Jake Doyle-Hayes

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I love the idea that it was the tackle, and not the fact he was absolutely ***** that has robbed him of a decent career.

Can’t see any way he wins the case when he has publicly claimed it was “nobodies fault” previously and also indicated that it was a tackle that could have been made by “any of the lads” which quite clearly suggests it was an innocent and reasonable challenge and not something that screamed ‘retired unfit manager who can’t keep up’.

Clearly a cash grab by a desperately poor player who has realised he’s found his level and realised there’s not a lot of money to be had at it.

I raised that with my colleague, he says it wasn’t likely to prejudice the case too much, as it could be reasonably argued that it wasn’t appropriate for JDH to call it out whilst still in employment with the possibility of a future at the club. They said it definitely didn’t help his case though, but isn’t a silver bullet against it.

[1875Sean]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.c...t-case-5153468

Interesting, you always hear about managed joining in training, injuries are part of the game, surely nothing will come from it

[Pretty Boy]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think it will be on his lawyers to prove that Johnson's participation in and/or conduct in the training game was reckless.

I suppose it comes down to whether Johnson's behaviour was deemed appropriate for the situation. If he was just making up numbers and an innocuous 50/50 left a player hurt then that's one thing. If he was showing off and went flying into a tackle 'for a laugh's then that starts to move towards the McGinn/Thompson situation whereby a situation wasn't necessarily malicious but became reckless and dangerous.

It will be particularly interesting to see if any ex or current players have to testify. My gut feeling is nobody wants a court case here and it will be settled out of court. Hibs won't want the potential embarrassment and awkwardness and JDH probably knows his case is 50/50 at best.

[500miles]

Nice to have another reason to slate that fat slaver to be fair.

[Trinity Hibee]

I heard LJ had 9 inch nails as studs

[TrinityHFC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think it will be on his lawyers to prove that Johnson's participation in and/or conduct in the training game was reckless.

I suppose it comes down to whether Johnson's behaviour was deemed appropriate for the situation. If he was just making up numbers and an innocuous 50/50 left a player hurt then that's one thing. If he was showing off and went flying into a tackle 'for a laugh's then that starts to move towards the McGinn/Thompson situation whereby a situation wasn't necessarily malicious but became reckless and dangerous.

It will be particularly interesting to see if any ex or current players have to testify. My gut feeling is nobody wants a court case here and it will be settled out of court. Hibs won't want the potential embarrassment and awkwardness and JDH probably knows his case is 50/50 at best.

This claim will be completely speculative to try and make something out of a career that has otherwise frittered away.

Don’t expect anything to come out of it. First, it isn’t unusual for coaching staff to be involved in training and secondly the player has already said there was nothing in it, it was an accident and that scans showed the injury was likely to have been there already.

[SunshineOnLeith]

Sorry to ruin the fun but Hibs will have insurance, and it will probably be settled long before it gets to the stage of Lee Johnson being called to give evidence as to his tackling ability.

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interesting, you always hear about managed joining in training, injuries are part of the game, surely nothing will come from it

I think it would depend on the drill etc that’s happening, and also a fair amount of it will land on players’ knowledge of what their employee rights are.

Players will accept a fair amount as part and parcel of being a footballer, their relationships with clubs and coaches will inform a lot of decision making in whether something is actionable or not as well, plus the severity of the situation that results will steer their thinking.

You could put some coaches into training and be absolutely fine, they are maybe recently retired and maintain their fitness by training with the team on conditioning etc, but clubs have a duty of care to the players and that extends to who is involved in training, who assesses their fitness, agrees their physical training plan etc.

Even if you take something like a player coming in and slipping on a freshly cleaned floor, if they’re injured and challenged that the floor wasn’t cleaned properly, Hibs would need to show that whoever cleaned the floor had received appropriate training or had appropriate skills to do it as part of their duty of care.

It is easy to dismiss these things as common practice or just one of those things that can happen, but when something goes wrong and you wind back to how it happened and who’s responsible for it, it can very quickly highlight a lack of care from the employer who hasn’t considered the duty of care implications for the practices - such as letting a head coach who is clearly no longer at the standard of a professional footballer get involved in a situation where he’s challenging and injuring a player. Even on things that are seen as an occupational hazard.

[Thatdayinmay16]

"The Irish midfielder is seeking compensation from the club over the injury that derailed his attempts to make a lasting impact on the first team."

This line is hilarious considering he was absolute guff before the injury and after it.

Just an attempt at a cash grab when he himself admitted that LJ didn't maliciously attempt to hurt him.

Couldn't be arsed turning up for hibs on a Saturday but been playing every week since joining sligo funnily enough.

