Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] De Zerbi was NOT “sacked”



jcdenton08

Offended Liver Sausage
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
11,526
I have seen a handful of posters repeatedly stating that De Zerbi was sacked. This is not true. I will explain why below.

I understand not everyone will be an expert on the finer workings of employment contracts of football managers.

If a manager is SACKED from a contract, the club has terminated their contract against their will. They will be paid compensation as per the terms of their contract in order to end their legally binding contract early.

If a manager LEAVES for another club during their contract, the recruiting club pay agreed/negotiated compensation to the contract holder in order to release the manager from his current club

In this case, the contract was terminated MUTUALLY. For avoidance of doubt or confusion, mutually means with the agreement of both sides.

In agreeing to part ways, either or both parties (the manager and the club) may specify terms, without which the agreement may not proceed.

Based on numerous press reports regarding compensation potentially to be paid by Chelsea to us for De Zerbi, it is highly probable that a clause agreed upon the mutual termination of his contract would be that compensation would be payable if he joined a specified club within a specified period.



But why? This is in order to protect against what is known as “tapping up”. Tapping up in situations like this is the illegal process of approaching a contracted employee, without the permission or knowledge of their employer, in order to bypass official channels and avoid payment of compensation or to bypass rules and regulations surrounding recruitment.

So, hypothetically, IF De Zerbi was approached by Chelsea while still under contract to us, compensation would be payable to us from Chelsea, as the manager still had an existing contract with us which was bought out by Chelsea.

If De Zerbi or his agent got wind of Chelsea’s interest, and he simply resigned, then joined Chelsea a week later, this could be seen as a case of “tapping up” and a pretty brazen attempt at getting around having to pay compensation for an asset they desire.

Therefore, to protect against this very thing happening, a legal exit document will have been drawn up saying essentially that both parties agree to mutually part ways. No compensation will be paid by either side - UNLESS certain criteria are met (see above - joining a divisional rival).


I hope this all makes sense and perhaps can prevent misinformation going forward.
 




dwayne

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
15,488
London
I think everyone knows this although some were doubting me when I said we would be due compo when he left , if he joins somewhere else quickly.

Chelsea thing seems very fishy.
 


trueblue

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,635
Hove
Absolutely. A good, detailed explanation of the point I’ve been repeating. None of us know exactly what happened and probably never will but the idea RDZ was forced out is clearly wrong if this compensation clause exists. My feeling is he engineered a way out with his behaviour this year. If that’s harsh, then at the very least it’s fairly obvious he wanted to move on.

Important because it’s already the stick some fans want to beat TB/PB with - and that will get a lot worse if we struggle and Dr Zerbi’s next club prospers.
 




He was effectively constructively dismissed, he was told his ideas on squad strengthening to avoid the crap of the last few months were never going to happen, so rather than being a dick about it and saying ok well sack me then, they cut a deal. Perfectly grown-up behaviour on both sides, whatever you think of the rights and wrongs of our squad strengthening
 




nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
14,042
Manchester
Thanks for this clarification. In the case of sackings, is it normal for a football manager to have a pre-written termination clause in their contracts? I’ve had some experience with ‘sacking’ an employee and the termination agreement had to be thrashed out until both parties were happy with it.
 


portlock seagull

Why? Why us?
Jul 28, 2003
17,423
If he wasn’t sacked, was he pushed…? Discuss.
 






timbha

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
10,135
Sussex
They “cut a deal” or signed a “compromise agreement”. This could contain anything and it’s very unlikely it just said “let’s call it quits”. Be interested to know where RDZ’s support team stand in all this.
 


Seagull27

Well-known member
Feb 7, 2011
3,329
Bristol
I genuinely believe that it was as Barber described in his interview - an amicable, mutual parting of ways due to an unresolvable difference in opinion on how to move forwards. TB/PB would've liked RDZ to stay, and RDZ would have liked to have stayed, but they couldn't get over that disagreement and decided it was best for all parties to end it now, rather than it getting messy later on.

In fact, Barber talks about how rare it is for managers leaving to end amicably and this one genuinely was from both sides.

