' So The Daily Mail Reported '

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

if you mean the statement was OTT yes, obviously written to allow no doubt what so ever as to who was in the wrong......
very direct,very very clear............but not to you........i dont think they were tortured, but were over a barrel .

OK I must be missing something if the "Apology" was direct and very very clear then what specifically has MM apologised for.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

if you mean the statement was OTT yes, obviously written to allow no doubt what so ever as to who was in the wrong......
very direct,very very clear............but not to you........i dont think they were tortured, but were over a barrel .

OK I must be missing something if the "Apology" was direct and very very clear then what specifically has MM apologised for.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

These are Malkys words

"Wherever mistakes were made during my time at the club, I wish to apologise for any part that I played in them, and for any offence I might have caused, particularly to Tan Sri Vincent Tan and all City fans"

If you cannot see that is an admission that mistakes have been made and offence has been caused and Malky is apologising for it, then I don't really know what more can be said Castleblue?
To me , Malky is publicly acknowledging that the mistakes made with the transfer budget was in large part down to him and Moody and not as has been trotted out down to Lim and Tan.

These are Malkys words

"Wherever mistakes were made during my time at the club, I wish to apologise for any part that I played in them, and for any offence I might have caused, particularly to Tan Sri Vincent Tan and all City fans"

If you cannot see that is an admission that mistakes have been made and offence has been caused and Malky is apologising for it, then I don't really know what more can be said Castleblue?
To me , Malky is publicly acknowledging that the mistakes made with the transfer budget was in large part down to him and Moody and not as has been trotted out down to Lim and Tan.

Actually they are not MM words and here is a copy of his statement taken from the club website;


Today I have reached a settlement agreement dropping all claims I have made against Cardiff City Football Club. I did not want to be in litigation and believe that it is in the best interest of all parties to have a clean break and move on.

I have enjoyed my time at Cardiff City and am most grateful to the Board of Cardiff City and Tan Sri Vincent Tan for giving me the opportunity. The Club’s owner Mr Vincent Tan invested heavily in the Club and supported our decisions in our push for promotion to the Premier League. Without him this would not have been possible.

My thanks to all those at the Club and the fans who have supported me during my time in Wales. If I have caused any offence to any one during this time, especially to Tan Sri Vincent Tan, then I apologise without reservation.

I wish everyone associated with Cardiff City FC all the best for the future and thank them for their support.

I will not be commenting further on this matter.



Malky Mackay

Absolutely no reference whatsoever to any mistakes being made during his time as manager of Cardiff City, no admission of any wrongdoing whatsoever just a lame "If I caused offence to anyone I apologise without reservation". Again no admission of any wrongdoing.

So I stick by what I've been saying and perhaps you would like to reconsider your assertion that MM made an admission that mistakes were made.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

if you mean the statement was OTT yes, obviously written to allow no doubt what so ever as to who was in the wrong......
very direct,very very clear............but not to you........i dont think they were tortured, but were over a barrel .

OK I must be missing something if the "Apology" was direct and very very clear then what specifically has MM apologised for.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

i think its you that has trouble with what to believe.......your idol..drops a law suit that could be worth millions.. gives an apology......and an OTT statement of gratitude to Tan,,,,,,,,,,you deduce? a load of shit is what you deduce......at worse mr makay did wrong..he gave an apology..at best he has no dignity,principals and is a liar {apology that is not meant for reward }
i feel sorry for his followers..love is such a strong emotion,its so difficult to let go......
the mistakes btw were huge ones.............cost my team a place in the prem....thats what matters to us Cardiff fans.....

These are Malkys words

"Wherever mistakes were made during my time at the club, I wish to apologise for any part that I played in them, and for any offence I might have caused, particularly to Tan Sri Vincent Tan and all City fans"

If you cannot see that is an admission that mistakes have been made and offence has been caused and Malky is apologising for it, then I don't really know what more can be said Castleblue?
To me , Malky is publicly acknowledging that the mistakes made with the transfer budget was in large part down to him and Moody and not as has been trotted out down to Lim and Tan.

