Jump to content

Pulis wanted (and tried to) leave without a payoff


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Tommycraign10others said:

I’m sorry but I don’t believe this leaving for nothing. He may have offered to leave by mutual consent but without a payment attached us stretching credibility to snapping point.  



I 100% believe it

 

He's a rich man - doesn't need the cash (but would want it in an ideal world)|

45 days into a new job and finds it that unbearable he needs releasing from his contract

 

Suggesting he would walk away on a mutual and no pay off is 100% a possibility to me

  • Like 1

 


Owlstalk Shop

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Pulis is understood to have been surprised, disappointed and hurt by the comments made by Chansiri.

 

Sky Sports News were told that Pulis wanted to leave the club with dignity and respect.

 

However, he feels that became impossible to achieve.

 

Pulis offered to leave Wednesday on mutually agreed terms, which would have seen him leave without a payoff, but the club would not accept that and chose instead to sack him.

 

During his short period at Hillsborough, Pulis felt he had a good working relationship with both the players and staff.

 

So Pulis wanted to walk away without a pay off but Chansiri insisted on sacking him so had to pay him off. 

 

No wonder this club is skint.. 

 

Unbelievable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

 

Yeah I can understand why someone desperate would cling to the hope that he was the right man


Everything you say is correct


However looking at his legal history and dark past of leaving clubs I'd have locked him into the most solid contract known to man legally


I'd also have ensured that Pulis was 100% aware of everything at the club that was beyond any chance of him saying he was shocked or surprised by something (something that happens with every manager in recent history for some reason) a few weeks into the role

 

 

Exactly, and this is what I don't get. Chansiri said he'd been in contact with Pulis for around 1 year(?). He also said he wasn't convinced that Pulis was the right choice for the club(?) so how the heck did he end up setting him on and why hadn't ge done his homework on Pulis during that time?? Just doesn't add up.

One thing is for sure, from an early stage, it became startlingly obvious that Pulis didn't want to be at the club. So what changed??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thompson was one of TP's 'staff' - he's managing the team today. Don't know what's happened to Gardner.

 

They obviously become a SWFC employee with their own contracts, but presumably linked because they come as a 'package'.

 

Does DC's comments suggest Thompson is just keeping the seat warm, or does DC see him differently? He could have thrown the keys to Bullen if he wanted TP and his team out.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, S36 OWL said:

 

So Pulis ALLEDGEDLY wanted to walk away without a pay off but Chansiri insisted on sacking him so had to pay him off. 

 

No wonder this club is skint.. 

 

Unbelievable. 

 

What you say is missing a word but, as it stands, this word is pretty feckin' important to the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Animis said:

Thompson was one of TP's 'staff' - he's managing the team today. Don't know what's happened to Gardner.

 

They obviously become a SWFC employee with their own contracts, but presumably linked because they come as a 'package'.

 

Does DC's comments suggest Thompson is just keeping the seat warm, or does DC see him differently? He could have thrown the keys to Bullen if he wanted TP and his team out.

 

 

Thompson has been at the club since 2011 hasn’t he? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:



I 100% believe it

 

He's a rich man - doesn't need the cash (but would want it in an ideal world)|

45 days into a new job and finds it that unbearable he needs releasing from his contract

 

Suggesting he would walk away on a mutual and no pay off is 100% a possibility to me

Then the question is what part of the release offer from Pulis was unacceptable to SWFC/DC if not money?

 

Something obviously was. Something so much that Pulis wanted it through by the end of that day. 
 

Does he still owe palace money?

Edited by WhiteOwl91
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Wall said:

 

Hmmm... several eyelids were batted on here to say the least.

 

Reading between the lines, it seems that TPs 'mutual consent' offer covered himself only and not his staff, which was an issue for DC as he would still be lumbered with them. Also seems to be some disagreement about how this would be announced

My eyelids feel battered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mrbluesky
2 hours ago, Roscoe P. Coltrane said:

Successful businessmen just don't make decisions like this one.

Yep...

 

SWFC

D-Taxis

ELEV8

Some latex company 

CHANSIRI 

 

Nobody can find anything on his actual buisness interests, I'll say it again, no matter how random a buisness you own, you would surely give yourself advertising space at the club?

 

He puts "CHANSIRI" everywhere, yet the only family you see is his own (I believe)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WAWAWUTO17 said:

Dont believe Pulis offered to leave for free. Looked what he did to Palace.

And we were led to believe he came because of the decent salary on offer

 

You don’t take a job for the great salary (money motivated) then leave for free

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...