Video on sky sports football app - our owner talking about Wilder's departure

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


An interesting interview. Looking at it from a strategic communication/legal point of view putting this out will be deemed necessary to dispel myths perpetuated by journalists that could cause reputational damage. The fact PA chose the national media tells you a lot about how they currently regard the local hacks. In doing so it also curtails any leaks from within the Club and puts to bed those supposedly ITK.

I doubt a written statement would have been sufficient to calm troubled waters, an interview IMO was the correct approach. The content has to be judged in the context there are two sides to a story and that one side, CW's, will be unavailable due to the terms of his NDA for some time to come. Unfortunately NDA's between employer and employee are always loaded in favour of the employer. Having personal experience of them you are bound for a time period and your post employment actions are dependant on you receiving your severance package. As I said in a previous post there will be express terms in the NDA that cover commercially confidential information that can not be commented on. Despite what some of the media are implying CW will not be able to talk. He is probably still being paid by the Club.

We now have PA's version of events. Whether they are factually correct in their entirety is a matter of opinion. What is obvious is the relationship was broken and could not be fixed. Both camps became entrenched and we have the result, a compromise settlement. Were there faults on both sides? of course, but we need to move on now as a Club. There seems little point in debating who was more in the right as it is unlikely we will ever be in possession of the full facts.

Whilst informative about the past it was disappointing that PA was not pressed more about the future vision for the Club. I would have liked to have known a revised timescale for the upgraded training facilities, current and future investment, how United World will benefit SUFC in the short term, what the recruitment process for a new manager will entail and how wide the net is being cast. The next appointment will tell us a lot about how committed to the Club PA is.
 
Whatever anyone thinks. Prince has put his point on the record. Until our previous manager does I will go with this. My own view is this exit was engineered and that Chris had become a “Top” league manager in his head. Good luck to him. He was the highest paid employee at the club but like the players he wanted to sign he wanted more. SUFC is all I am interested in not the ego’s of football employees. If Chris has signed an NDA then he has done so happy with his wedge. I can’t wait for this season to end to be honest and whoever the next manager is he will get my support.
 
I'd like to know where does it say that there is a NDA in place? Where has this come from? To me the only people pushing this NDA are Chris' mate Twit and his followers.

Maybe Chris is keeping his gob firmly shut because what the Prince says in the full interview is a pretty accurate description of events. I would be astounded if the Prince was putting out untruths to Sky as that would leave him open being taken to court.

One thing for sure certain people on this forum who wanted answers now don't like those answers.
 
jono_t2000 said:
I honestly don't think it's got anything in the interview that anyone would argue with tho.
Click to expand...
Apart from all the things I listed that I would argue with?

jono_t2000 said:
Regarding payment whether it's from Wilders agent or from Wilder himself doesn't really matter. Agents are representative of the person.
Click to expand...
They may represent a person, but they aren't simply go-betweens relaying messages. They are there so that their clients don't have to deal with it. It could have been nothing more than the agent saying, "you might be able to get a settlement even if you resign, I'll see what I can do" and Wilder saying "OK". I don't think so, but it could have been.
My guess, from everything that's been said and applying some personal experiences, is that Wilder has been frustrated by various hurdles placed in his way by the board, combined with a growing feeling that he can't turn it around and so felt the best option was to walk away - however because he didn't feel it was entirely down to him, didn't think a straight resignation without compensation was correct. I think it was more a "I'm prepared to resign if we can come to an agreed settlement". The board say no, we want you to stay, but don't back down on the hurdles he feels they are placing in front of him. Hence negotiation, "resignation" and some sort of settlement. That's what it sounds like to me.

jono_t2000 said:
Regarding Brewster being cornerstone for the future, yes but he also said was worried with Wilders targets as needed players for now rather than just the future.

