This issue isn't mentioned enough on here.
Just had a quick search and can't find much - can anyone point us somewhere?
https://www.google.com/search?q=step...w=1366&bih=643
Printable View
This issue isn't mentioned enough on here.
Just had a quick search and can't find much - can anyone point us somewhere?
https://www.google.com/search?q=step...w=1366&bih=643
There was a small column by Owen Cowzer in one of the papers on Tuesday about Day 1 in the courts but no corresponding online article on any of the papers websites. There’s a screenshot of it here https://www.reddit.com/r/LeagueOfIre...t=share_button
Have the full extents of Pats claims been made public anywhere? I know they claim breach of contract but have any specifics been leaked or rumoured other than Pats saying O'Donnell had another year in his contract and O'Donnell saying he didn't?
Is the crux of the issue to do with whether the contract SOD had was informal (i.e he could leave at seasons end if another offer came in) or formal ( he needed to request permission to speak to other clubs)
You cant go in to court to say you are "upset" there has to be a quantum of claim set out to give the other side the ability to settle.
What damages did Pats suffer?
I guess they could say they had to pay more for new players to replace players "poached" , they qualified for Europe so unless they could make a case that they would have overhauled Rovers with SOD its hard to say they lost out.
Maybe make vague claims about club medium term plan was out back........
Hard to see there being a lot in it quantifiable.
Problem SOD has i guess is if Pats say its 100k does he have a 100k to settle , if not it will be twice that with costs by the time it finishes....he'd want to be very sure he was winning before going for Kelliher............who does have th 100k.
I have no skin in the game but id suspect if Pats have lodged the case they are on solid ground.
Its a serious enough thing to lodge a case as straight away the other side have to start spending money on solicitor fees so the ball is kicked i and the bills are running
I’ve no more information than anyone else but I don’t really agree that just because Pats have lodged a case that they have a solid case. It’s been seen in the past that wealthy people will use the courts and threats of legal action on people who can’t afford the risk of losing. Kelleher can afford any potential loss so the risk for him is minimal compared to the risk for O’Donnell.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
I agree thats why i made the point that Kelliher has the 100k so he can roll the dice with less worry than SOD but if the case had no merit SOD solicitors would advice SOD to defend away and spend the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
So Pats must have "some" merit , even wealthy people dont throw money away on 100% losers.
No winners here ....OTHER THAN THE LAWYERS
Word around dundalk is Stat Sports are going to cover any costs Stephen has.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
Well Pats had to find a new manager (Clancy) may have had to pay a fee to Drogheda for him to break his contract to go to them, likely hire a new backroom team as O'Donnell could've poached some of the old ones & Clancy likely had some coaches he trusts that he would want to continue to work with so there's some costs incurred that wouldn't have happened if O'Donnell stayed. Then there could be clauses within the contract around breaking the contract minimum notice periods, gardening leave if they mutually agree to split, costs for illegally breaching contract etc. How clauses like that would hold up in court I'm not sure but it wouldn't be the first time clauses like that existed and could be what Pats are trying to recover from O'Donnell. You're right that this is something that rich people will take a punt on even if they're case is a little flimsy that's why I'm so curious as to what the actual claims from Pats side are.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
Sure isn’t it any wonder they’re getting the begging buckets back out looking for investment so ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
They have been looking for investment from day one and discussed it with loads of diff people for a year now. Nothing will be done that's not going to benefit the club and that's why the Hull deal is offQuote:
Originally Posted by 2 Year Contract
I can't understand how all of these investors aren't jumping at the chance to throw away millions on LOI clubs. If there was proper government support in place for ground developments etc then you might have a chance. But even allowing for an occasional Europa League group stage qualification it's hard to see any return on the money that would need to be committed to make it that far. It makes a bit more sense if it's part of a multi club strategy.
Good insight but I was quite obviously jokingQuote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
Very good interview with the chairman put up yesterday on clubs YouTube channel. Explains everything in debt in fairness to himQuote:
Originally Posted by 2 Year Contract
multi club should be a big no no league wide IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
I’d agree. I’m sure Kelleher didn’t get rich by throwing money away on lost causes. The legal advice must have been that Pats have at least a stateable case. Worth noting that O’Donnells lawyers were late filing his defence, which is why the costs of the motion were awarded against him the other day. You wouldn’t be filled with confidence in your lawyers if you were him. I still wouldn’t be surprised to see the case settled.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
How would the Pats fans like to see it settled? Public flogging or kick up the hole?
