Gordon Bennett
Active member
- Sep 7, 2010
- 384
Was Charlie found guilty? I thought it was mutually agreed that he'd leave (or something along those lines) with no guilt being implied either way?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Gus, Tanno, and Charlie ... does ANYONE know?
- Thread starter Cowfold Seagull
- Start date
Was Charlie found guilty? I thought it was mutually agreed that he'd leave (or something along those lines) with no guilt being implied either way?
Despite the protestations of some, I don't think the question will ever stop being asked.
When a manager is sacked it is nearly always transparent as to why their services are no longer required; poor results. Not even his greatest detractors could suggest that Gus wasn't successful. Yes, he had spouted off so often about joining a "bigger club" and I was quite vocal in saying that he would shaft us as soon as a better offer came along.
But Gus didn't resign to join a "bigger club". He certainly wasn't dismissed for poor performances / results. So why did the club sack the most successful manager in the club's history? I don't share the desperation of some to try to get to the answer. It wasn't as if he had said he was committed to us for life - in fact, very often the opposite - so he was always going to give us the finger and walk away sooner or later.
It's not actually true to say that reasons for dismissal are never discussed or published (or its not "our" business); there is a plethora of Employment Tribunal cases available to view online.
I don't particularly think the club covered itself in glory by going to such great lengths to bury the reasons for the sacking. We'll find out one day when memoirs are published!
Gus is gone. Time to move on. Although there will always be that little nagging doubt that if the club had nothing to hide, why would they have gone to such great lengths to hide it?!
When a manager is sacked it is nearly always transparent as to why their services are no longer required; poor results. Not even his greatest detractors could suggest that Gus wasn't successful. Yes, he had spouted off so often about joining a "bigger club" and I was quite vocal in saying that he would shaft us as soon as a better offer came along.
But Gus didn't resign to join a "bigger club". He certainly wasn't dismissed for poor performances / results. So why did the club sack the most successful manager in the club's history? I don't share the desperation of some to try to get to the answer. It wasn't as if he had said he was committed to us for life - in fact, very often the opposite - so he was always going to give us the finger and walk away sooner or later.
It's not actually true to say that reasons for dismissal are never discussed or published (or its not "our" business); there is a plethora of Employment Tribunal cases available to view online.
I don't particularly think the club covered itself in glory by going to such great lengths to bury the reasons for the sacking. We'll find out one day when memoirs are published!
Gus is gone. Time to move on. Although there will always be that little nagging doubt that if the club had nothing to hide, why would they have gone to such great lengths to hide it?!
BensGrandad
New member
I have no idea as to the reason but IMHO and wanted to have a wager, the matter could well have been resolved with the final piece to the jigsaw added last week. I could well be miles out in my guess but we will never know unless somebody has the ear of one of the three concerned.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Of course people will know. It's just common sense that some people based in the same city as a huge story like this will. It's just no one is stupid enough to write it on here.
One person involved tells 3 people. those 3 people tell 3 people etc etc. It soon spreads. Of course there is an element of chinese whispers involved but the basics will be known by a lot.
Doesn't take long for word of mouth and remember, there were FAR more people involved/affected/ at the forefront of it all than just Gus, Tanno and Charlie.
One person involved tells 3 people. those 3 people tell 3 people etc etc. It soon spreads. Of course there is an element of chinese whispers involved but the basics will be known by a lot.
Doesn't take long for word of mouth and remember, there were FAR more people involved/affected/ at the forefront of it all than just Gus, Tanno and Charlie.
seagullmouse
New member
- Jan 3, 2011
- 676
What will happen if somebody writes the truth on here then?
BensGrandad
New member
BensGrandad
New member
What can happen if it is the truth with no embelishment?
Some of the posts allow the poster to virtually say I know but I am not telling you, I remember doing that at Holy Trinuty school and I was about 7 years old.
seagullmouse
New member
- Jan 3, 2011
- 676
If I knew I would say. 
If that happens nobody outside of the circle will ever know if it really was the truth. There will be people who will say 'yes, that makes sense' but there have been so many theories that could be correct that it will just be another of them.
seagullmouse
New member
- Jan 3, 2011
- 676
What are these many theories? I haven't really heard anything.
symyjym
Banned
Just by telling players, who he signed, that if he leaves he promises to come back for them, it would be considered gross misconduct. I am not saying he did this, or that it was particularly bad if he did, but it is not in the clubs interest for managers to sign players on the basis of them taking them with him.
Also if a manager is unsettled and could leave at any minute, it compromises any signings. All it takes for a gross misconduct is for the boss to have reason lose confidence in his employee and it doesn’t have to be some dark twisted abuse within the company. Gross misconduct probably sounds worse than it was, but the relationship was strained and there was only one person who would leave, and it wasn’t going to be Bloom.
seagullmouse
New member
- Jan 3, 2011
- 676
If I were planning to take a load of employees to my new job it would be considered gross misconduct. Why should this be different?
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
Nothing, unless there is a legal injunction in place.
They would be wise to be 100% sure it is the truth.
And they may not be believed in any case.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
*Removed as not sure if naming the alledged POOGATE villain is allowed*
I'm sure you heard Bloom's own version about being called up late at night just before the Palace match in March and Gus saying he wanted to go? That was misconduct. After that there were another 143 of them to make it Gross Misconduct ((c) The Two Ronnies....)
Philzo-93
Well-known member
seagullmouse
New member
- Jan 3, 2011
- 676
Ever heard of libellous cases
Not libellous if its true though surely.
The point is that CLEARLY it wasn't one "event" or "incident". If it was, it would be common knowledge on here by now. It was a very small, very gradual thing, so isn't anywhere near as black and white as many people want to paint it.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
symyjym
Banned
I'm not excusing it, if it happened, but there are far worse gross misconducts like sexual harrasment, physical or verbal abuse, racism or drink and drug addiction etc within the company.
All I am saying is that gross misconduct can sound worse than it is and I am sure that Gus didn't do anything evil, just that he upset the apple cart.