They also go into talking about the possibility of loaning Brewster if Wilder hadn't hyped him up in the press before a deal was done (which we know obviously he did)
Click to expand...
A lot of what the Prince said there about recruitment contradicted itself. Either Wilder did everything himself and had full control, in which case he had no reason to claim that Brewster's signing - one that both he and the board think is a good signing - was signed "by everybody". Why would anyone else be involved at all if the situation was entirely in Wilder's hands? If he was deflecting blame for bad signings, why would he do that with someone the board thinks is a good signing?

jono_t2000 said:
I'm just not inclined to disagree with much that PA said based on what we've been told in bits and pieces, unless you had an agenda against the Prince i don't think u would deny there's anything the prince said that he wouldn't be able to prove as accurate.
Click to expand...
And this is the main problem I have - people are taking this as gospel, why? Why do you think he would be able to prove it as accurate? Why do you think he is being open and honest - but Wilder wasn't? Because from some of the things that have been said, they can't both be right. He has a motivation to paint a picture that shows him in a good light. As I said, I can't tell whether this is largely true or hardly true, but I know he is capable of underhand manipulation for his own gain and I can see plenty in the interview that doesn't stack up. For me, this has been anything but convincing, though I am sure there is some truth in there somewhere, I just wish I knew how to tell which bits are which.
 
S64 Blade said:
The NDA could include anything, not necessarily just linked to the terms of him leaving. I suspect NDAs happen all the time when manages go, whether sacked or resigned. You wouldn’t want a disgruntled manager putting it out there the clubs finances, for example.
Click to expand...
An example of an NDA on a Settlement Agreement:

The parties agree to keep confidential the existence, negotiation and terms of this Agreement and the circumstances concerning the termination of the Employee’s employment and not to disclose the same to any other third party person, firm or company except in relation to:
  • The Employee’s immediate family members, providing they agree to keep the information confidential;
  • The Employee’s doctor or any other qualified medical professional if it is relevant to their treatment, and they agree to keep the information confidential;
  • Seeking legal or professional advice in relation to its terms, provided the advisors agree to keep the information confidential;
  • Disclosing the same to the proper authorities as required by law, by HMRC or any regulatory authority;
  • Disclosing to any actual or prospective employer or recruitment consultant that the Employee’s employment with the Employer terminated by agreement on terms which remain confidential; or
  • The Employee’s insurer for the purposes of processing a claim for loss of employment.

And a couple of paragraphs on confidentiality of company information:

  • The Employee agrees that, as a result of the Employee’s employment, the Employee has had access to confidential information and in this regard the Employee acknowledges the continuing duty of confidentiality to the Employer and to Group Companies after the termination of the Employee’s employment. The restrictions in this clause do not apply to any confidential information which is in or comes into the public domain other than through the Employee's unauthorised disclosure.

  • The Employee will not represent themself or permit themself to be held out as being in any way connected with or interested in the Employer or any Group Company after the Termination Date.
 
Look forward to seeing if any players put any cryptic messages on the gram.
 
metalblade said:
I'd like to know where does it say that there is a NDA in place? Where has this come from? To me the only people pushing this NDA are Chris' mate Twit and his followers.

Maybe Chris is keeping his gob firmly shut because what the Prince says in the full interview is a pretty accurate description of events. I would be astounded if the Prince was putting out untruths to Sky as that would leave him open being taken to court.

One thing for sure certain people on this forum who wanted answers now don't like those answers.
Click to expand...
There will be a NDA in place if the club have given him any sort of settlement payment.
 

Millhousesblade1889 said:
View attachment 109097
Click to expand...
The NDA would not prevent him from responding to the interview. Following termination of employment, a person is entitled to respond to what they consider to be untruths or damaging comments, providing they stay within the boundaries of the said content, (ie, this interview) and do not expand into areas of confidentiality which were deemed and agreed by both parties to be protected by the NDA. Wilder would have been advised not to air these issue, but he's certainly allowed to respond. It would appear he's chosen not to.
 
derekacorah said:
Yep, but you don't get a settlement if you resign.
Click to expand...

The Prince has effectively destroyed any accusations against Wilder that he engineered his own removal - by saying that he resigned and that the Prince was clear that he wouldn't get a pay-off - or that Wilder was motivated by greed. If Wilder wanted the money, he could have stayed in his guaranteed job, earning a fortune, for years to come or wait to be sacked. Then he really would be set for life. Instead he's left with at best a fraction of one year's income. How is that greedy? How is that engineering your own pay off?
Yet everyone still thinks he got a sizeable pay off, most likely with an NDA......... but not sacked or forced out. ???

derekacorah said:
That's what he says in the interview numerous times, but then you look at the timeline and the actions of the board and that's not how they've acted.

He's basically said "I want you to stay and manage the club (because I don't want to pay you off)" and then gone on to criticise and make the relationship impossible with comments and pulling the plug on the JTW signings.