Actually they are not MM words and here is a copy of his statement taken from the club website;


Today I have reached a settlement agreement dropping all claims I have made against Cardiff City Football Club. I did not want to be in litigation and believe that it is in the best interest of all parties to have a clean break and move on.

I have enjoyed my time at Cardiff City and am most grateful to the Board of Cardiff City and Tan Sri Vincent Tan for giving me the opportunity. The Club’s owner Mr Vincent Tan invested heavily in the Club and supported our decisions in our push for promotion to the Premier League. Without him this would not have been possible.

My thanks to all those at the Club and the fans who have supported me during my time in Wales. If I have caused any offence to any one during this time, especially to Tan Sri Vincent Tan, then I apologise without reservation.

I wish everyone associated with Cardiff City FC all the best for the future and thank them for their support.

I will not be commenting further on this matter.



Malky Mackay

Absolutely no reference whatsoever to any mistakes being made during his time as manager of Cardiff City, no admission of any wrongdoing whatsoever just a lame "If I caused offence to anyone I apologise without reservation". Again no admission of any wrongdoing.

So I stick by what I've been saying and perhaps you would like to reconsider your assertion that MM made an admission that mistakes were made.

Here's a link to the BBC website with quotation marks aroud Malkys quote, I don't think the BBC mis-quote http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27338126

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

if you mean the statement was OTT yes, obviously written to allow no doubt what so ever as to who was in the wrong......
very direct,very very clear............but not to you........i dont think they were tortured, but were over a barrel .

OK I must be missing something if the "Apology" was direct and very very clear then what specifically has MM apologised for.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

i think its you that has trouble with what to believe.......your idol..drops a law suit that could be worth millions.. gives an apology......and an OTT statement of gratitude to Tan,,,,,,,,,,you deduce? a load of shit is what you deduce......at worse mr makay did wrong..he gave an apology..at best he has no dignity,principals and is a liar {apology that is not meant for reward }
i feel sorry for his followers..love is such a strong emotion,its so difficult to let go......
the mistakes btw were huge ones.............cost my team a place in the prem....thats what matters to us Cardiff fans.....

Apologies Castle, just re-read it and it's Moodys quote=Mare

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

i think its you that has trouble with what to believe.......your idol..drops a law suit that could be worth millions.. gives an apology......and an OTT statement of gratitude to Tan,,,,,,,,,,you deduce? a load of shit is what you deduce......at worse mr makay did wrong..he gave an apology..at best he has no dignity,principals and is a liar {apology that is not meant for reward }
i feel sorry for his followers..love is such a strong emotion,its so difficult to let go......
the mistakes btw were huge ones.............cost my team a place in the prem....thats what matters to us Cardiff fans.....

Apologies Castle, just re-read it and it's Moodys quote=Mare

No problem and lets face you would find it hard to disagree with Moody as he messed up bigtime. I just wish MM had agreed to cut him loose and not supported him. If MM made any mistakes, in my opinion, supporting Moody was the biggest.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

if you mean the statement was OTT yes, obviously written to allow no doubt what so ever as to who was in the wrong......
very direct,very very clear............but not to you........i dont think they were tortured, but were over a barrel .

OK I must be missing something if the "Apology" was direct and very very clear then what specifically has MM apologised for.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

i think its you that has trouble with what to believe.......your idol..drops a law suit that could be worth millions.. gives an apology......and an OTT statement of gratitude to Tan,,,,,,,,,,you deduce? a load of shit is what you deduce......at worse mr makay did wrong..he gave an apology..at best he has no dignity,principals and is a liar {apology that is not meant for reward }
i feel sorry for his followers..love is such a strong emotion,its so difficult to let go......
the mistakes btw were huge ones.............cost my team a place in the prem....thats what matters to us Cardiff fans.....

The list of embellishment just gets longer but still no answer to the question. Are you struggling to find the answer because in your words this statement was very direct and very very clear.

