| Barton Going ? 01:57 - May 27 with 5664 views | Pommyhoop |
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/322789/Mark-Hughes-has-final-say-on-Joey-Bar
If the 12 months thing is true surely we will get rid.
MARK HUGHES holds the key to whether Joey Barton is booted out of QPR — and possibly England — without a penny.
The QPR boss will be asked if he wants to keep the problem player, who has been banned for 12 games and fined £75,000 after being sent off at Manchester City on the last day of the Premier League season.
If Hughes gives the thumbs down, Barton faces being shown the exit from Loftus Road after an internal inquiry. A decision is unlikely before next month, even though the club’s wealthy backers are believed to be disgusted by the disgraced star’s conduct.
Under current legislation, Barton, 29, who joined the club on a free transfer from Newcastle last August, is unlikely to be able to claim any compensation if dismissed — or anything else for that matter.
As it stands, the law affords him no legal rights to sue QPR for unfair dismissal because he hasn’t been employed by the club for 12 months. New rules have also increased that qualifying period to two years.
All this means that Barton, who signed a lucrative contract believed to be worth about £11million, would face a massive legal fight to find some technical loophole to salvage anything — if QPR decide to fire him.
It means the maverick midfielder, who joined QPR after a public fallout with the Tyneside club, faces being cast into football’s wilderness.
It is possible that British clubs may not risk signing a player with such a disastrous disciplinary record, one who the former England manager Fabio Capello described as “too dangerous” to consider for national team selection.
That would leave the seemingly unrepentant Barton, who turns 30 in September, with little option but to try his luck abroad.
His most likely destination would be Qatar, where his record would give him some novelty value — even if only for a short period.
Queens Park Rangers confirmed that a full internal inquiry into Barton’s sending-off and subsequent incidents at Manchester City is under way.
The QPR midfielder will not appeal against the decision by an independent regulatory commission last Wednesday to suspend him for an extra eight games on top of the automatic four-match ban.
Barton and his team are fully co-operating with the club in their internal investigation, which is expected to last for at least two weeks.
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
|  |
| |  |
| Barton Going ? on 11:54 - May 28 with 1216 views | Charlie1 |
| Barton Going ? on 11:44 - May 28 by Northernr |
"The second is the Barton's assertion on social media to 1.5M followers that a teammate had suggested he take one of theirs with him. Barton has, I believe, since told the FA that was untrue. A very straightforward case of bringing the game and QPR into disrepute I would have thought."
Agreed, this is the one they could get him on IMO. We sacked Sousa for much less! No evidence on the tape that any QPR player speaks to him, reckon he made it up because he's not as bright as he likes to make out and didn't want to admit he'd totally lost the plot. |
Don't disagree with that point BUT untl they announce (if indeed they do) and share the findings of their investigation, we're dealing in hearsay currently.
The other point not commented on (from what I can see), is the FA comment about the importance of the game and brand w/w.
Tony F will be very aware of this. Until we see the contract, then who knows.
|  |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 12:01 - May 28 with 1206 views | E17hoop |
Interesting suggestions but I can't see either getting past a tribunal (which is where this would go).
The Aguero knee was an off the ball incident as the Norwich head butt was; the discipline procedures meted out to Barton following the Norwich sending off could easily be used by Barton to suggest that any other action by the club is excessive. There may be an exception to this which I'll return to later. Neither incident on their own however, would likely be deemed as gross misconduct. Any agent worth their salt knows that cards are an occupational hazard and will have written the card issuing into the contract so it would be treated by a fine. Irrespective of their emotional impact, the terms 'cowardly' and 'unprovoked' have little bearing.
The social media use is more interesting. I disagree that it would be bringing the game into disrepute - even if it was it would be dealt with under the terms of his contract. I'm not aware of any footballer having their contract terminated for that reason; as an example, even Luke McCormick's contract was cancelled contract by mutual consent as opposed to gross misconduct. If a player can cause death by dangerous driving and not have their contract cancelled, a comment on twitter is small fry in the grand scheme of things. However, it has prompted me to think about the cumulative nature of Barton's tenure with us.
