Capello's contractual rights in spotlight after resignation

Readers' comments (11)

• Anonymous | 9-Feb-2012 2:42 pm

  so the clause might or might not be in the contract and, if it isn't, it might be implied. very insightful. out of interest, why did you not seek the view of a leading employment lawyer on whether a particular term would be implied into a contract of employment? a sportsman's employment contract is no more 'sports law' than a banker's employment contract is banking law

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 9-Feb-2012 4:50 pm

  The only sensible thing on this page is the comment at 1442

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Mickey Mouse | 10-Feb-2012 0:20 am

  Some mighty powerful legal analysis in this here article!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Flashofthebleedingobvious | 10-Feb-2012 1:41 pm

  In an article a few days ago by Mark Palio (ex FA CEO) he said that since the Rio/DrugsTest incident they have always inserted a clause in the manager's contract that the CEO/Board have the ultimate right to make a decision on selection/captain.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Guido | 10-Feb-2012 2:46 pm

  It's either in the contract in black and white or it's not. No grey areas here. If the former, then Capello has a grievance if not then tough. Either way it should be obvious and not a subject for legal waffle.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• The Inn Crowd | 10-Feb-2012 3:47 pm

  The main thing is that he is no longer manager, the truth is he should have been sacked after the world cup fiasco. My main concern is what apears to be the inability of the FA to get a decent manager for the English team.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 10-Feb-2012 4:46 pm

  Legality aside, I think the FA are hooligans. The man did his job and some yahoo comes along and does things that are less than sterling and then has the cajones to blow his own horn - I am sooooooo great. Just pure rubbish.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• ZX10R | 10-Feb-2012 5:02 pm

  No matter which way you dress this whole episode up, the fact remains - irrespective of 'right', the FA have confirmed, by their recent actions, that the England manager position is a 'poisoned chalice'
  
  No manager in their right mind should let the emotional importance of the role overtake the need to work under the shambolic heirarchy of the FA

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• No win no fee | 10-Feb-2012 6:10 pm

  I would like to think the basis of article is correct but this is the English FA we are talking about.
  
  The breakdown of trust between the two parties was irreparable so the inevitable happened. I would guess FC was paid up in full with a little extra to say very little.
  
  Perhaps you could offer FC some advice to make a claim on a "no win no fee" basis!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• chris morrison | 11-Feb-2012 9:44 am

  perhaps a more interesting analysis would cover the liabilities of the FA in this situation for Capello's remuneration in respect of the unexpired portion of his previously agreed term of tenure. Has the action of the FA over Terry been serious enough to amount to grounds for his walking away, then claiming he has in effect been dismissed from his post? I would find it hard to think that, but for another reason I'm glad he has gone. I remain to be convinced that he hasn't just milked the position and now is leaving just ahead of the time where one or two shortcomings are likely to be confirmed in similar fashion to the last World Cup, the timing of this certainly would appear somewhat convenient to that at least.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 13-Feb-2012 11:43 am

  Does anyone give a brass monkey

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment