Adam Le Fondre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Read this article and come back to me. Stuff the CEO should lead on is being done by Malky. Fact.

https://www.skysports.com/football/n...emiership-side

---

Having read the article you are wrong. Fact. CEO is responsible for overseeing all aspects of the club. Malky is responsible for the football side but still reports to CEO who is essentially his line manager. It seems like you feel CEO because he is not hands on is no longer doing the job he is paid for. Should he also work behind the bar and clean the toilets?

whilst the information you are getting from your sources appears to be credible, your slant on it is often skewed imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Please add the ALF, £15.000k/week to the list.

I'm baffled as to why the club wanted an appearance clause linked to an extension option to the contract to begin with? Maybe it's normal practice when you sign a 37 year old, either way they created the stick with which they are now being beaten with.

Leaving it to Montgomery to inform Le Fondre though, that was well shan.

---

That vastly inflated wage was a typo in a computer game i'm sure. An extra zero added by mistake.

It's a shocking way to treat a player in all honestly. If he wasn't going to be required next season then Kensell and Gordon should have been man enough to meet with ALF face to face. As for trying to offload him to Stockport or Salford, what a joke.

Starting to think this club is being run by numpties.

Lets hope MM and DSG can crack on and get on the field sorted :flag:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChuckNor

Read this article and come back to me. Stuff the CEO should lead on is being done by Malky. Fact.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11781/13135637/hibernian-nick-montgomery-sacked-as-head-coach-of-scottish-premiership-side

---

Yeah you’re still wrong. I know what a CEO does.

I doubt Montgomery negotiated the contract so it wasn't his responsibility to speak with Le Fondre about a material change to it ie the removal of the extension, unless it was his decision that he didn't want Le Fondre to stay. And we know that wasn't the case because Montgomery then played Le Fondre.

So the responsibility for the conversation lies higher up the food chain and whether that was Kensall or Gordon, it was very poor that neither was the one to speak with Le Fondre.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

I doubt Montgomery negotiated the contract so it wasn't his responsibility to speak with Le Fondre about a material change to it ie the removal of the extension, unless it was his decision that he didn't want Le Fondre to stay. And we know that wasn't the case because Montgomery then played Le Fondre.

So the responsibility for the conversation lies higher up the food chain and whether that was Kensall or Gordon, it was very poor that neither was the one to speak with Le Fondre.

---

As I said above I don’t think that’s really true. Managers get paid to have conversations with staff in every walk of life, whether they made or believe in those decisions or not. In fact it isn’t great from NM to say to a member of his team that he can’t believe the owners or CEO didn’t speak to him. It his job to get on board and communicate the decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eyrie

I doubt Montgomery negotiated the contract so it wasn't his responsibility to speak with Le Fondre about a material change to it ie the removal of the extension, unless it was his decision that he didn't want Le Fondre to stay. And we know that wasn't the case because Montgomery then played Le Fondre.

So the responsibility for the conversation lies higher up the food chain and whether that was Kensall or Gordon, it was very poor that neither was the one to speak with Le Fondre.

---

It could still be Montgomerys decision based on his long absence with injury that he did not want ALF for the following season as he felt he could get better value for his budget elsewhere. At the same time when he was fit towards the end of the season he could still see the merit in playing him once the clause had been removed.

Montgomery was his direct line manager also and imo in any workplace it would be more common for this person along with human resources to discuss any contract changes with an employee. This would include things such as pay, changes to working condition and pension schemes, disciplinary issues etc.

It is not common place for a CEO in an organisation to deal with every employee directly regarding these matters. The decision would imo most likely have been made jointly through some sort of discussion, almost certainly involving Monty.

Whilst it could be argued a football club is a slightly different beast I am still not sure it comes under the CEO remit but possibly that of Brian McDermott at the time or the HR person. I am sure that many of you will have way more experience than me of working at the top end of a large company and will be better informed. I do know my wife is HR manager and she deals with all these issues on behalf of her boss, the Chief exec, whom she reports to.

It is easy however to be critical without really knowing how these things work or who actually made the decision. The default position on here as always is .. blame Ben Kensall.

