Have Villa jumped the gun?

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

[quote user="BroadstairsR"]The timing is not important here Purple, more the fact that we actually did eventually allow PL to talk to Villa, contrary to some reports. [/quote]

 

Indeed, we did. As McNally said, the dynamics changed. In other words we knew it was pointless trying to stand in Lambert''s way. The question seems to be whether Lambert had that as a cause in his contract and if so what the wording was. For example, one possible wording that would safeguard NCFC would be something very, very roughly on these lines:


"NCFC acknowledges Lambert''s right to talk to other PL clubs about management jobs but a condition of that right is that no job offer can be accepted by Lambert until compensation has been agreed by NCFC and the other club."

[Branston Pickle 3,680]

...and Villa didn''t tap him up in any way at all, I suppose?!

I am far from convinced that Lambert is the manager you want or need, but I guess time will tell. Enjoy letting 60+ goals in next season, anyway.

[morty 0]

[quote user="Dodds"]He handed in his resignation, repudiating his contract. He is now employed by Aston Villa.

Whether an amicable settlement is reached on a commercial basis is by the by.[/quote]Enjoy[Y]And what sort of weirdo hangs around other teams football forums anyway?

[Dodds 0]

A lot of you keep saying that. I get the impression that its not me you''re trying to convince.

[Indy_Bones 441]

[quote user="Dodds"]He handed in his resignation, repudiating his contract. He is now employed by Aston Villa.

Whether an amicable settlement is reached on a commercial basis is by the by.[/quote]Sorry, but no. Resignation does not equate to contract repudiation as we are under no legal obligation to accept it.If we had caused a breach in the contract, he wouldn''t have needed to resign as he would have simply just gone to Villa and agreed the managers job and we''d have been left trying to chase a case regarding the method of the approach.He may well have been appointed by Villa as their new manager, but it''s on the basis of fair compensation being agreed, which if not, will result in a similar situation we had with Colchester whereby an independent tribunal will determine the amount and whether or not either club acted inappropriately.Neither side will want this to be the case, so it will be resolved this week in all probability (if it hasn''t already).If you think the compensation side of things is somewhat irrelevant, then you''re slightly deluded...

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

[quote user="Dodds"]He handed in his resignation, repudiating his contract. He is now employed by Aston Villa. Whether an amicable settlement is reached on a commercial basis is by the by.[/quote]

 

How can you "repudiate a contract by handing in a resignation?" That''s absolute nonsense and I''m quite sure you didn''t pick up that little legal gem from the time you spent in the Victoria Courts.

 

Read the whole thread instead of just planting inanities into it. NCFC currently hold all the cards. Whether it be by determining Lambert''s immediate fate or by screwing Randy for a few million. I would prefer the latter and the two of them seem well-met, until the cracks start to show, which will likely be from immediate effect.

 

 

[militantcanary 0]

I think you have forgotten something

Karsa and Culverhouse are not in the same boat as Lambert and he will want them ergo unless you want to annoy him on the 1st day you will have to cough up for Lambert as well as there is no way we will agree compensation for those two if you are trying to rip us off for Lambert

So what was he doing on Friday he was either allowed to speak to A Villa once the dynamics had changed or he was likely to be in breach of contract with us even if he had taken legal advice.

By the way fuck off

[Branston Pickle 3,680]

You can get whatever impression you like, I doubt many of us could really care less.

My CEO is a Villa fan and we''ve had this conversation several times. He couldnt quite understand the clamour to get Lambert, either. The simple fact is that while he has done really well fo us, he has managed only one season in the PL with a side that was riding the wave of successive promotions, has never managed a side with ''big name'' players, and has never really had to deal with international call ups, nor playing in Europe. It just seems that he hasn''t really proven any of those things, and if Villa really are as big as they like to think, I''d have thought they might have set their sights a little higher.

I personally am not that bothered that he has gone; he undoubtedly did well for us but clearly didn''t buy in to the club''s ethos or would have seen it through. Whoever comes in inherits a decent squad and will be able to strengthen.

[Dodds 0]

Lamberts resignation is him terminating his contract on the basis of an apparent breach of a condition by Norwich. It doesn''t matter whether McNally accepts it or not and in any event the contract will be repudiated whether the resignation was valid as he is no longer rendering his services to Norwich City FC.