Are you struggling because in fact MM actually didn't apologise for anything specifically.

not clear...................your kidding......only a few weeks ago Tan banned MOODY from our main stand had to sit in the away end,then reports him to the FA, this having sacked him, and then belittle his job.........now read Moodys statement.....
grovel grovel lick lick.....without actually going into details,itwas made pretty obvious who held the high ground.......it wasnt and never is those that grovel

Not kidding at all so I'll ask again what specifically has MM apologised for ?

seriously..if you dont get this...........there is no point talking with you......you obviously pray to his efigy every day and send him half your wages.............

Yes seriously, Specifically what has MM apologised for. Never mind the other embellishments you have added which seems to be a trait of your posts surely you can answer such a simple question. Surely.

look..if what you think of yesterdays statement........is tan gave Malky lots of dosh..and in return him and moody gave that cringey arse licking apology....get on with it........google pedantic..........its a trait of yours

Me pedantic - Never. You said that the statement was very direct and very very clear and written to allow absolutely no doubt to who was to blame. So if something is that clear I'll ask again specifically what did MM apologise for.

By the way VT did not ban IM from the boardroom for the Palace game that was a made up story by the newspapers who later issued him with an apology. Do you still believe that VT banned IM.

i think its you that has trouble with what to believe.......your idol..drops a law suit that could be worth millions.. gives an apology......and an OTT statement of gratitude to Tan,,,,,,,,,,you deduce? a load of shit is what you deduce......at worse mr makay did wrong..he gave an apology..at best he has no dignity,principals and is a liar {apology that is not meant for reward }
i feel sorry for his followers..love is such a strong emotion,its so difficult to let go......
the mistakes btw were huge ones.............cost my team a place in the prem....thats what matters to us Cardiff fans.....

Apologies Castle, just re-read it and it's Moodys quote=Mare

No problem and lets face you would find it hard to disagree with Moody as he messed up bigtime. I just wish MM had agreed to cut him loose and not supported him. If MM made any mistakes, in my opinion, supporting Moody was the biggest.

Malky and Moody came as a team, any mistakes made by either in terms of transfers, which I believe this whole affair is to do with, makes them both equally culpable, at least that's what Malky was at pains to have us believe, when he defended Moody, when he was asked to leave the club.

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

Apologies by.............. I.Moody: M:Mackay
Script by ..................V.Tan.

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

Apologies by.............. I.Moody: M:Mackay
Script by ..................V.Tan.

Script by ..... VT Blood Sucking Lawyers.

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

Apologies by.............. I.Moody: M:Mackay
Script by ..................V.Tan.

Script by ..... VT Blood Sucking Lawyers.

So Malky is human like the rest of us after all? When enough money is offered his principles go out the window

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

Apologies by.............. I.Moody: M:Mackay
Script by ..................V.Tan.

Script by ..... VT Blood Sucking Lawyers.

So Malky is human like the rest of us after all? When enough money is offered his principles go out the window

Afraid so but I bet that statement was back and forth between the clubs and MM legal representatives over and over until the final draft was agreed and I have no doubt whose team insisted on that sentance being included.

If I was Malky Mackay. I would ask myself why on earth would I drop a compensation claim against my former employers worth potentially (if you listen to the media) anything between £2 million and £7 million to myself and have to pay legal fees in the tens of thousands of pounds (if not more) no doubt and then embarrassingly have to make an unreserved apology to said previous employer? Answer simple!!! -because said employer has something on me to counter any possible claim. Who knows what that something is but it must be something very serious to drop a multi million pound compensation case. Have Malky and Moody been naughty boys while under the employment of Cardiff City Football club? I know what I think but I leave you all to draw your own conclusions!!!

Perhaps they settle for the full amount with a caveat that an apology of some sort was given. If you were offered that what would you do?

Ian you and I both know that if MM had resigned when VT had asked him to one of two things would have happened;

1: MM would have continued as manager of Cardiff City FC until he had worked his notice period or;

2: Cardiff City would have allowed him to leave immediately and paid him in lieu of notice. A.K.A Gardening Leave.


MM wasn't prepared to leave on either of that basis so he waited to be sacked and has now agreed a payment probably somewhere between his minimum notice period and the full value of his contract. The lame attempt at an apology just muddies the waters as far as I'm concerned. Just a case of MM doing what he had to do to get as much money in his departure bag as possible.