Agree with the OP - it happens quite often on here that a particular narrative becomes 'fact' after being repeated a few times, without a shred of evidence.
 


brighton_tom

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2008
5,119
For me, the mutual agreement to part ways scenario that we’ve been told made complete sense. If targets, transfer budgets, transfer strategy, and ideas about player recruitment could not be agreed by Tony and RDZ, then them both kind of saying ‘well it looks like we can’t continue’ & mutually ending things seems the logical outcome, rather than waiting for RDZ to inevitably be tempted with another job offer. I don’t think we really need to over think what happened and look for anything more sinister.
 




dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
53,212
Burgess Hill
I have seen a handful of posters repeatedly stating that De Zerbi was sacked. This is not true. I will explain why below.

I understand not everyone will be an expert on the finer workings of employment contracts of football managers.

If a manager is SACKED from a contract, the club has terminated their contract against their will. They will be paid compensation as per the terms of their contract in order to end their legally binding contract early.

If a manager LEAVES for another club during their contract, the recruiting club pay agreed/negotiated compensation to the contract holder in order to release the manager from his current club

In this case, the contract was terminated MUTUALLY. For avoidance of doubt or confusion, mutually means with the agreement of both sides.

In agreeing to part ways, either or both parties (the manager and the club) may specify terms, without which the agreement may not proceed.

Based on numerous press reports regarding compensation potentially to be paid by Chelsea to us for De Zerbi, it is highly probable that a clause agreed upon the mutual termination of his contract would be that compensation would be payable if he joined a specified club within a specified period.



But why? This is in order to protect against what is known as “tapping up”. Tapping up in situations like this is the illegal process of approaching a contracted employee, without the permission or knowledge of their employer, in order to bypass official channels and avoid payment of compensation or to bypass rules and regulations surrounding recruitment.

So, hypothetically, IF De Zerbi was approached by Chelsea while still under contract to us, compensation would be payable to us from Chelsea, as the manager still had an existing contract with us which was bought out by Chelsea.

If De Zerbi or his agent got wind of Chelsea’s interest, and he simply resigned, then joined Chelsea a week later, this could be seen as a case of “tapping up” and a pretty brazen attempt at getting around having to pay compensation for an asset they desire.

Therefore, to protect against this very thing happening, a legal exit document will have been drawn up saying essentially that both parties agree to mutually part ways. No compensation will be paid by either side - UNLESS certain criteria are met (see above - joining a divisional rival).


I hope this all makes sense and perhaps can prevent misinformation going forward.
It was mutual consent, that much is obvious from the public statements from both sides :shrug:
 


jcdenton08

Offended Liver Sausage
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
11,526
It was mutual consent, that much is obvious from the public statements from both sides :shrug:
And yet I’ve read dozens of times on here that De Zerbi was “sacked”, hence making this thread as to why it is not the case. Which is exactly how untruths become “common knowledge”. (See paragraph 1)
 










hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,782
Chandlers Ford
He was effectively constructively dismissed, he was told his ideas on squad strengthening to avoid the crap of the last few months were never going to happen, so rather than being a dick about it and saying ok well sack me then, they cut a deal. Perfectly grown-up behaviour on both sides, whatever you think of the rights and wrongs of our squad strengthening
To suggest ‘constructive dismissal’ is a very poor, very odd take. He took a job, with the terms and constraints of that clearly defined.

After a while he decided he no longer liked the terms, and asked that they be changed. His employer declined to change them, so he chose to no longer remain in the post.
 






portlock seagull

Why? Why us?
Jul 28, 2003
17,423
If he WAS sacked, why would Chelsea need to pay us compensation? Surely we’d be paying off De Zerbi’s remaining contract.
They say we wouldn’t / aren’t…
 


Bodian

Well-known member
May 3, 2012
12,509
Cumbria
They “cut a deal” or signed a “compromise agreement”. This could contain anything and it’s very unlikely it just said “let’s call it quits”. Be interested to know where RDZ’s support team stand in all this.
Yes - that's what I asked on another thread. They all presumably had their own contracts with the club - so what happens to them? Are they 'sacked', do they 'resign', who pays any compensation / lost wages etc. Unless they're all sub-contracted by RDZ?
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here