If it is true that Norwich have breached a condition, and really it is all guesswork, then there wont be any damages owed by The Villa for Lamberts contract.

Money will still cross hands, but its unlikely to be to the full tune.

[BroadstairsR 2,199]

[quote user="Dodds"]Lamberts resignation is him terminating his contract on the basis of an apparent breach of a condition by Norwich. It doesn''t matter whether McNally accepts it or not and in any event the contract will be repudiated whether the resignation was valid as he is no longer rendering his services to Norwich City FC. If it is true that Norwich have breached a condition, and really it is all guesswork, then there wont be any damages owed by The Villa for Lamberts contract. Money will still cross hands, but its unlikely to be to the full tune.[/quote]

 

Codswallop!

 

You are a genuine legal eagle are you not, Brummie Brains? Silk Cut and all.

 

I think perhaps you should head a dignified retreat, one wildly innacurate posting too many indicates that you are clearly out of your depth.

[Jacko 0]

[quote user="Dodds"]Lamberts resignation is him terminating his contract on the basis of an apparent breach of a condition by Norwich. It doesn''t matter whether McNally accepts it or not and in any event the contract will be repudiated whether the resignation was valid as he is no longer rendering his services to Norwich City FC.

If it is true that Norwich have breached a condition, and really it is all guesswork, then there wont be any damages owed by The Villa for Lamberts contract.

Money will still cross hands, but its unlikely to be to the full tune.[/quote]

Now you are finally making some sense for a change. The only thing I would pull you up on is that what you are now referring to is constructive dismissal. Lambert technically wouldn''t be resigning. He would be treating himself as being dimissed by Norwich on the grounds of this breach. If this is the case then absolutely no money will be changing hands whatsoever. But we don''t know whether there was actually a clause in the contract. This is all newspaper guesswork and speculation.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="Dodds"]Lamberts resignation is him terminating his contract on the basis of an apparent breach of a condition by Norwich. It doesn''t matter whether McNally accepts it or not and in any event the contract will be repudiated whether the resignation was valid as he is no longer rendering his services to Norwich City FC.

If it is true that Norwich have breached a condition, and really it is all guesswork, then there wont be any damages owed by The Villa for Lamberts contract.

Money will still cross hands, but its unlikely to be to the full tune.[/quote]If he felt his contract was breached by NCFC then he would be poorly advised to offer his resignation rather than to go straight for legal options.Offering his resignation would seem to indicate that he was unhappy with the spirit of something not the legality of it.

[Dodds 0]

A chilling rebuke Broadstairs I''m sure.

Jacko, I think money will change hands on the fact that Villa and Norwich operate in the same market. Taking the emotion out of it, football is a business and Villa and Norwich will likely do business again. Ultimately it comes down to this and not the finer points of Lamberts terms of service etc.

[Jacko 0]

We will see. Given the amount of money Lerner wasted on McLeish I would think the idea of getting Lambert for free is pretty appealing if he can pull it off. Putting the breach to one side a fair compromise in this situation is for Villa to pay Norwich a year''s salary (representing the fact that he always has 1 year left on a rolling contract) which I guess is about £1 million. Whether everyone will sit down and actually be that civil about it is another matter.

[Nuff Said 5,166]

[quote user="Jacko"]

We will see. Given the amount of money Lerner wasted on McLeish I would think the idea of getting Lambert for free is pretty appealing if he can pull it off. Putting the breach to one side a fair compromise in this situation is for Villa to pay Norwich a year''s salary (representing the fact that he always has 1 year left on a rolling contract) which I guess is about £1 million. Whether everyone will sit down and actually be that civil about it is another matter.

[/quote]But then as Militant says, there''s the separate issue of Culverhouse and Karsa. It doesn''t appear that we have even potentially slipped up in our treatment of them, so we can dig our heels in if Lambert wants to take them too, and I would be amazed if he didn''t.Keeping Culverhouse next season and Lambert disappointing at Villa as a result is quite an appealing fantasy.

[AJ 0]

Culverhouse is gone.

Not expecting anything above 1m tops in compo