They want him give back his cup winners medal and go on gardening leave for a year after the disgraceful way he left them in a better position than when he arrivedQuote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
That made me smile :)Quote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
LOI long overdue a good court battle after the days of Ollie Byrne getting tangled up in them one way or the other
Personally I don't really care, find the whole ordeal pretty funny if anything. Was long ago in football time and from players to managers it's not like you can get too hung up on loyalty in this league. The only reason that makes me want to see SOD come out on the wrong side of things is just how much it'd continue to bother certain vociferous Dundalk fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Give it a break Jack, plenty Pats fans on here, all nearly semi obsessed about the SOD court thing, as its obviously still left a bitter taste (not sure why - as managers and players leave all the time) plus its hardly even spoken about locally, not even sure any of our local papers have covered even the hearing date, if they have I must have missed it.
One thing I will agree, it was a long time ago football time.
Just because the local dundalk papers are clearly deliberately ignoring the court case doesn't mean its not a story in the LOI.
I'd wager an awful lot of LOI people are very interested in what happens in this case, as a marker of future behaviour of intra-LOI managemt moves.
I'm not disputing any of this (outside of the local press point, can't speak to that) but it doesn't make anything I said untrue. I don't care whether it even went to court or not, much less what the result is, and there definitely is a lot of Pats fans that imo are too attached to the situation, but I'd still find it funny to see it go Kelleher's way after so many smug "How's the court case going?" jibes from some Dundalk fans who acted like they even knew what was happening with any confidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by oriel
Ah come on. Not exactly uncommon for fans to have a problem with an ex player or manager for any one of a number of reasons. It's a fairly common theme in a lot of matches in presumably every country football is played in. Whether these circumstances warrant it or not... they probably do. Some fans won't be all that bothered.Quote:
Originally Posted by oriel
Hard to see why O'Donnell wouldn't be filled with confidence in his lawyers. They act for him and did what they were told to do. They can't file something without his say so. Was a deliberate stalling/delay tactic. Whether he's filled with confidence in the merits of his defence is another thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD
Look we'll see what comes out of it, just seems such a long time ago, plus I think this week's court item was only a listing date & its not uncommon for cases like this to be further extended for the actual hearing.
SOD doesn't appear to be worried any time I have heard him comment on it.
All those jibes were pointed at one poster in particular who only seems to contribute when it's about SOD, maybe it's Gareth or one of his lap dogs. Pats fans were rightly ****ed when SOD left unexpectantly, but that's football. I've switched off to it because as most have said it's a football lifetime ago but if I remember correctly the biggest accusation was that SOD was intentionally stalling players contracts so that he could poach them for Dundalk? If that was the case he did a terrible job since we only signed an injured Mountney, ageing Benson and average Bone. There was also an analysis on Pats late signing over the years from local journalist James Rogers which I think showed that Pats have form in making most signings post Xmas each year. So I don't think this accusation holds much water.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack B
This stinks of a rich elite who feels like they were wronged trying to strongarm a Joe Soap to prove a point. Pats fans will of course side with the man who has kept their club afloat for many years but for many others he is just another celtic tiger developer who contributed to screwing many of us.
Sue sue sue
I'm nearly say that Stephen enjoyed that 5-0 for some reason! ?
Smug? I saw them as straight up questions to ITK Patsdad who i'm sure will be along soon to provide an update on case proceedings, the only person who seemed to know how a judge would rule before any judge was appointed to hear the case. Tbh it is quite possible that the powers that be at St Pats would probably like to just move on now also but have already committed to taking the case to the high court, even the super principled Mr Kelleher.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack B
The whole 'just move on' thinking of fans aside, this could be quite a significant case and ruling for football here, possibly setting a precedence where (some!?)sporting contracts become basically useless - are exemption clauses legal here, whereby someone can or must sign away their legal rights? Could become very messy with the conflict with sporting rules on compensation, tapping up et. at best itd cause a lot of scrambling to issue amended contracts.
Lads I was referring to the wider world outside of specifically this forum, wasn't having a go at any one or group of you in particular on here or the debates that went on.
In any case if Pats could somehow work some kind of annexing of Friday's game from the records into this case it'd be much appreciated.
Case was back before court last week on a non-appearance basis and was continued afaik.
i.e AJOURNED
Where is Patsdad, thought he would be straight onto this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99