Premier League stars' racist orgy shame caught on camera during Thailand tour

[yorkie1999]

As a side note to the thrust of this discussion.

 

Today I went into work and suddenly people who have never spoken to me about football in years are speaking about LCFC.

 

The embarassment and shame which I felt in having to speak about the topic in a polite manner (with no mention of rimming) extends far beyond Thailand, LCFC, the UK and those three idiots. Also, how bad do I feel for a couple of my mates who are married to ladies from the region? How bad do I feel facing these ladies (many with PhDs) when the club that I passionately support associates me with these rancid acts?

 

I am more angry today about this than when I first heard the news.

And yet you come from a country, i assume from your name, that finds it perfectly acceptable to munch your way through the entire eastern oceans supply of sharks and whales and also chop off every rhinocerous' horn to enhance your bedroom skills.

[Finnegan]

T hose of you wanting a quick sacking would do well to remember the Dennis Wise incident where he was sacked instantly subsequently suing lcfc which ultimately played a massive part in forcing us into administration.

Wise probably had a lucrative contract and we were skint.

Vichai could pay off these three with what's in his wallet to be honest.

[davieG]

he sued because he is a miserable, mardy *words deleted due to risk of mods thinking ive gone OTT.* these guys have been caught bang to rights. they will be hauled in front of a proper disciplinary panel and dismissed for bringing the club into disrepute. 

Whatever his personal make up was he was sacked for breaking  Davidson's jaw, as bang to rights as it could ever be. You don't  have to be innocent to sue someone and cost them time, money and reputation.

 

This needs to be done by the book but as quick as is legally and practicably  possible.

[digitalalba]

no, no its not

People are put in prison for slagging someone off racially.

[Bettsj2]

Understood. But isn't their gross misconduct pretty cut and dry? Does the appeal not come after the fact, rather than before it?

Obviously my knowledge on employment law is pretty poor, but I kind of expected the club to come down a little harder (excuse the pun) than the lukewarm statement we've had so far.

It is cut and dry but as with most things nowadays, there are procedures in place recognised by law, you step outside of those procedures and its you that ends up worse off.

[davieG]

Wise probably had a lucrative contract and we were skint.

Vichai could pay off these three with what's in his wallet to be honest.

Of course but we're  much more a litigation society than we were back then and agents are even more canny besides  it's  not a money issue it's  case of ensuring  that any action taken kills the story stone dead.

[Babylon]

Wise probably had a lucrative contract and we were skint.

Vichai could pay off these three with what's in his wallet to be honest.

But if you could avoid paying out a few 100k on the back of it taking a few extra days to get rid... I think anyone in their right might would take that option.

[Finnegan]

Of course but we're much more a litigation society than we were back then and agents are even more canny besides it's not a money issue it's case of ensuring that any action taken kills the story stone dead.

I think you're being a bit alarmist to be honest, DG. I think there's near enough zero legal risk to the owners here.

Unless they hand things over to the local triad, that is, and let Hopper et all just vanish.

[5waller5]

I don't see any risk in sacking them instantly .... it's not like there's a lack of clear evidence of the misconduct is there!!?

[Itsthejoeker]

It's a fair point, and it doesn't really matter if they were or were not, they treated the women with disdain and racist language. The whole act has tarnished the image of the club.

 

Of course it doesn't matter in this case, but people are getting so uptight about morals in this thread without even knowing if they're debating something relevant.

 

Understood. But isn't their gross misconduct pretty cut and dry? Does the appeal not come after the fact, rather than before it?

 

Obviously my knowledge on employment law is pretty poor, but I kind of expected the club to come down a little harder (excuse the pun) than the lukewarm statement we've had so far.

 

 

We don't know the half of it, were the girls planted? Were the players drugged? 

 

I'm not suggesting that what they did is defensible. But if we sack them and it turns out that they were drugged and lured into this, then the club would be liable. 

[leicsmac]

I'm not talking about freedom of choice, I'm saying you have no right to assume anything about these women as you don't know them or know their backgrounds, you are stereotyping them into a group which are forced into the trade, which inevitably is a small percentage.

I disagree. But I think that's something we're not going to see eye to eye on.

[reality-bites]

As I understand it Pearson's son is out of contract at the end of June. I would imagine that if he had any future at the Club (before this event) he would have been offered new terms so my guess would be that he will be seeking employment elsewhere anyway.

 

The other two have a year left on their contracts. If they were any good I would have expected that they would have been offered extensions - the fact that they haven't suggests that they are not so highly regarded and would have been leaving next year anyway. Its best that they be terminated now.