[TrinityHFC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it would depend on the drill etc that’s happening, and also a fair amount of it will land on players’ knowledge of what their employee rights are.

Players will accept a fair amount as part and parcel of being a footballer, their relationships with clubs and coaches will inform a lot of decision making in whether something is actionable or not as well, plus the severity of the situation that results will steer their thinking.

You could put some coaches into training and be absolutely fine, they are maybe recently retired and maintain their fitness by training with the team on conditioning etc, but clubs have a duty of care to the players and that extends to who is involved in training, who assesses their fitness, agrees their physical training plan etc.

Even if you take something like a player coming in and slipping on a freshly cleaned floor, if they’re injured and challenged that the floor wasn’t cleaned properly, Hibs would need to show that whoever cleaned the floor had received appropriate training or had appropriate skills to do it as part of their duty of care.

It is easy to dismiss these things as common practice or just one of those things that can happen, but when something goes wrong and you wind back to how it happened and who’s responsible for it, it can very quickly highlight a lack of care from the employer who hasn’t considered the duty of care implications for the practices - such as letting a head coach who is clearly no longer at the standard of a professional footballer get involved in a situation where he’s challenging and injuring a player. Even on things that are seen as an occupational hazard.

You are way overthinking this.

It is a nonsense claim.

[Paulie Walnuts]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"The Irish midfielder is seeking compensation from the club over the injury that derailed his attempts to make a lasting impact on the first team."

This line is hilarious considering he was absolute guff before the injury and after it.

Just an attempt at a cash grab when he himself admitted that LJ didn't maliciously attempt to hurt him.

Couldn't be arsed turning up for hibs on a Saturday but been playing every week since joining sligo funnily enough.

Don’t necessarily agree on your last point (maybe because I largely couldn’t care less what he was up to whilst we weren’t being subjected to him on the pitch), but he was an absolutely terrible player. Made Brian Kerr look like a maverick.

[easty]

He should be focussing on a negligent angle for the club not diagnosing the original injury that was exacerbated by the tackle

I cannae see him winning a case against a tackle injuring him.

Maybe he’s just hoping for an out of court settlement

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You are way overthinking this.

It is a nonsense claim.

I’m not making any judgement on whether he’ll by successful with it, and it’s not overthinking to know what you’re talking about.
His solicitors clearly think he’s got a better than 50/50 chance of winning otherwise they wouldn’t be taking the case.

[SteveHFC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"The Irish midfielder is seeking compensation from the club over the injury that derailed his attempts to make a lasting impact on the first team."

This line is hilarious considering he was absolute guff before the injury and after it.

Just an attempt at a cash grab when he himself admitted that LJ didn't maliciously attempt to hurt him.

Couldn't be arsed turning up for hibs on a Saturday but been playing every week since joining sligo funnily enough.

He said this in the record 2 years ago.

“It was a tackle, a 50-50 and nobody holds back in training so it wasn’t an issue. That’s how it happened, we don’t hold back because we train with intensity.

“The gaffer doesn’t join in a lot - I don’t think he has joined in since! He apologised, said it was an accident but I knew that anyway. It was nobody’s fault, he didn’t mean it and that’s the way we train.“

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/jake-doyle-hayes-absolves-lee-29600004.amp

[Thatdayinmay16]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He said this in the record 2 years ago.

“It was a tackle, a 50-50 and nobody holds back in training so it wasn’t an issue. That’s how it happened, we don’t hold back because we train with intensity.

“The gaffer doesn’t join in a lot - I don’t think he has joined in since! He apologised, said it was an accident but I knew that anyway. It was nobody’s fault, he didn’t mean it and that’s the way we train.“

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/...e-29600004.amp

That was the quote I was alluding to, funny how he's now backtracked from that original statement.

The guy won the lottery being at hibs, it's the furthest he'd have reached. No "Career was derailed" considering he was still being paid and has now ended up playing for Sligo week in week out.

[Wilson]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m not making any judgement on whether he’ll by successful with it, and it’s not overthinking to know what you’re talking about.
His solicitors clearly think he’s got a better than 50/50 chance of winning otherwise they wouldn’t be taking the case.

No win, no fee?

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No win, no fee?

Wouldn’t think so here!

[Thatdayinmay16]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No win, no fee?

Should have went with Digby Brown.

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think it will be on his lawyers to prove that Johnson's participation in and/or conduct in the training game was reckless.

I suppose it comes down to whether Johnson's behaviour was deemed appropriate for the situation. If he was just making up numbers and an innocuous 50/50 left a player hurt then that's one thing. If he was showing off and went flying into a tackle 'for a laugh's then that starts to move towards the McGinn/Thompson situation whereby a situation wasn't necessarily malicious but became reckless and dangerous.