Thats exactly my outlook on it. We will never know how much was offered on the table.

The apology is having the desired effect on some on here though. To me its nothing.

Apologies by.............. I.Moody: M:Mackay
Script by ..................V.Tan.

Script by ..... VT Blood Sucking Lawyers.

Well, if thats true then Malky is not "a man of integrity" like he claimed.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

I am no expert in law, but have been required to sit various law exams many years ago linked with my job (now retired) in the world of finance. My understanding is that the LMA would provide an advisory service to MM, and also provide representation during any hearing should MM request their services. Would be extremely surprised if they were to offer any financial assistance in any shape or form, other than in a test case which could affect a large number of their members. Unions usually offer financial help if it is likely to result in a positive result for the majority of their members, and not in the case of an individual personal grievance hearing. My personal view is that MM was advised to withdraw his grievance as a result of new evidence coming to light, and the probability that he would lose his case should it end up in court. This could have resulted in large legal fees, as well as damaging his reputation.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

You are the silly poster nr 1 of the year.

Milky took you for a fool and he was certainly right !

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

A think a 5 second google about covers your experience but your assertion that the LMA would not contribute to a members legal fees is, in my opinion, absolutely wrong. However I would agree the type of legal representation together with the level of cost involved would have to be a consideration here.

In the case of MM from the moment he was sacked every official statement made on his behalf and been via the LMA, I have no doubt that through LMA Legal Services Department, and Slater & Gordon a number of claims have been submitted on behalf of MM to an Employment Tribunal and not a court.

As a result of these claims a process of negotiation has taken place between the LMA and Slater & Gordon and Cardiff City FC and it's legal team which has resulted in a "Settlement Agreement" being reached. Fundemental to the Settlement Agreement is that all present and any potential future claims by MM against the club are dropped.

Again, and in my opinion, there was no way that this was ever going to get anywhere near an Employment Tribunal and, because of costs, any court of law. This was always going to be settled by negotiation and then the tied up in a legally binding Settlement Agreement.

If as VT would have us believe that MM just dropped his claims then why on earth has a Settlement Agreement been put in place effectively blocking all parties from making the details public?. If the club had the dirt on MM it just would have sat back and said crack on because even if you take us to ET or Court we will win and then hit you with our legal costs. But the club didn't it negotiated an out and part of that agreement would have been a commitment to pay at least part of MM legal costs, in my experience probably 20%.

Having said that the costs will have been a fraction of any potential ET or Court case and, again in my experience, the LMA would have paid the balance of any costs. Absolutely.

I am no expert in law, but have been required to sit various law exams many years ago linked with my job (now retired) in the world of finance. My understanding is that the LMA would provide an advisory service to MM, and also provide representation during any hearing should MM request their services. Would be extremely surprised if they were to offer any financial assistance in any shape or form, other than in a test case which could affect a large number of their members. Unions usually offer financial help if it is likely to result in a positive result for the majority of their members, and not in the case of an individual personal grievance hearing. My personal view is that MM was advised to withdraw his grievance as a result of new evidence coming to light, and the probability that he would lose his case should it end up in court. This could have resulted in large legal fees, as well as damaging his reputation.

Look it's all about opinions but from the moment MM was sacked the LMA has issued statements on his behalf so they have clearly been offering MM far more than just an advisory service. I have always believed this would be settled before it got anywhere near an Employment Tribunal never mind a court. This was always a simple matter of what MM was entitled too under the terms of his contract of employment and the aim from the outset would have been, in my opinion and experience, to negotiate that and wrap it up in a Settlement Agreement. That's been achieved and the costs, in my experience will have been a fraction of the cost of an Employment Tribunal.

I accept completely that no Union or Trade Association would offer a member a blank cheque in legal fees and that's why, in my experience, in matters relating to employment law related cases they would seek closure through negotiating Settlement Agreements.

As regards any new evidence coming to light, if that was the case why on earth would the club negotiate a settlement if it has the dirt on MM. In my opinion and experience there was no new evidence and there is a reason why firstly the club negotiated a settlement and secondly why MM accepted the inclusion of a meaningless apology. It's called expediency a word the lawyers love.