Whilst Wilder shouldn't be exempt from criticism, if I hammer my staff to the point where they don't want to work for me anymore, all the while telling them I do want them to work for me, I'm shouldering some of the blame.
Click to expand...
Having been in similar situations several times and feeling I had no choice but to resign despite being in a company I wanted to be in and doing a job I wanted to do, I can imagine the situation, if indeed that was the situation. I suspect a lot of people who can't see it have never experienced anything similar. Having a nasty, manipulative boss really is hell and is very dangerous mental-health wise. I also know several people who have been pushed over the edge by such things and it is not as easy to deal with as some people think.

Scarebus said:
Id imagine any legal team could pick apart anything slanderous or untruthful in this interview if they wanted to. Its on record now.

I don't think we'll hear any more.
Click to expand...
It really isn't as easy or as desirable to get into a legal battle over comments people make in the media. Expensive, long and drawn out over years, nasty, stressful, always with counter accusations, not certain of a favourable outcome regardless of what was said.
The idea that no legal action = the truth has been told is very dangerous.
 
ISZA said:
They agreed but weren’t happy to agree with it moving forward. Having your owner recommend players is either stupid or comes via a third party who works in football. Brand it however you want but it’s the same role as a DOF.
Click to expand...

Name me one club that doesn't have recruitment team ? No club in the world has solely the manager picking signings
 
Hamburg Blade said:
Apart from all the things I listed that I would argue with?


They may represent a person, but they aren't simply go-betweens relaying messages. They are there so that their clients don't have to deal with it. It could have been nothing more than the agent saying, "you might be able to get a settlement even if you resign, I'll see what I can do" and Wilder saying "OK". I don't think so, but it could have been.
My guess, from everything that's been said and applying some personal experiences, is that Wilder has been frustrated by various hurdles placed in his way by the board, combined with a growing feeling that he can't turn it around and so felt the best option was to walk away - however because he didn't feel it was entirely down to him, didn't think a straight resignation without compensation was correct. I think it was more a "I'm prepared to resign if we can come to an agreed settlement". The board say no, we want you to stay, but don't back down on the hurdles he feels they are placing in front of him. Hence negotiation, "resignation" and some sort of settlement. That's what it sounds like to me.


A lot of what the Prince said there about recruitment contradicted itself. Either Wilder did everything himself and had full control, in which case he had no reason to claim that Brewster's signing - one that both he and the board think is a good signing - was signed "by everybody". Why would anyone else be involved at all if the situation was entirely in Wilder's hands? If he was deflecting blame for bad signings, why would he do that with someone the board thinks is a good signing?


And this is the main problem I have - people are taking this as gospel, why? Why do you think he would be able to prove it as accurate? Why do you think he is being open and honest - but Wilder wasn't? Because from some of the things that have been said, they can't both be right. He has a motivation to paint a picture that shows him in a good light. As I said, I can't tell whether this is largely true or hardly true, but I know he is capable of underhand manipulation for his own gain and I can see plenty in the interview that doesn't stack up. For me, this has been anything but convincing, though I am sure there is some truth in there somewhere, I just wish I knew how to tell which bits are which.
Click to expand...

This isn’t like an agent ordering your shopping from Waitrose, it appears to be an offer to contract him walking away. Do you really think the £4m figure won’t have been discussed with Wilder? That really is naive.

Err, how do you know he’s only left with a fraction of one years salary? That’s pure biased speculation.
 
I really don’t have any reason to think what PA said wasn’t the truth. His chronology makes sense, and his discussions with CW sound more than fair. It’s appropriate to call out CW on chucking his players under the bus.

Sounds to me like this is less about a DOF and more about an unwillingness to work collaboratively with the board.

As reticent as I was when PA came in, at some point I’ve had to recognize that he’s done a lot for our club and wants what’s best for SUFC.

This doesn’t mean that CW isn’t a legend. He is. But I’m of the mind that the club is in good hands and the post-Wilder era is not going to be as apocalyptic as I first thought.
 
Rodders said:
"The first ever bit of adversity he's had and he wants to resign"

Aye, getting Northampton to 100pts with players not getting paid was a cake-walk.

FACTS. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You are misunderstanding

CW's career and time with us has been a one way upwards trajectory

First bump in the road and he wants off
 
Hamburg Blade said:
It really isn't as easy or as desirable to get into a legal battle over comments people make in the media. Expensive, long and drawn out over years, nasty, stressful, always with counter accusations, not certain of a favourable outcome regardless of what was said.
The idea that no legal action = the truth has been told is very dangerous.
Click to expand...
You absolutely correct Meghan, I mean Rebecca.
 