It will be particularly interesting to see if any ex or current players have to testify. My gut feeling is nobody wants a court case here and it will be settled out of court. Hibs won't want the potential embarrassment and awkwardness and JDH probably knows his case is 50/50 at best.

It would be very surprising if he has taking it to court without anything more than he said / no he said. There is some interesting wording in the complaint for sure.

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This claim will be completely speculative to try and make something out of a career that has otherwise frittered away.

Don’t expect anything to come out of it. First, it isn’t unusual for coaching staff to be involved in training and secondly the player has already said there was nothing in it, it was an accident and that scans showed the injury was likely to have been there already.

You fancy spending 20k+ for a day in court just on the off chance?

[Jamesie]

Proceedings in relation to a personal injury matter need to be raised within three years of the event giving rise to the claim - the “triennium”. It’s fairly common for protective proceedings to be raised to avoid eroding any negotiating position / losing the right to litigate if negotiations don’t reach a successful outcome.

Whilst JDH would likely have until September to raise these proceedings, it may suit him / his advisors to raise proceedings now to demonstrate they are apparently serious in proceeding with the action. The action can be paused / withdrawn at any stage.

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m not making any judgement on whether he’ll by successful with it, and it’s not overthinking to know what you’re talking about.
His solicitors clearly think he’s got a better than 50/50 chance of winning otherwise they wouldn’t be taking the case.

Unless it's a no win no fee scenario then why wouldn't they take the case, they'd be getting paid even if they lost. My experience of soliciters/lawyers is that they only refuse cases if the case could burden them with reputational damage - like everyone else they need to make money.

[NAE NOOKIE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

JDH was employed by Hibs at this time - do you think he's going to say anything different? If a manager turns up still pissed from a previous night out would you expect players to mention it during an interview? Just because it's reported doesnt make it true. There are plenty current and past well regarded Hibs players who have nothing but praise for JDH and his time at Hibs. Not many would say the same for Lee Johnson.

No wonder JDH couldn't nail down a first team place if he couldn't even dodge a tackle from a half pissed out of shape 40 year old.

[McD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That was the quote I was alluding to, funny how he's now backtracked from that original statement.

The guy won the lottery being at hibs, it's the furthest he'd have reached. No "Career was derailed" considering he was still being paid and has now ended up playing for Sligo week in week out.

Would be interesting to see how he/his lawyers demonstrate that his career has been derailed, when he continued to (rightly) be paid by Hibs during this period time, and agreed to mutual parting of the ways, which would imply he’d been given a payoff to leave early. There really isn’t a way to prove he’d have been offered another contract at Hibs, or anyone else of a similar or higher level.

[Thatdayinmay16]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

JDH was employed by Hibs at this time - do you think he's going to say anything different? If a manager turns up still pissed from a previous night out would you expect players to mention it during an interview? Just because it's reported doesnt make it true. There are plenty current and past well regarded Hibs players who have nothing but praise for JDH and his time at Hibs. Not many would say the same for Lee Johnson.

Johnson gave us more memories in 90 minutes than JDH gave us in 3 years.

As for the bit in bold, who?

[Thatdayinmay16]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would be interesting to see how he/his lawyers demonstrate that his career has been derailed, when he continued to (rightly) be paid by Hibs during this period time, and agreed to mutual parting of the ways, which would imply he’d been given a payoff to leave early. There really isn’t a way to prove he’d have been offered another contract at Hibs, or anyone else of a similar or higher level.

Yup, couldn't agree more.

He agreed to a pay off when he could have stayed and fought for his place in the first team and then seen out his contract and then moved to another club or potentially been offered a new deal.

We've not "derailed" anything, classic example of a guy throwing his toys out of the pram.

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yup, couldn't agree more.

He agreed to a pay off when he could have stayed and fought for his place in the first team and then seen out his contract and then moved to another club or potentially been offered a new deal.

We've not "derailed" anything, classic example of a guy throwing his toys out of the pram.

Again you are assuming he has agreed to a pay off.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Again you are assuming he has agreed to a pay off.

In January, the Hibs Observer reported that "His deal was due to expire in the summer but an agreement has been reached to allow the Irishman to leave this month and 'explore the next steps of his career'".

[BoomtownHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Again you are assuming he has agreed to a pay off.

He would have to agree to it for it to happen surely?

[matty_f]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Unless it's a no win no fee scenario then why wouldn't they take the case, they'd be getting paid even if they lost. My experience of soliciters/lawyers is that they only refuse cases if the case could burden them with reputational damage - like everyone else they need to make money.

Because they have duty of care to their client as well, and to limit the cost. Proceeding with a case that’s more likely to lose than win will give them a payday now but the bad advice will prevent repeat custom.