It would be interesting to know how disciplinary action has been undertaken for the previous activities. If the club have gone through the motions, called him into an office, slapped wrist, fine, don't do it again, then it's unlikely that they could go further. If however, they have treated the number of incidents cumulatively, escalating the disciplinary action each time, providing clear written results of their actions and expectations of future conduct then there MAY be an opportunity for the club to look at escalating it further.
In real terms, however, it's highly unlikely and if we are to get rid my belief is it'd mean settling up his contract. |  |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 12:49 - May 28 with 1154 views | Cliff |
All this paying up his contract is rubbish. If we can't sack him we should keep on the books, pay his wages and put him on gardening leave.
That way even if we do eventually end up paying his full wages it will be slowly over time and the club, not him, have had the money in the bank and earning interest. Plus I bet he'd get pissed off eventually and leave. |  | | |
| Barton Going ? on 13:26 - May 28 with 1136 views | stansleftfoot |
I'm looking under every stone to find some hope in this Barton tale. My offer today is that Football needs to sort out the money it's spending on wages, its not sustainable and is fundamentally changing the game and how the Players behave.
It struck me that Footballers contracts are unique and weighted so heavily on their behalf that Clubs need to re-establish their control so that they can survive.
I'm not sure there's a precedent for Sacking Footballers as they have fixed term contracts...their activities on the pitch are seen pretty much as their duties of work.
Joey Barton however feeble his actions, physically assaulted and or threatened(?) two if not three players after he had been given the Red Card. Technically not playing and should be off the pitch. So he's acting entirely on his own behalf....a Good QC could make a case for Gross Misconduct whilst not engaged in the actions of his work....maybe....He's clearly bought his Club and fellow players into disrepute by stating publically he was advised to get a Man City player sent off and then saying it wasn't the case...no real support from the PFA (his union)....its building up to a proper case and even at a £6 million saving...its a reasonable player instead....QPR should go to court and establish a precedent, they should also get the Players to pay the Agents Fee's....Game Changers! |  | | |
| Barton Going ? on 13:56 - May 28 with 1106 views | Jamie |
| Barton Going ? on 10:38 - May 28 by Charlie1 |
It's not a criminal act though is it.
Explain your view point rather than implying this will happen (you're often wrong with what you claim to know and state on here). Am intrigued.
I think E17 has it bang on. I also think Westy's permutation on it will pan out that way. The truth is, you or no-one knows right now. It's in the fine print of the contract.
|
Much of it has already been posted on here but:
the fact that he has made himself unavailable for selection for 12 games,
the nature of the incident,
the fact that 'Our Tone' is on a massive PR & branding push in Malaysia and in the biggest game of his time here, the captain disgraces himself infront of an audience of kids back in Malaysia that the club is trying to convince to turn in their Utd/City/Chelsea/Arsenal/Liverpool kits
or quite simply the fact that Barton claimed that his meltdown was cleverly connived by a colleague and then went pleading to the FA that it was all nonsense would be all be very good points to take to any possible tribunal appealing his sacking for gross misconduct or bringing the club into disrepute.
Of course it comes down to the wording of his contract. If his contract states that regardless of his behaviour, he cannot be sacked then clearly we are fcked. | | | |
| Barton Going ? on 13:59 - May 28 with 1101 views | E17hoop |
He didn't make himself unavailable - the FA did. His actions led to the hearing, but he has not excluded himself, the FA have. | |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 14:01 - May 28 with 1092 views | JonDoeman |
| Barton Going ? on 13:59 - May 28 by E17hoop |
He didn't make himself unavailable - the FA did. His actions led to the hearing, but he has not excluded himself, the FA have. |
You've had some good posts on this thread, but that sounds like, same difference bollocks. |  |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 14:06 - May 28 with 1083 views | E17hoop |
| Barton Going ? on 14:01 - May 28 by JonDoeman |
You've had some good posts on this thread, but that sounds like, same difference bollocks. |
If Barton had behaved the same way, it wasn't seen, and he'd got away with it, he wouldn't have been banned. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Barton Going ? on 14:18 - May 28 with 1065 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Barton Going ? on 12:01 - May 28 by E17hoop |
Interesting suggestions but I can't see either getting past a tribunal (which is where this would go).
The Aguero knee was an off the ball incident as the Norwich head butt was; the discipline procedures meted out to Barton following the Norwich sending off could easily be used by Barton to suggest that any other action by the club is excessive. There may be an exception to this which I'll return to later. Neither incident on their own however, would likely be deemed as gross misconduct. Any agent worth their salt knows that cards are an occupational hazard and will have written the card issuing into the contract so it would be treated by a fine. Irrespective of their emotional impact, the terms 'cowardly' and 'unprovoked' have little bearing.
The social media use is more interesting. I disagree that it would be bringing the game into disrepute - even if it was it would be dealt with under the terms of his contract. I'm not aware of any footballer having their contract terminated for that reason; as an example, even Luke McCormick's contract was cancelled contract by mutual consent as opposed to gross misconduct. If a player can cause death by dangerous driving and not have their contract cancelled, a comment on twitter is small fry in the grand scheme of things. However, it has prompted me to think about the cumulative nature of Barton's tenure with us.
It would be interesting to know how disciplinary action has been undertaken for the previous activities. If the club have gone through the motions, called him into an office, slapped wrist, fine, don't do it again, then it's unlikely that they could go further. If however, they have treated the number of incidents cumulatively, escalating the disciplinary action each time, providing clear written results of their actions and expectations of future conduct then there MAY be an opportunity for the club to look at escalating it further.
In real terms, however, it's highly unlikely and if we are to get rid my belief is it'd mean settling up his contract. |
The Aguero incident and what followed is not comparable to other examples, except of the Cantona type, because Barton had already been sent off. So it wasn't an off the ball incident imo, more common assault.
People keep saying so and so player eg McCormick was not sacked and therefore such and such follows.......but in many cases it would have been down to the club's choice of available options, rather than any constraint on the club to sack.
It is quite likely that Fernandes/Mittal/Beard/Hughes went through the options and decided the way they wanted to go, impediments permitting, before calling the 'internal investigation'. So with Fernandes being inclined to meet problems head-on the possibility of sacking could be much higher than some people think.
It may cost a lot of money, but that has to be weighed against the probability of difficulties and costs in the future. The club's belief/hope would have been that the worst of Barton's anger problems were behind him (eg no red cards for two seasons at Newcastle). Maybe Barton's worst problems are ahead of him? | | | |
| Barton Going ? on 14:35 - May 28 with 1045 views | Cliff |
| Barton Going ? on 14:06 - May 28 by E17hoop |
If Barton had behaved the same way, it wasn't seen, and he'd got away with it, he wouldn't have been banned. |
You're right, and criminals wouldn't be criminals if the police hadn't caught them!
We could under you're system reduce the crime rate to zero by simply disbanding the police. | | | |
| Barton Going ? on 14:37 - May 28 with 1050 views | E17hoop |
| Barton Going ? on 14:18 - May 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
The Aguero incident and what followed is not comparable to other examples, except of the Cantona type, because Barton had already been sent off. So it wasn't an off the ball incident imo, more common assault.
People keep saying so and so player eg McCormick was not sacked and therefore such and such follows.......but in many cases it would have been down to the club's choice of available options, rather than any constraint on the club to sack.
It is quite likely that Fernandes/Mittal/Beard/Hughes went through the options and decided the way they wanted to go, impediments permitting, before calling the 'internal investigation'. So with Fernandes being inclined to meet problems head-on the possibility of sacking could be much higher than some people think.
It may cost a lot of money, but that has to be weighed against the probability of difficulties and costs in the future. The club's belief/hope would have been that the worst of Barton's anger problems were behind him (eg no red cards for two seasons at Newcastle). Maybe Barton's worst problems are ahead of him? |
'So it wasn't an off the ball incident imo, more common assault.'