Rodders said:
"The first ever bit of adversity he's had and he wants to resign"

Aye, getting Northampton to 100pts with players not getting paid was a cake-walk.

FACTS. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Didn’t Halifax go bust while he was there? They certainly had a lot of issues.

Jordan has a right to his opinion and I don’t entirely disagree with some of his points but they’re not facts.
 
Sean Thornton said:
This isn’t like an agent ordering your shopping from Waitrose, it appears to be an offer to contract him walking away. Do you really think the £4m figure won’t have been discussed with Wilder? That really is naive.

Err, how do you know he’s only left with a fraction of one years salary? That’s pure biased speculation.
Click to expand...
No, I don't, I actually said I don't think that's what happened. I was giving an example as a response to the idea that an agent is just someone who relays what their client has said.

I assume he has walked away with a fraction of one year's salary from the Prince saying a) his salary was £4m a year and b) he wasn't going to pay him £4m for resigning. Unless I've remembered those figures incorrectly or misunderstood what the Prince has said, or missed something, he has got somewhere between 0 and £4m, presumably quite a bit less.
 
Addison said:
An interesting interview. Looking at it from a strategic communication/legal point of view putting this out will be deemed necessary to dispel myths perpetuated by journalists that could cause reputational damage. The fact PA chose the national media tells you a lot about how they currently regard the local hacks. In doing so it also curtails any leaks from within the Club and puts to bed those supposedly ITK.

I doubt a written statement would have been sufficient to calm troubled waters, an interview IMO was the correct approach. The content has to be judged in the context there are two sides to a story and that one side, CW's, will be unavailable due to the terms of his NDA for some time to come. Unfortunately NDA's between employer and employee are always loaded in favour of the employer. Having personal experience of them you are bound for a time period and your post employment actions are dependant on you receiving your severance package. As I said in a previous post there will be express terms in the NDA that cover commercially confidential information that can not be commented on. Despite what some of the media are implying CW will not be able to talk. He is probably still being paid by the Club.

We now have PA's version of events. Whether they are factually correct in their entirety is a matter of opinion. What is obvious is the relationship was broken and could not be fixed. Both camps became entrenched and we have the result, a compromise settlement. Were there faults on both sides? of course, but we need to move on now as a Club. There seems little point in debating who was more in the right as it is unlikely we will ever be in possession of the full facts.

Whilst informative about the past it was disappointing that PA was not pressed more about the future vision for the Club. I would have liked to have known a revised timescale for the upgraded training facilities, current and future investment, how United World will benefit SUFC in the short term, what the recruitment process for a new manager will entail and how wide the net is being cast. The next appointment will tell us a lot about how committed to the Club PA is.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t actually an interview was it, the owner just made a series of statements and wasn’t challenged on any of them. He mentioned CW’s lawyer wanting £4m but wasn’t asked what the final settlement was...all that guff about not wanting to criticise CW got a bit ‘Brutus is an honourable man’ for me. Fair play though, he has got his version of events out there and we can all make our own minds up.

As you say, we haven’t learnt anything about the future but there was one cause for optimism. PA is a businessman and he wants to make money out of SUFC; as he said himself, you don’t make any money in the Championship. Hopefully they will all be going flat out to get us promoted next season.
 

If you dont want to listen to the whole 29 minutes listen from 4mins 7 seconds onwards for about 5 minutes you will possibly get your answers about why CW may have walked but they certainly didnt want him to go.

I think PA came across as quite honest and open. Be interesting to read "CW Book" for his side of things but I think it was a good interview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
I hope Sheffield United don't come to regret this
3 4 5
Replies
132
Views
10K
blade too long
blade too long
ThatJa
SkySports+ + EFL
4 5 6
Replies
172
Views
15K
Berkshire Blade
B
HeCanDoMagic
Reflecting on Wembley
2 3 4
Replies
109
Views
10K
Jan Age
Jan Age
Westran
Are our fans a hindrance?
2 3 4
Replies
99
Views
6K
Tony_Kaufman
Tony_Kaufman
GreasyChipBeattie
Imagine this...
Replies
7
Views
544
Jon Bon II
Jon Bon II

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom