Mar 17 1.07pm

Originally posted by Crazy_Eagle

like him or not we are still in the Premier League purely down to him.

And Pardew. Pulis's leaving threw us into a search for a new manager, that resulted in a debacle with McKay, and then having Warnock as the best candidate.

Three/four months later we were going down.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Littlebogreek's Profile Littlebogreek Flag 09 Mar 17 2.20pm Send a Private Message to Littlebogreek Add Littlebogreek as a friend

Originally posted by ParchmoreEagle

TP simply breached his contract I presume. As for his leaving, IMO it was Parish's attitude at the time to spending money. I recall not much being spent that transfer window. Now Parish is more enlightened. But what do I know?

I don't think its a case of being more enlightened or his attitude, as I understand it, for FFP rules, they take 3 years accounting into consideration, therefore for this season, we had 3 years premiership earnings therefore could spend more without being as constrained.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eritheagle's Profile eritheagle Flag Erith 09 Mar 17 3.12pm Send a Private Message to eritheagle Add eritheagle as a friend

Originally posted by kent675

Does Pulis have any avenues open to appeal this, or has he exhausted every chance?

He was quoted after the court hearing saying that he intended to appeal. Something bout being wronged, whinge, whinge etc!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > A question on the Pulis case etc.