If managers can be sacked for “their†team underperforming, then why not a player?

[Wolves Till I Die]

This is probably one of the most stupid questions i'll ever ask, but to me It’s well overdue. You can get sacked at work for this so why should footballers be treated any differently?

As an alternative, how about if the F.A brought in a ruling that teams cannot sack their manager between the period a new season starts and ends no matter what!

Any other alternaive suggestions, whether sensible or farcicle would be very welcome!

 

[UEAwolf]

They can.

 

[Surrey Wolf]

How would you recoup a fee for a player tho?

 

[Sharples]

Probably can but if you've spent £7 million on a player, sacking him is going to be costly vs waiting until the summer and selling him.

 

[PeteWolf]

They can be, albeit defining the terms of their contracts and indiscipline can be more vague (and principally, up for contention at a tribunal) than with a manager I suppose.

Chris Cornes is probably the highest profile player we've sacked in recent years. Adrian Mutu was from Chelsea as well, but I guess you have to take into account resale value and the worth of sacking them or taking a reduced fee.

 

[Deleted member 3545]

they would also have a clause in their contracts that the contract would have to be paid up in the full or compensation

 

[PeteWolf]

they would also have a clause in their contracts that the contract would have to be paid up in the full or compensation

Not for gross indiscipline. A contract requires both parties to commit to it.

 

[Deleted member 3545]

Not for gross indiscipline. A contract requires both parties to commit to it.

No but the thread was about underperforming on the pitch

 

[PeteWolf]

No but the thread was about underperforming on the pitch

Which could come under gross indiscipline depending on the players commitment, and sackable without compensation.

 

[WonderWolf]

A very difficult situation.

Players could 'engineer' a move by 'defaulting'....

The other point is that players are considered 'tools' (and some certainly are) where as the Manager/Coach is the the master craftsmen....it's never the tool's fault!:dong:

 

[Deleted member 3545]

Which could come under gross indiscipline depending on the players commitment, and sackable without compensation.

But how can you prove a player is/has underperformed unless they have been proven guilty of cheating match fixing etc.

player will in their defence use the excuses the managers tactics were wrong, off day, better opponents, bad refereeing, unsettled at club.

Like its been said a player wont be sacke dunless its gross misconduct, as they are classed as a companys assets.

 

[FLEET WOLF]

A very difficult situation.

Players could 'engineer' a move by 'defaulting'....

The other point is that players are considered 'tools' (and some certainly are) where as the Manager/Coach is the the master craftsmen....it's never the tool's fault!:dong:

A bad workman always blames his own tools.

 

[PeteWolf]

But how can you prove a player is/has underperformed unless they have been proven guilty of cheating match fixing etc.

player will in their defence use the excuses the managers tactics were wrong, off day, better opponents, bad refereeing, unsettled at club.

Like its been said a player wont be sacke dunless its gross misconduct, as they are classed as a companys assets.

It would be very debatable at a tribunal, but lack of effort in tackles, deliberately not making themselves available for the ball, walking around the pitch away from the action, etc. Deliberate own goals/penalties conceeded, that kind of thing.

 

[WonderWolf]

A bad Coach always blames his own tools.

Corrected!

Does this make Mick and/or Terry good or bad?....Plus, they are Mick's tools. Terry had no choice. Not that he's blaming them.......should he be?....

 

[Deleted member 3545]

It would be very debatable at a tribunal, but lack of effort in tackles, deliberately not making themselves available for the ball, walking around the pitch away from the action, etc. Deliberate own goals/penalties conceeded, that kind of thing.

Deliberate own goals and penalties would be classed as cheating throwing a game not underperforming.

most players walk around the pitch during a game no one runs for 90 mins flat out.

you cannot sack players because the team is bottom of the league or knocked out of aq cup.

Is sir Alex going to sack his Man Utd team that played last night becaused they underperformed against a relegation threatened Wigan?

 

[PeteWolf]

Deliberate own goals and penalties would be classed as cheating throwing a game not underperforming.

most players walk around the pitch during a game no one runs for 90 mins flat out.

you cannot sack players because the team is bottom of the league or knocked out of aq cup.

Is sir Alex going to sack his Man Utd team that played last night becaused they underperformed against a relegation threatened Wigan?

Continued and deliberate underperformance is a sackable offence provided the HR department have issued the appropriate warnings.

Doesn't matter what line of work you're in.

 

[Wolves Till I Die]

All players should be set what is deemed acheivable targets and if not met "should" firstly lead to a verbal warning. If it were to happen again a written warning then final dismissal if it happened a third time. Three strikes and you're out methinks.

It happens in everyday life, so why should footballers be treated any differently?

 

[derbyrameater]

They would have to be employed for two years under New Condem legislation before they can go to a tribunal.

If they sign a new contract (extension etc) within this time period does the clock start ticking from zero again?

 

[Deleted member 3545]

Continued and deliberate underperformance is a sackable offence provided the HR department have issued the appropriate warnings.

Doesn't matter what line of work you're in.

Who says Wolves players have underperformed this season the fans, board, manager or have to players just performed to their max limits?
Wasnt it the 3Ms who said push on for midtable this season not the players.

like i said i bet Sir Alex doesnt issue disaplinary action against his teams that lost last night for underperforming i bet they still get to pick up their paypacket at the end of the week.

Players are warned to buck up thier ideas or be shipped out of the club or dropped if their performances dont improve. Clubs wont sack players for what they see as underperfoming again like i mentioned players are the clubs assets.

If a player is found to be deliberatly not trying then thats gross miscontuct and a different kettle of fish they were basically throwing a game.

the orginial thread was about sacking players who underperform not cheat.

Its not like you or me if we dont perform well at work we are sacked after the appropriate warnings and disaplinary actions thats has been found againt you unless you have a good union to prove otherwise. The firms we work for dont look at us as assets theres no finanical gain for the company unlike football. You sack a footballer you lose out on a transfer fee you sack a factory worker you lose nothing unless they were wrongly dismissed.

You wont find players sacked for underperforming as it is nigh on impossible to prove. Like i mentioned to many factors to factor in player maybe playing to their max limit, bad ref, better opponents, off days 101 different reasons.

the thing is someone or three have to be relegated each year this season it looks like it going to be Wolves it came close last season but survived by the skin of their teeth. Its a $$$$er but lifes a $$$$ and then your die get over it.

Did Newcastle sack all their superstars on the contracts they were on without a relegation paycut clause the other year when they went down for " underperforming" to get the high earners off their books or for not pulling their weight.

who says players dont have soemthing written into their contracts stating reasons they can only be sacked for?