You seem an intelligent guy so ask yourself if there really was any new evidence and the LMA and his legal team told him his case was unwinable and he would lose countless £k's in legal costs would he have been advised just to issue a statement saying I'm dropping all claims against the club? He didn't he said having reached a Settlement Agreement he was dropping all claims against the club.

That's the whole point to this a negotiated settlement which itself resulted in all claims being dropped. All this at the fraction of the cost of any court case or ET hearing.

I am no expert in law, but have been required to sit various law exams many years ago linked with my job (now retired) in the world of finance. My understanding is that the LMA would provide an advisory service to MM, and also provide representation during any hearing should MM request their services. Would be extremely surprised if they were to offer any financial assistance in any shape or form, other than in a test case which could affect a large number of their members. Unions usually offer financial help if it is likely to result in a positive result for the majority of their members, and not in the case of an individual personal grievance hearing. My personal view is that MM was advised to withdraw his grievance as a result of new evidence coming to light, and the probability that he would lose his case should it end up in court. This could have resulted in large legal fees, as well as damaging his reputation.

Look it's all about opinions but from the moment MM was sacked the LMA has issued statements on his behalf so they have clearly been offering MM far more than just an advisory service. I have always believed this would be settled before it got anywhere near an Employment Tribunal never mind a court. This was always a simple matter of what MM was entitled too under the terms of his contract of employment and the aim from the outset would have been, in my opinion and experience, to negotiate that and wrap it up in a Settlement Agreement. That's been achieved and the costs, in my experience will have been a fraction of the cost of an Employment Tribunal.

I accept completely that no Union or Trade Association would offer a member a blank cheque in legal fees and that's why, in my experience, in matters relating to employment law related cases they would seek closure through negotiating Settlement Agreements.

As regards any new evidence coming to light, if that was the case why on earth would the club negotiate a settlement if it has the dirt on MM. In my opinion and experience there was no new evidence and there is a reason why firstly the club negotiated a settlement and secondly why MM accepted the inclusion of a meaningless apology. It's called expediency a word the lawyers love.

You seem an intelligent guy so ask yourself if there really was any new evidence and the LMA and his legal team told him his case was unwinable and he would lose countless £k's in legal costs would he have been advised just to issue a statement saying I'm dropping all claims against the club? He didn't he said having reached a Settlement Agreement he was dropping all claims against the club.

That's the whole point to this a negotiated settlement which itself resulted in all claims being dropped. All this at the fraction of the cost of any court case or ET hearing.

I've recently quoted on another thread comments regarding the Tan video : I would suggest that listening to his comments you could say that this is pretty close to "character assassination". He has handed out a right slating and accused Malky of almost destroying the club. All we have heard recently from Malky is an unreserved public apology. Following the latest Tan outburst, if Malky makes no response in defence of himself, I would suggest that Tan has information regarding Malky's dealings at the club that would further harm Malky's reputation. If Tan had made these comments about me, and I knew that I had done nothing wrong, I would fight back with everything I have to preserve my reputation. Will be interesting to see what happens next.

I am no expert in law, but have been required to sit various law exams many years ago linked with my job (now retired) in the world of finance. My understanding is that the LMA would provide an advisory service to MM, and also provide representation during any hearing should MM request their services. Would be extremely surprised if they were to offer any financial assistance in any shape or form, other than in a test case which could affect a large number of their members. Unions usually offer financial help if it is likely to result in a positive result for the majority of their members, and not in the case of an individual personal grievance hearing. My personal view is that MM was advised to withdraw his grievance as a result of new evidence coming to light, and the probability that he would lose his case should it end up in court. This could have resulted in large legal fees, as well as damaging his reputation.

Look it's all about opinions but from the moment MM was sacked the LMA has issued statements on his behalf so they have clearly been offering MM far more than just an advisory service. I have always believed this would be settled before it got anywhere near an Employment Tribunal never mind a court. This was always a simple matter of what MM was entitled too under the terms of his contract of employment and the aim from the outset would have been, in my opinion and experience, to negotiate that and wrap it up in a Settlement Agreement. That's been achieved and the costs, in my experience will have been a fraction of the cost of an Employment Tribunal.

