[Archived] Steve Kean Drink Driving Poll - Sack or Back ?

[Guest TheArtistFormallyKnownAsJB]

You're quite right about this as is the poster who mentioned rent-a-mob. I'm truely disgusted by the witch hunt that is taking place here. Yes Steve Kean is a crap manager, yes his behaviour is inexcusable over the DD incident but the posting in this thread is by and large appalling. God knows why it was even started when we have a perfectly good SK thread as it is.

SK being sacked for footballing reasons is an excellent debate. All this moral outrage regarding the DD issue is completely out of order. Yes he deserves everything that comes his way from DUI but it is NOT a sackable offence unless specifically referred to in his contract of employment.....but don't let that stop the lynching

I've lost count of the number of times I've read fans discussing the great time they've had getting p1ssed up at the football. I'm sure none of those people drove afterwards. P1ssed up suporters at football matches really irritate me BTW. I watched some YouTube stuff of people in Wolverhampton pubs - I hope none of that lot are taking the moral highground here. I'm sure no one on here has driven the morning after a good session or just gone slightly over the limit.

Apologies if I sound angry over this, it's directed at no one in particular but I feel the majority have got this wrong. This thread should never have been started, the poll question is badly flawed and the thread should be closed.

+1 from me

[yoda]

You're quite right about this as is the poster who mentioned rent-a-mob. I'm truely disgusted by the witch hunt that is taking place here. Yes Steve Kean is a crap manager, yes his behaviour is inexcusable over the DD incident but the posting in this thread is by and large appalling. God knows why it was even started when we have a perfectly good SK thread as it is.

SK being sacked for footballing reasons is an excellent debate. All this moral outrage regarding the DD issue is completely out of order. Yes he deserves everything that comes his way from DUI but it is NOT a sackable offence unless specifically referred to in his contract of employment.....but don't let that stop the lynching

I've lost count of the number of times I've read fans discussing the great time they've had getting p1ssed up at the football. I'm sure none of those people drove afterwards. P1ssed up suporters at football matches really irritate me BTW. I watched some YouTube stuff of people in Wolverhampton pubs - I hope none of that lot are taking the moral highground here. I'm sure no one on here has driven the morning after a good session or just gone slightly over the limit.

Apologies if I sound angry over this, it's directed at no one in particular but I feel the majority have got this wrong. This thread should never have been started, the poll question is badly flawed and the thread should be closed.

I would say that not having a driving licence seriously affects his ability to manage a PL club,

good enough reason for me, but then I am not a Rao,

[otto man]

I would say that not having a driving licence seriously affects his ability to manage a PL club,

good enough reason for me, but then I am not a Rao,

In what way? is it needed during training?, Team talks? Player selection? Tactics meetings? Does he drive the team to away games? Pick them up for training? NO!

For every thing else driving related he employs a driver...Simples!

[den]

My worry is that sacking Kean won't make any difference. Venkys have already shown they don't want a manager who makes his own decisions and imposes his personality on a club when they sacked Sam. What we need right now is an experienced manager to grab hold of the whole thing and sort it out, will Venkys allow that? I wouldn't be particularly surprised if sacking Kean landed us with John Jensen.

And even if Venkys didn't demand another yes man and let a new manager do his own thing, that manager would still have to work under the mess that Venkys have made of the club so far. He'd have no chairman, no MD, would have to travel halfway round the world to meet the owners every few weeks. He'd also have to put up with this bizarre transfer policy which so far seems to consist of continuing to sell our best players and buying mediocre unknowns.

And then there's the chances of a half-decent manager actually coming in the first place. We're currently a laughing stock, widely predicted for relegation, with owners building a reputation for being unpredictable and difficult to work with. Who in their right mind would take this job if it wasn't a big step up for them?

I agree with your worries about whether any decent manager would come into the club SKH. Under the present set up, I doubt anyone would. Venky's have to change their ways and they would have to show to any prospective new manager that he would be in sole control of team affairs, while Venky's backed him to the hilt. Why is that so difficult for them? It shouldn't be, but in all probability that isn't why they bought the club in the first place.

If Venky's want to make this takeover a success, then they have to swallow their pride and do what I've just said. There's no point in them continuing as they are, because their dream isn't coming to reality. Nor can we really use the reasoning that sacking Kean wont improve anything. As a club, we have to change the whole way we run it. Do that and there just might be a decent future for us. Taking the option of staying as we are will surely see us into ruin. No - or does anyone still have faith in the way the clubs being run?

.