If it was assault, then Barton should have been arrested and it would be managed under the terms of his contract in relation to police action.
'People keep saying so and so player eg McCormick was not sacked and therefore such and such follows.......but in many cases it would have been down to the club's choice of available options, rather than any constraint on the club to sack.'
But gross misconduct is THE hardest to prove since the club have to prove it is consistent with what any other reasonable employer would do. As a consequence, other players are a precedent in terms of employment law.
'It is quite likely that Fernandes/Mittal/Beard/Hughes went through the options and decided the way they wanted to go, impediments permitting, before calling the 'internal investigation'. So with Fernandes being inclined to meet problems head-on the possibility of sacking could be much higher than some people think.'
They may have decided the way they want to go and in most likelihood, the internal investigation is reviewing the actions undertaken following Barton's previous disciplinary procedures (as I mentioned before).
The club have been short of HR expertise and advertised for a HR generalist in September 2011 to review policies and provide guidance to managers. If that work hadn't been undertaken and disciplinary procedures were lacklustre, the investigation would throw that up.
| |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 16:02 - May 28 with 1015 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Barton Going ? on 14:37 - May 28 by E17hoop |
'So it wasn't an off the ball incident imo, more common assault.'
If it was assault, then Barton should have been arrested and it would be managed under the terms of his contract in relation to police action.
'People keep saying so and so player eg McCormick was not sacked and therefore such and such follows.......but in many cases it would have been down to the club's choice of available options, rather than any constraint on the club to sack.'
But gross misconduct is THE hardest to prove since the club have to prove it is consistent with what any other reasonable employer would do. As a consequence, other players are a precedent in terms of employment law.
'It is quite likely that Fernandes/Mittal/Beard/Hughes went through the options and decided the way they wanted to go, impediments permitting, before calling the 'internal investigation'. So with Fernandes being inclined to meet problems head-on the possibility of sacking could be much higher than some people think.'
They may have decided the way they want to go and in most likelihood, the internal investigation is reviewing the actions undertaken following Barton's previous disciplinary procedures (as I mentioned before).
The club have been short of HR expertise and advertised for a HR generalist in September 2011 to review policies and provide guidance to managers. If that work hadn't been undertaken and disciplinary procedures were lacklustre, the investigation would throw that up.
|
As Mr Terry knows police action as a result of a football incident can happen. If Aguero had made a complaint perhaps it would have gone in that direction. It doesn't stop the club reaching their own conclusions.
It could only be a precedent if it was the subject of a court case or tribunal. How else would you know the full circumstances which led an employer to one conclusion rather than another, or whether their decision was justified.
You seem preoccupied with the process rather than the merits or repercussions of this particular situation. | | | |
| Barton Going ? on 16:56 - May 28 with 990 views | E17hoop |
Because the process will be key in this case.
Quite simply put, how many footballers have had their contracts terminated for gross misconduct? In the last 10 years there have been 3:
Zebroski (Swindon) - assaulted a team mate leaving him needing 50 stitches.
Mutu (Chelsea) - failed drugs test.
Plummer (Bristol Rovers) - an incident with a member of the public at a gym.
None of them involved their behaviour on the pitch. As I mentioned before, to make gross misconduct stick it's down to the club to prove sacking him is reasonable and consistent with what other employers would do. There is no precedent and at a tribunal, Barton would win.
| |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 17:02 - May 28 with 976 views | TheBlob |
| Barton Going ? on 16:56 - May 28 by E17hoop |
Because the process will be key in this case.
Quite simply put, how many footballers have had their contracts terminated for gross misconduct? In the last 10 years there have been 3:
Zebroski (Swindon) - assaulted a team mate leaving him needing 50 stitches.
Mutu (Chelsea) - failed drugs test.
Plummer (Bristol Rovers) - an incident with a member of the public at a gym.