I accept completely that no Union or Trade Association would offer a member a blank cheque in legal fees and that's why, in my experience, in matters relating to employment law related cases they would seek closure through negotiating Settlement Agreements.

As regards any new evidence coming to light, if that was the case why on earth would the club negotiate a settlement if it has the dirt on MM. In my opinion and experience there was no new evidence and there is a reason why firstly the club negotiated a settlement and secondly why MM accepted the inclusion of a meaningless apology. It's called expediency a word the lawyers love.

You seem an intelligent guy so ask yourself if there really was any new evidence and the LMA and his legal team told him his case was unwinable and he would lose countless £k's in legal costs would he have been advised just to issue a statement saying I'm dropping all claims against the club? He didn't he said having reached a Settlement Agreement he was dropping all claims against the club.

That's the whole point to this a negotiated settlement which itself resulted in all claims being dropped. All this at the fraction of the cost of any court case or ET hearing.

I've recently quoted on another thread comments regarding the Tan video : I would suggest that listening to his comments you could say that this is pretty close to "character assassination". He has handed out a right slating and accused Malky of almost destroying the club. All we have heard recently from Malky is an unreserved public apology. Following the latest Tan outburst, if Malky makes no response in defence of himself, I would suggest that Tan has information regarding Malky's dealings at the club that would further harm Malky's reputation. If Tan had made these comments about me, and I knew that I had done nothing wrong, I would fight back with everything I have to preserve my reputation. Will be interesting to see what happens next.

VT was certainly wound up in that interview, and in respect of transfer dealings, rightly so as they left a lot to be desired. But it was also interesting to here VT say that he couldn't say more because of a legal agreement and sometimes it's more interesting to "hear" was isn't said to what is said.

What was clear is that VT was angry that having commited so much money to buying Cornelius, and £45k per week how on earth wasn't he the first name on the teamsheet. The answer is that he wasn't good enough and it was a staggering amount of money to spend on a player who wasn't ready. In my opinion that's why MM was sacked, incompetance in last summers transfers dealings and not anything underhand or shady. It's almost impossible to argue a case in favour of MM on the basis of that transfer alone. If I was MM I would just let it go because he will not be able to defend himself, he messed up pure and simple.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

A think a 5 second google about covers your experience but your assertion that the LMA would not contribute to a members legal fees is, in my opinion, absolutely wrong. However I would agree the type of legal representation together with the level of cost involved would have to be a consideration here.

In the case of MM from the moment he was sacked every official statement made on his behalf and been via the LMA, I have no doubt that through LMA Legal Services Department, and Slater & Gordon a number of claims have been submitted on behalf of MM to an Employment Tribunal and not a court.

As a result of these claims a process of negotiation has taken place between the LMA and Slater & Gordon and Cardiff City FC and it's legal team which has resulted in a "Settlement Agreement" being reached. Fundemental to the Settlement Agreement is that all present and any potential future claims by MM against the club are dropped.

Again, and in my opinion, there was no way that this was ever going to get anywhere near an Employment Tribunal and, because of costs, any court of law. This was always going to be settled by negotiation and then the tied up in a legally binding Settlement Agreement.

If as VT would have us believe that MM just dropped his claims then why on earth has a Settlement Agreement been put in place effectively blocking all parties from making the details public?. If the club had the dirt on MM it just would have sat back and said crack on because even if you take us to ET or Court we will win and then hit you with our legal costs. But the club didn't it negotiated an out and part of that agreement would have been a commitment to pay at least part of MM legal costs, in my experience probably 20%.

Having said that the costs will have been a fraction of any potential ET or Court case and, again in my experience, the LMA would have paid the balance of any costs. Absolutely.

WTF are you on about!

The LMA's own website tells you how it works. They offer a free initial helpline service and then have preferential partners that offer a discount to its members. The LMA would not have been able to afford to pay the costs in something like this. A quick browse of their accounts show that they could never be big enough to underwrite the legal costs of their members. MM would have paid his own legal fees.