Poor way for a community business to conduct itself in my view. Consistent with a lot of other practice at the club since the change in ownership and removal of a lot of long-serving staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeithMike

Poor way for a community business to conduct itself in my view. Consistent with a lot of other practice at the club since the change in ownership and removal of a lot of long-serving staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

You are spot on. As alluded to by Lewis Stevenson and John McGinn, the club lost a bit of itself when we got rid of those long-serving staff in favour of people who didn't get the club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1875Sean

He wasn’t on anywhere near 15k a week tho, myth that’s been spoken about for ages on here and keeps appearing as it was on football manager when he was in Australia

---

That was the point. I was replying to another post and their point about wage "myths". That one could be added to Muellers alleged wage and someone randomly speculating that Kenneh is on 4-5k/week.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeithMike

Poor way for a community business to conduct itself in my view. Consistent with a lot of other practice at the club since the change in ownership and removal of a lot of long-serving staff.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

And I thought we were a professional football team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by we are hibs

Hiding in corridors probably sums up our CEO and "owner".


Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

---

Our CEO should have been bulleted by now. Promises much delivered very little. Remember how excited he was with the Foley cash, now very quiet. He certainly enjoys himself on match day wining and dining.

ALF said that he understood and agreed with the decision. He's miffed because BK and/or IG didn't talk to him about it.

Poor wee soul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibbyradge

ALF said that he understood and agreed with the decision. He's miffed because BK and/or IG didn't talk to him about it.

Poor wee soul.

---

I don’t think ALF’s expectations here are unreasonable or deserving of ridicule.

Although - I’m very aware that we’re only getting to hear about this situation from one side. It would be interesting to hear if BK or IG’s version of events tallies up. They’re between a rock and a hard place here if their version doesn’t tally up, as a public disagreement would be pretty undignified, so they’re pretty much bound to keep quiet whatever happened.

Will players be hesitant to sign if that’s way BK and co go about regarding contracts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eastmainsmsh

Will players be hesitant to sign if that’s way BK and co go about regarding contracts

---

Only if they aren’t getting the money they want. If we’re paying them the salary they’re after they’ll not give a **** about the rest.

More to the point though, we’re not the only club in the world who would’ve looked to remove the clause giving ALF a new deal. Footballs a business too, and it’d have been bad business to trigger a year’s extension for a player we didn’t want for another year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eastmainsmsh

Will players be hesitant to sign if that’s way BK and co go about regarding contracts

---

We have just signed 3 players so I would think the answer to that is no

Listening to snippets of that podcast, ALF has had issues and been given bad references so I’d take what he’s saying with a pinch of salt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibbyradge

ALF said that he understood and agreed with the decision. He's miffed because BK and/or IG didn't talk to him about it.

Poor wee soul.

---

Agreed. Put your big boy pants on and get on with life.

Didn't we stop playing John O'Neill because of his appearance fee or it trigger extra years or something?

Who was the interferer back then?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Callum_62

Didn't we stop playing John O'Neill because of his appearance fee or it trigger extra years or something?

Who was the interferer back then?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

---

Rod Petrie made some calls on players like O’Neil and Fenwick when the Sky deal went south. Unpopular at the time but he moved early to keep us in business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Callum_62

Didn't we stop playing John O'Neill because of his appearance fee or it trigger extra years or something?

Who was the interferer back then?

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

---

Iirc we didn’t play O’Neil because he was on a fairly astronomical appearance bonus - one that even as a good player his impact on games was unlikely to be able to justify.

When we signed him we were chucking decent amounts of cash about and I think we beat a few teams (including Hearts) to his signature.

I seem to remember a tv deal with Scottish football collapsing and Scottish clubs suddenly facing a new financial reality - Hibs were one of the earliest to properly adapt to that reality, hence getting the golden generation getting their chances at a young age and signings of players like Sauzee, Zitelli, Latapy and De la Cruz ceasing.

It's a pity ALF couldn't make as big an impact on the park as he's trying to do off it now he's left. Flashes of good play but ultimately, despite all his talking, another poor signing.