None of them involved their behaviour on the pitch. As I mentioned before, to make gross misconduct stick it's down to the club to prove sacking him is reasonable and consistent with what other employers would do. There is no precedent and at a tribunal, Barton would win.
|
And how exactly are precedents set except with test cases such as this one?I'm not convinced Barton would win given the tide of emotion involved. |  |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 17:21 - May 28 with 963 views | E17hoop |
Which is why the process to get him there has to be perfect. If QPR have stepped outside their own discipline procedures, or have not carried out the right actions at the right times, it would be thrown out. | |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 17:45 - May 28 with 932 views | Charlie1 |
| Barton Going ? on 13:56 - May 28 by Jamie |
Much of it has already been posted on here but:
the fact that he has made himself unavailable for selection for 12 games,
the nature of the incident,
the fact that 'Our Tone' is on a massive PR & branding push in Malaysia and in the biggest game of his time here, the captain disgraces himself infront of an audience of kids back in Malaysia that the club is trying to convince to turn in their Utd/City/Chelsea/Arsenal/Liverpool kits
or quite simply the fact that Barton claimed that his meltdown was cleverly connived by a colleague and then went pleading to the FA that it was all nonsense would be all be very good points to take to any possible tribunal appealing his sacking for gross misconduct or bringing the club into disrepute.
Of course it comes down to the wording of his contract. If his contract states that regardless of his behaviour, he cannot be sacked then clearly we are fcked. |
It depends on what you mean by fcked.
If TF and want him out then yes.
Many have already condemned and judged Barton.
Don't under estimate his impact on us staying up rather than jumping to social media conclusions. I'm not sure his career at qpr is fcked. I think you're jumping to your conclusion which is your view ie you want him out.
Think E17 has it right.
Personally I think he'll be back for us after 11 games. | |
| |
| Barton Going ? on 17:47 - May 28 with 928 views | rcap |
| Barton Going ? on 17:21 - May 28 by E17hoop |
Which is why the process to get him there has to be perfect. If QPR have stepped outside their own discipline procedures, or have not carried out the right actions at the right times, it would be thrown out. |
And this is why we've waited until the FA hearing's been finished.
As far as the law goes, there's a lot that's been aired on here. There's no requirement for Barton to have committed a criminal offence for us to sack him for gross misconduct. Fighting between co-workers is, depending on its severity, a ground for dismissal for gross misconduct, and is particularly serious in front of customers - clearly because of its effect on the company's reputation.
Here, I would say that Barton's unprovoked assaults on Aguero and (attempted) on Kompany, in front of tens of thousands of spectators and millions more on TV, was sufficiently serious for us to dismiss him.
There is a lot that isn't known about the details of Barton's contract, and particularly whether he's been subject to other internal warnings. But provided that QPR's procedure was handled professionally (and with Phil Beard in charge I think it would be), I think it would be possible to dismiss him for this in a manner that an ET would consider fair. | | | |
| Barton Going ? on 18:55 - May 28 with 895 views | 100percent |
E17 has it completely right.
The only thing that QPR can hope to do by holding an investigation and taking some action is to actually make this the start of the disciplinery process. By doing this they have to set out the rules moving forward and what the expectation levels are. The huge point here will be that, as E17 suggests, there are no precedents set and therefore to introduce them, they need to be brought in across the whole squad.
Barton's easiest defence is by just using Cisse as an example.
Unlike most on here, I personally do not think that Barton should go, so if he is to be sacked, it will cost us a whole heap of money and the precedent that we set will be poor.
Keep him, manage him and put him on a performance management process that he can be monitored with and has accountability. Now that would be a great precedent to set. If then pulls himself around as a player and we have instigated that process - both sides are winners.
|  | | |
| Barton Going ? on 20:55 - May 28 with 856 views | derbyhoop |
E17 is right that the process has to be clear and precise. They may have a case but it depends. The red card is an occupational hazard. It's what followed. TF wants to sell Qpr in SE Asia but the image from that game is of a team containing an unsigned thugs rather than a side who have the champions elect a fright. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