You said in your opening post that:

"So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him and I have no doubt that the club has made a contribution to the costs of drawing up the settlement agreement with MM Legal representatives i.e. Slater & Gorden.
"

How on earth can you say stuff like that with certainty, you have basically just guessed and stated things as fact without any contextual knowledge of what went on. It's bizarre.

You need to accept that Malky has rushed into dropping his case against Tan, received no compensation and had to pay his own legal fees. On top of that he had to arse lick Tan with an apology. You need to have a think as to why.

As for your slant that a settlement agreement must mean Malky got something out of it, well thats pie in the sky as well.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

A think a 5 second google about covers your experience but your assertion that the LMA would not contribute to a members legal fees is, in my opinion, absolutely wrong. However I would agree the type of legal representation together with the level of cost involved would have to be a consideration here.

In the case of MM from the moment he was sacked every official statement made on his behalf and been via the LMA, I have no doubt that through LMA Legal Services Department, and Slater & Gordon a number of claims have been submitted on behalf of MM to an Employment Tribunal and not a court.

As a result of these claims a process of negotiation has taken place between the LMA and Slater & Gordon and Cardiff City FC and it's legal team which has resulted in a "Settlement Agreement" being reached. Fundemental to the Settlement Agreement is that all present and any potential future claims by MM against the club are dropped.

Again, and in my opinion, there was no way that this was ever going to get anywhere near an Employment Tribunal and, because of costs, any court of law. This was always going to be settled by negotiation and then the tied up in a legally binding Settlement Agreement.

If as VT would have us believe that MM just dropped his claims then why on earth has a Settlement Agreement been put in place effectively blocking all parties from making the details public?. If the club had the dirt on MM it just would have sat back and said crack on because even if you take us to ET or Court we will win and then hit you with our legal costs. But the club didn't it negotiated an out and part of that agreement would have been a commitment to pay at least part of MM legal costs, in my experience probably 20%.

Having said that the costs will have been a fraction of any potential ET or Court case and, again in my experience, the LMA would have paid the balance of any costs. Absolutely.

WTF are you on about!

The LMA's own website tells you how it works. They offer a free initial helpline service and then have preferential partners that offer a discount to its members. The LMA would not have been able to afford to pay the costs in something like this. A quick browse of their accounts show that they could never be big enough to underwrite the legal costs of their members. MM would have paid his own legal fees.

You said in your opening post that:

"So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him and I have no doubt that the club has made a contribution to the costs of drawing up the settlement agreement with MM Legal representatives i.e. Slater & Gorden.
"

How on earth can you say stuff like that with certainty, you have basically just guessed and stated things as fact without any contextual knowledge of what went on. It's bizarre.

You need to accept that Malky has rushed into dropping his case against Tan, received no compensation and had to pay his own legal fees. On top of that he had to arse lick Tan with an apology. You need to have a think as to why.

As for your slant that a settlement agreement must mean Malky got something out of it, well thats pie in the sky as well.

Only showing your inexperience of how these thing actually work. I will never accept that MM was rushed into anything, especially and "Arse Lick Apology" to VT because what he said was qualifed with "If". It's called expediency and intended to get out of town with the payoff he was entitled to under his contract of employment.

Even VT stopped short in his rant about MM transfer dealings because of this Settlement Agreement and although he is absolutely right about how bad a deal the Corneluis transfer was he run for cover behind the legal agreement when pressed for details on the Settlement.

I'm right you think I'm not but life is all about opinions and it would be a strange world if we all saw things the same way. The thing is I've been involved in a number of settlement agreements or compromise agreements so I know how they work and that's how I can say things with such conviction.

Like any other Trade Association or Trade Union the LMA offer members Legal services covering any number of issues when required and at no cost to the member.


So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him

With the greatest respect, what you have stated above is amongst the biggest load of laughable nonsense I have ever had the misfortune to read.

The legal partners of the LMA are not there to give free legal services in complicated litigation matters - they are there because they pay/sponsor the LMA to be their legal partners as now and again they will get a big juicy case that pays big juicy fees.