[RibbleValleyRover]

All this moral outrage regarding the DD issue is completely out of order. Yes he deserves everything that comes his way from DUI but it is NOT a sackable offence unless specifically referred to in his contract of employment.....but don't let that stop the lynching

I've lost count of the number of times I've read fans discussing the great time they've had getting p1ssed up at the football. I'm sure none of those people drove afterwards. P1ssed up suporters at football matches really irritate me BTW. I watched some YouTube stuff of people in Wolverhampton pubs - I hope none of that lot are taking the moral highground here. I'm sure no one on here has driven the morning after a good session or just gone slightly over the limit.

Apologies if I sound angry over this, it's directed at no one in particular but I feel the majority have got this wrong. This thread should never have been started, the poll question is badly flawed and the thread should be closed.

I would imagine there are some people on this forum who may have been affected by drink driving for example they may have lost a loved one or a friend due to a drink driver. If there are any and I believe there are one or two have stated this to be the case then I am not sure they will be too happy with your post Paul and the tone of it.

Personally I think Kean should be sacked for footballing reasons, from what I saw last season he clearly wasn't the right man for the club and should have been shown the door after the final game. But at the same time I do have a huge moral problem with having a convicted drink driver as our manager.

I would say that not having a driving licence seriously affects his ability to manage a PL club,

good enough reason for me, but then I am not a Rao,

I've been discussing with my father who is a HR Director for a company about this and from an Employment Law standpoint he reckons Kean would have a good chance of getting a serious payoff from an employment tribunal if Venky's did sack him. If Kean can demonstrate that he can still do his job despite the conviction for example paying for a chauffeur to drive him around (and Kean can easily afford that) then he can demonstrate to any courts that he can still do his job to the level required and any dismissal would be unfair.

[trueblue]

I've been discussing with my father who is a Senior HR Director for a large global company about this and from an Employment Law standpoint he reckons Kean would have a good chance of getting a serious payoff from an employment tribunal if Venky's did sack him. If Kean can demonstrate that he can still do his job despite the conviction for example paying for a chauffeur to drive him around (and Kean can easilly afford that) then he can demonstrate to any courts that he can still do his job to the level required and any dismissal would be unfair.

Still do his job to the required level?? has that numpty EVER been able to manage Rovers at the 'required level'?

[Guest TheArtistFormallyKnownAsJB]

If Venky's want to make this takeover a success, then they have to swallow their pride and do what I've just said. There's no point in them continuing as they are, because their dream isn't coming to reality. Nor can we really use the reasoning that sacking Kean wont improve anything. As a club, we have to change the whole way we run it. Do that and there just might be a decent future for us. Taking the option of staying as we are will surely see us into ruin. No - or does anyone still have faith in the way the clubs being run?

It's not even been 10 months since they bought the club. Kean has been in charge for 8 months. If we sack Kean, and the next candidate has a wobble, how long do we wait before we sack another manager and start again.

I am sure someone out there can prove the point, with statistics, that teams who lack consistency from the top tend to end up at the bottom! Look at Aston Villa at the beginning of last season.

I agree the sounds coming from the club are not promising at best. I don't expect fans to just sit and take what they are given, but at the end of the day common sense dictates that we give SK a chance. Big Sam proved that there are managers out there who can pull you out the mire if needed. I personally don't think it will happen though, as I can see from our teams attacking body language on saturday that SK is twice the Manager of Paul Ince, but we need to give him time for this to tell.

[Mattyblue]

SK is twice the manager that Paul Ince?

How on Earth have you got to that conclusion?

[jim mk2]

that SK is twice the Manager of Paul Ince, .

Ince was worse than useless so if Kean is twice the manager I suppose that upgrades him to only useless.

[RibbleValleyRover]

SK is twice the manager that Paul Ince?

How on Earth have you got to that conclusion?

I have to agree, stats and performances certainly don't indicate that to be the case.

[den]

It's not even been 10 months since they bought the club. Kean has been in charge for 8 months. If we sack Kean, and the next candidate has a wobble, how long do we wait before we sack another manager and start again.

I am sure someone out there can prove the point, with statistics, that teams who lack consistency from the top tend to end up at the bottom! Look at Aston Villa at the beginning of last season.

I agree the sounds coming from the club are not promising at best. I don't expect fans to just sit and take what they are given, but at the end of the day common sense dictates that we give SK a chance. Big Sam proved that there are managers out there who can pull you out the mire if needed. I personally don't think it will happen though, as I can see from our teams attacking body language on saturday that SK is twice the Manager of Paul Ince, but we need to give him time for this to tell.

I guess you wanted to stick with Ince at the time, then? That would have been consistent.

No mate, we had consistency before Venky's and Kean arrived. That's the consistency we needed.

Consistency with the right people at the club and with good management procedures has to be the aim.

[onlyonejackwalker]

I have lost count of the number of times I have read that we must give Kean more time. Said with absolute certainty like it means something.

Time to do what? Lose more points, alienate more players and fans, release more stupid comments, make further crazy team selections, sign more average players, increase his air miles, drink a little more?

Giving Kean more time is the craziest thing we could do. The sensible thing would be to recruit a decent man / decent manager, unite the club and support the new recruit with a suitable transfer budget.

[philipl]

SK is twice the manager that Paul Ince?

How on Earth have you got to that conclusion?

Twice as fat?

[otto man]

Twice as fat?

no that was Sam!

[Guest TheArtistFormallyKnownAsJB]

Ince had 15+ games in charge with a full pre-season under his belt. He signed Vince Grella and Keith Andrews on approx 50k a week.

Steve Kean has signed 4 players for about the same money Grella cost, and I would say at least 2 of those look decent signings.

This in itself, regardless of the attitude the players had on the pitch under either, proves that Kean has a better eye for players at least.

Giving Kean more time is the craziest thing we could do. The sensible thing would be to recruit a decent man / decent manager, unite the club and support the new recruit with a suitable transfer budge - Every six months?!

[onlyonejackwalker]

Ince had 15+ games in charge with a full pre-season under his belt. He signed Vince Grella and Keith Andrews on approx 50k a week.

Steve Kean has signed 4 players for about the same money Grella cost, and I would say at least 2 of those look decent signings.

This in itself, regardless of the attitude the players had on the pitch under either, proves that Kean has a better eye for players at least.

Giving Kean more time is the craziest thing we could do. The sensible thing would be to recruit a decent man / decent manager, unite the club and support the new recruit with a suitable transfer budge - Every six months?!

You seem to be forgetting the games we 'enjoyed' under Kean last year. A a gentle reminder we only stayed up on the last day of the season and Kean has now been 'in charge' for 23 games I think.

No I do not and never have advocated constant change. I think it is counter-productive and unhelpful. Unless of course you have made a very bad choice at the outset and need to rectify a very poor error. Which is the situation we now find ourselves in.

Also, I am of the opinion that a fully qualified and experienced manager would make instant improvements, very quickly at our club as the platform is in place (developed over a decade) for anyone with half a brain to get us moving in the right direction.

[cruz]

You are implying that Kean is not qualified when he has the necessary accreditation

By experienced do you mean one of the many who have been sacked somewhere else?

[yoda]

In what way? is it needed during training?, Team talks? Player selection? Tactics meetings? Does he drive the team to away games? Pick them up for training? NO!

For every thing else driving related he employs a driver...Simples!

at whose cost?

and how does he get to games to see the opposition for future games etc looking at possible signings

I think there is more to being a PL manager than you think

[sentient]

Ince had 15+ games in charge with a full pre-season under his belt. He signed Vince Grella and Keith Andrews on approx 50k a week.

Steve Kean has signed 4 players for about the same money Grella cost, and I would say at least 2 of those look decent signings.

This in itself, regardless of the attitude the players had on the pitch under either, proves that Kean has a better eye for players at least.

ffs you know things are rock bottom when people are debating which of ince and kean is the better manager. Strawman arguments from you Artist. Really poor.

[47er]

The key issue for me is that Kean is seen as a liar by a magistrate. One thing to commit the offence,quite another to try folks your way out of it. When first stopped he denied having any drink at all.Absolute loser in ever way.

[Glenn]

You're quite right about this as is the poster who mentioned rent-a-mob. I'm truely disgusted by the witch hunt that is taking place here. Yes Steve Kean is a crap manager, yes his behaviour is inexcusable over the DD incident but the posting in this thread is by and large appalling. God knows why it was even started when we have a perfectly good SK thread as it is.

Because the Steve Kean thread (and more importantly the poll) is in light of his managerial abilities, I specifically want to see how his conviction along with the admission of guilt that he lied to the police impacted things, that's why I specifically mentioned the court appearance in the question, because as you point out, we already have a perfectly good thread/poll on his managerial failings.

SK being sacked for footballing reasons is an excellent debate. All this moral outrage regarding the DD issue is completely out of order. Yes he deserves everything that comes his way from DUI but it is NOT a sackable offence unless specifically referred to in his contract of employment.....but don't let that stop the lynching

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but don't most contracts of employments specifically mention DD as an example of gross misconduct? My previous two employers did (and people were sacked from both for DD incidents) and our off-the-shelf bolierplate one we use at my present company do. Obviously I haven't read a Rovers ones, but I thought it was pretty standard these days.

