The Currant Bun claims:
'Alan Pardew will get £1million from Charlton — before he has hardly had time to open his Advent calendar. Pards, axed as boss on Saturday after the 5-2 home defeat by Sheffield United, is set for a total pay-off of £1.6m. But under the terms of his contract, £1m must be paid within 12 DAYS — and that means Thursday, December 4.
The former West Ham chief had the clause written into his deal when he signed a 3½-year contract as Les Reed’s replacement on Christmas Eve 2006. The huge immediate windfall is believed to be one of the reasons the cash-strapped Championship club kept faith with Pards for so long.'
7 comments:
it probably seemed like a good idea at the time..
Pembury Addick
He had exactly the same deal at West Ham which is why he was available so quickly after they sacked him.
Pity Curbs didn't insist on the same clause in his contract with West Ham.
In another twist,Heidar Helguson will sign for us today.
"Big deal - so what"
i don't think the finances matter in this particular decision. We were going down under Pards and he refused to admit that we were in trouble, or even playing poorly.
He should have gone after Barnsley - all we did was waste 3 games and a month, in return for 1 point.
These are troubled times for us, and we could drop off the radar altogether.
COME BACK CURBS !
If only football clubs had the courage not to pay their ex managers compensation on the basis that they were not doing their job before their departure.
I'm sure that the club could call on 20,000+ (in theory) witnesses to support the legal arguments if they wanted.
Could the Board right something into the next manager's contract about spending time organising the existing players before trying to arrange "emergency" loans between transfer windows. The sad thing is that we have been losing to teams which are better organised - rather than ones whose players demonstrate better footballing skills.
Why do football clubs grant such generous contracts to managers in the first place? Are contracts never performance-related – with a relatively modest base salary but substantial bonuses for league or cup success or both? Why do clubs put themselves in a position where they must pay substantial sums to remove under-performing managers – by which time, of course, the clubs may be in deep financial difficulties?
I can guess the answers – it's the market, good (sic) managers will not accept less than the industry norm etc.
What finally sticks in the craw is that most of the tens of thousands of people now being made redundant are probably entitled to no more than a week's pay for every year of service, and that's capped!
My experience of working on the football management staff at three semi-pro football clubs, albeit on a voluntary basis but I dare say two of them are quite well-known, gives me a different perspective on the question of the termination clause allegedly in Pardew’s contract. Such a clause would be there for the employee’s protection and quite right too. There is no other walk of life where employees are routinely treated with such dismissive contempt: just look at some of the above comments!
Football clubs get the loyalty from their football employees that they deserve. Usually this is quite rightly none at all, and the fact that we are all emotionally involved with Charlton doesn’t alter that fact at all.
If Pardew was able to get such a clause in his contract then good luck to him, and well done to Charlton for agreeing to it as it lends a veneer of integrity to their dealings with their football employees that to my knowledge is usually lacking.
Luv Robin is right if he is talking about semi pro football, those who don't make the grade and perhaps even professional football in the lower leagues - but he is way out of date regarding the pay levels for the likes of Pardew and many of our senior players. In fact salaries to players and managers in the top two levels have now reached such a level that the game is hardly financially viable without large injections of cash from sugar daddies and benefactors.
The quoted figures for Pardew's payout are an obscene reward for what amounts to a pretty clear cut failure. I am all for worker protection - but this is a lot more than than. Plenty of ordinary people contribute what they consider serious amounts of money (look at the programme and Saturday at look at the 30p entrance fee in 1971 - if you want to see how much more money is now bing put into the game- together with all the dosh we pay to Sky) to be entertained and support their side, and quite frankly Pardew wasn't keeping his side of the bargain. I've never booed my team and never will - but at the moment loyalty looks to be a very one way street.
Post a Comment