Tom Cairney and his lawyer

Mitch Connor

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/2892073/Brown-has-to-take-Cair.html

PHIL BROWN has been ordered not to talk to Hull teenage ace Tom Cairney - by the player's lawyer.
Boss Brown was stunned to receive a letter from Cairney's legal representative after the club tried to open contract negotiations.

Cairney, 19, has one more year to run and is refusing to sign a new deal.

Brown said: "Tom has taken advice from an unlicensed and unregistered agent hiding under the umbrella of a solicitor and we are not allowed to talk to their client.

"So Tom was left out against Arsenal and I could not tell him that he had been dropped!

"Unfortunately, he is taking advice from the wrong people. He should be listening to me, the chairman, the backroom staff and the players."

Surely there has to be more to this - anyone heard stories of Cairney hating Brown (actually stories as opposed to people simply projecting their own hatred of Brown). Seems like a really odd move to instruct your manager via legal means that he is not allowed to talk to you. If I was a manager and I player did the same i'd be dropping him to the reserves and telling him, or getting my staff to tell him, that he will be training with the U18's for the rest of the season.

Surely the reality of the story is that he has simply blocked the Hull management from talking to him about the contract specifically.

Helix

novel way of angling for a move

if brown has any balls, which i suspect he does, he'll just let him run out his contract without kicking a ball, either in training or for the reserves, for the next 12 months

Xavi6

Dump him in the reserves and let him rot. Worst case scenario is they make a few quid from a tribunal if he signs for someone else when the contract expires. The threat of a year in the wilderness will sort this nonsense out.

Helix

Xavi6 wrote: »

Dump him in the reserves and let him rot

nah

that means he gets to play

train him with the youngest youth team on the books

leninbenjamin

Surely if Cairney is refusing to speak to Brown he's in breach of contract in some way? How can he be expected to fulfil his contractual obligations on the pitch if he is dictating those terms to his gaffer?

Mars Bar

That's ridiculous! One good goal and his head inflates. Needs a proper kick up the arse.

JimsAlterEgo

leninbenjamin wrote: »

Surely if Cairney is refusing to speak to Brown he's in breach of contract in some way? How can he be expected to fulfil his contractual obligations on the pitch if he is dictating those terms to his gaffer?

if the employee was sueing for bullying or something, this is understandable

leninbenjamin

JimsAlterEgo wrote: »

if the employee was sueing for bullying or something, this is understandable

would he not be obliged to first leave his position before proceeding with a case? doesn't make sense to me why the employer should still be expected to pay his wages...

SlickRic

plonker.

and worst of all, he's going to get me feeling sympathy for Phil Brown.

Mitch Connor

I suppose it could be argued that other members of staff can still talk to him, so he can still be told what to do.

There has to be more to it than this. It is either, imo, nothing to do with the contract or it is more than Brown that can't talk to him. My reasoning is that surely it isn't Brown that would be doing the negotiating - I would have thought that would be the job of the CEO or similar, not the manager himself. So I would have to think that Cairney is either stopping the club from speaking to him about the contract or there is a personal, no contract related issue, between Brown and Cairney.

dreamers75

Is he any use?

Xavi6

Mitch Connor wrote: »

I suppose it could be argued that other members of staff can still talk to him, so he can still be told what to do.

"Brian*, can you ask Tom to pass the ball to Jimmy?"

"Brian, can you tell Phil that Jimmy always has two defenders around him?"

Yeah, it could work.




*That's Horton btw

SlickRic

dreamers75 wrote: »

Is he any use?

he scored one beaut, and he's English.

do the math.

Mitch Connor

Xavi6 wrote: »

"Brian*, can you ask Tom to pass the ball to Jimmy?"

"Brian, can you tell Phil that Jimmy always has two defenders around him?"

Yeah, it could work.




*That's Horton btw

I'm not saying it is a good solution, or a solution in reality, just something that could be argued. Sure look at United games as an example. The coaches spend more time relaying messages than Ferguson does.

As I have said in the OP, if it is true as represented in the article, then the guy should be shipped out of the first team squad and training - but it just doesn't add up for me, not as a contract issue. I reckon Brown might be exaggerating the situation - in that he (and all Hull staff) are precluded from talking to Cairney about a new contract, but that it is limited to that.

JimsAlterEgo

leninbenjamin wrote: »

would he not be obliged to first leave his position before proceeding with a case? doesn't make sense to me why the employer should still be expected to pay his wages...

Not necessarily, have heard of plenty of bullying cases where the employee was in place at the time.