I've lost count of the number of times I've read fans discussing the great time they've had getting p1ssed up at the football. I'm sure none of those people drove afterwards. P1ssed up suporters at football matches really irritate me BTW. I watched some YouTube stuff of people in Wolverhampton pubs - I hope none of that lot are taking the moral highground here. I'm sure no one on here has driven the morning after a good session or just gone slightly over the limit.

Paul, you know I like a drink, but I've never driven drunk (or even knowingly over the limit) and as I mentioned previously my "day after" risk-taking was over years ago.

Apologies if I sound angry over this, it's directed at no one in particular but I feel the majority have got this wrong. This thread should never have been started, the poll question is badly flawed and the thread should be closed.

Feel free to be angry (and others should take note, Paul shows how to remain civil and dignified even when angry) but I disagree, and I still believe this thread has validity.

I guess a question to ask both sides is, how would you feel if it had been the kit man or the grounds man? Should he still be sacked/not sacked? Would you be outraged if he was or wasn't sacked ?

[Paul]

Because the Steve Kean thread (and more importantly the poll) is in light of his managerial abilities, I specifically want to see how his conviction along with the admission of guilt that he lied to the police impacted things, that's why I specifically mentioned the court appearance in the question, because as you point out, we already have a perfectly good thread/poll on his managerial failings.

OK I accept that but don't think it was clear in the first place. Perhaps I read the question differently or misunderstood the intention. I do see what you're asking, i didn't before.

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but don't most contracts of employments specifically mention DD as an example of gross misconduct? My previous two employers did (and people were sacked from both for DD incidents) and our off-the-shelf bolierplate one we use at my present company do. Obviously I haven't read a Rovers ones, but I thought it was pretty standard these days.

I don't know but I suspect it would vary from one company to another. If a driving licence is not crucial to the job then I think it could be grounds for unfair dismissal. As someone who drives for a living my contract states I must hold a valid license. If I got a DD conviction I wouldn't have a case to argue. On the other hand I cannot drive for health reasons for at least six months and my employers are 110% behind me because they of my commitment to the business. I'm currently cycling about 50 miles a day with a round trip commute of 5 hours!! I like my car! When I need to go further to visit customers one of the staff drives me. I could let Steve Kean have his number.

In the last four years we have had two guys convicted of DD. One was a driver, the other a key member of staff who does travel between sites in a company pick-up but it isn't essential to his work. The driver had just completed his HGV at our expense!! Both received an almighty bollocking and in one instance we expressed our extreme disappointment in the individual's lack of judgement. Both remain employed by us.

Paul, you know I like a drink, but I've never driven drunk (or even knowingly over the limit) and as I mentioned previously my "day after" risk-taking was over years ago.

I know this Glenn and wouldn't dream of suggesting otherwise. I've tried very hard to make my comments general as I don't want to have a go at you. It's all a bit unfortunate.

Feel free to be angry (and others should take note, Paul shows how to remain civil and dignified even when angry) but I disagree, and I still believe this thread has validity.

I guess a question to ask both sides is, how would you feel if it had been the kit man or the grounds man? Should he still be sacked/not sacked? Would you be outraged if he was or wasn't sacked ?

Thank you The other bit depends on his contract and ability to do his job - without a licence

[Paul]

I must stress I do not condone any form of drink driving or morning after. I also admit as a young man I used to do so, it was nearly 40 years ago and times have changed.

[colin]

I'm willing to be corrected on this, but don't most contracts of employments specifically mention DD as an example of gross misconduct? My previous two employers did (and people were sacked from both for DD incidents) and our off-the-shelf bolierplate one we use at my present company do. Obviously I haven't read a Rovers ones, but I thought it was pretty standard these days.

Not really. Gross misconduct has a number of examples of behaviour that "pull the trigger" under the ACAS code of conduct.

Drunk driving may well kick in if an employee is employed as a driver and is no longer able to carry out those duties due to a DD ban, but it will be down to the employer to decide. If the employee's duties do not involve driving then he or she may well have a case for unfair dismissal & take the employer to an Employment Tribunal.

If Steve Keen can get to work and do his job then then he may be OK. Unless his contract specifically states that DD is a dimissable offence.

[otto man]

at whose cost?

At his cost of course!.

and how does he get to games to see the opposition for future games etc looking at possible signings

With the afore mentioned driver by chance?... you're really not thinking this through are you?

I think there is more to being a PL manager than you think

Now if you believe I don't understand the role of a PL manager please explain to me how not having a licence will effect his role. I think you are grasping at straws as you are desperate to see kean sacked

.