 

Development players come and go - if they don't make an impression there are always more coming along.

[davieG]

I think you're being a bit alarmist to be honest, DG. I think there's near enough zero legal risk to the owners here.

Unless they hand things over to the local triad, that is, and let Hopper et all just vanish.

Not really I just think issues like this are best done in a formal considered  way rather than media/fan driven panic. I've  been in sacking situations before both as a union rep representing an employee and a manager having to do the sacking and however  clearcut things can seem it's  a minefield  of detail.

[5waller5]

I would imagine the course of action to be .... 

 

Later today club announces players' suspensions during disciplinary process (which they will probably frame as investigations).

 

Within a week they will be sacked and given (i think 2 weeks but it could be a week) to appeal.

 

James Pearson certainly won't want to appeal (unless he hates his dad). The other two may do but the appeal would be just a lawyers' payday.

[Finnegan]

Of course it doesn't matter in this case, but people are getting so uptight about morals in this thread without even knowing if they're debating something relevant.

We don't know the half of it, were the girls planted? Were the players drugged?

I'm not suggesting that what they did is defensible. But if we sack them and it turns out that they were drugged and lured into this, then the club would be liable.

lol drugged and lured in? Have you seen the video? Jesus.

[breadandcheese]

Whatever his personal make up was he was sacked for breaking Davidson's jaw, as bang to rights as it could ever be. You don't have to be innocent to sue someone and cost them time, money and reputation.

This needs to be done by the book but as quick as is legally and practicably possible.

The reason Wise successfully won his tribunal case for unfair dismissal was exactly as you say, acting in haste.

After the Davidson incident, the manager instantly fined him two weeks wages. Then the club investigated and sacked him for gross misconduct (which is not unreasonable when he committed assault and broke a fellow team mates jaw). The employment tribunal ruled this as punishing him twice for the same offence, fining him and then sacking him. Hence unfair dismissal. You can't be punished twice for the same offence.

So as you say, the club are right to take their time, rather than act rashly, without taking legal advice. If only they'd done that with Wise.

[Ollie93]

I disagree. But I think that's something we're not going to see eye to eye on.

 

True, I do not have the knowledge to quote percentages but my point about stereotyping them still remains.

[les-tah]

am i not the only one who thought the girls looked like they were enjoying themselves?

[Itsthejoeker]

lol drugged and lured in? Have you seen the video? Jesus.

 

I'm not saying they have? But the club will need to investigate into the matter before coming to conclusions.

[digitalalba]

What a complete load of boll@cks!

 

You sir are a tw@t!

Where would you place the crime of racism amongst the other crimes in society?

[thybluefox]

lol drugged and lured in? Have you seen the video? Jesus.

 

I've heard it all now.

[lgfualol]

am i not the only one who thought the girls looked like they were enjoying themselves?

Part of their job is to pretend

[Finnegan]

True, I do not have the knowledge to quote percentages but my point about stereotyping them still remains.

You have absolutely zero knowledge what so ever. You come across as, at best, childish and naive and, at worst, thick.

What, you've been on a holiday to Thailand and you now know everything about the sex trade?

You have literally no statistics, evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, yet you feel qualified to discredit two of the most travelled adults in this community, based on what?

I'd do yourself a favour and wind your neck in a little, personally.

[Babylon]

I don't see any risk in sacking them instantly .... it's not like there's a lack of clear evidence of the misconduct is there!!?

You wouldn't, but it's not your money is it. No big business (unless they are moronic) will just sack people without following the correct procedures, especially when they have contracts worth hundreds of thousands of pounds.

 

The most seriously viewed "crime" will be the racist comment and that came from one person from what I can tell. I'd rather not watch the whole thing, but was it even said on camera, is it obvious who it is? I'm fairly sure that one is definitely sackable, but the others could depend on the interpretation of the wording in their contracts about what's expected.

 

It was also a Sunday out of season when many club people could be away on holiday and not contactable.

[Finnegan]

Pretty obvious they'll be suspended pending investigation and that our owners wield enough clout to get rid of a bunch of trainee, journeymen footballers just for looking at them funny if that's their pleasure.

Not sure why we're even discussing that side of things.

Our owners have proven repeatedly (despite some seriously borderline racist prejudice when they first showed up from thick as **** Leicester neanderthals without a penny to rub together on here) that they're massively competent business people.

It'll be dealt with professionally and ably.