I have no doubt whatsoever that MM ran up a huge legal bill with them and had to pay it himself because he was up the creek without a paddle (due to new evidence being presented).

Any other theory is just fanciful and naive.

I never said that at anytime that Slater & Gordon had offered thier services for free, what I have said is that there would be no cost to the LMA member i.e. Malkay Mackay. I have no doubt that the LMA will have picked up the costs as would any Trade Union or Trade Association worth it's salt.

If you think for a single second that Slater & Gordon are only associated with the LMA in the hope they get a big juicy case every now and again is well fanciful and naive.

How on earth can the LMA pay legal fees for their members? They only have a handful of members who pay small fees to them - it is not comparable to a large trade union whatsoever.

I think you will find that the law firm pay a large amount of money to LMA just to be their legal partner. That's how it works in football trade bodies - for exams the PFA will have all sorts of partners ie car dealerships, investment advisers, estate agents etc. All of these companies will pay the PFA to be their preferred partner, it's not the other way around.

I have experience in the above and can state if for a fact so take that how you want.

Wow I didn't realise you had experience in all of this just a pitty you haven't learned a thing from all this experience.

By the way this handful of members the LMA has, exactly how many would that be and as your obviously in the know exactly how much are these "Small Fees" they pay to the LMA. Surely with your experience you'll have that information to hand.

A quick google gives you this link:

http://www.leaguemanagers.com/members/services-94.html

It says that their commercial partners like the law firm offer LMA members a discount as they are preferential partners. The link shows that you have been talking some serious horseshite in this thread. The LMA do not contribute to its members legal fees whatsoever. You are completely wrong.

Regardless of what I know for a fact personally, a quick 5 second google just blew your nonsense out of the water.

A think a 5 second google about covers your experience but your assertion that the LMA would not contribute to a members legal fees is, in my opinion, absolutely wrong. However I would agree the type of legal representation together with the level of cost involved would have to be a consideration here.

In the case of MM from the moment he was sacked every official statement made on his behalf and been via the LMA, I have no doubt that through LMA Legal Services Department, and Slater & Gordon a number of claims have been submitted on behalf of MM to an Employment Tribunal and not a court.

As a result of these claims a process of negotiation has taken place between the LMA and Slater & Gordon and Cardiff City FC and it's legal team which has resulted in a "Settlement Agreement" being reached. Fundemental to the Settlement Agreement is that all present and any potential future claims by MM against the club are dropped.

Again, and in my opinion, there was no way that this was ever going to get anywhere near an Employment Tribunal and, because of costs, any court of law. This was always going to be settled by negotiation and then the tied up in a legally binding Settlement Agreement.

If as VT would have us believe that MM just dropped his claims then why on earth has a Settlement Agreement been put in place effectively blocking all parties from making the details public?. If the club had the dirt on MM it just would have sat back and said crack on because even if you take us to ET or Court we will win and then hit you with our legal costs. But the club didn't it negotiated an out and part of that agreement would have been a commitment to pay at least part of MM legal costs, in my experience probably 20%.

Having said that the costs will have been a fraction of any potential ET or Court case and, again in my experience, the LMA would have paid the balance of any costs. Absolutely.

WTF are you on about!

The LMA's own website tells you how it works. They offer a free initial helpline service and then have preferential partners that offer a discount to its members. The LMA would not have been able to afford to pay the costs in something like this. A quick browse of their accounts show that they could never be big enough to underwrite the legal costs of their members. MM would have paid his own legal fees.

You said in your opening post that:

"So MM never had to pay a penny to the Legal Team representing him and I have no doubt that the club has made a contribution to the costs of drawing up the settlement agreement with MM Legal representatives i.e. Slater & Gorden.
"

How on earth can you say stuff like that with certainty, you have basically just guessed and stated things as fact without any contextual knowledge of what went on. It's bizarre.

You need to accept that Malky has rushed into dropping his case against Tan, received no compensation and had to pay his own legal fees. On top of that he had to arse lick Tan with an apology. You need to have a think as to why.

As for your slant that a settlement agreement must mean Malky got something out of it, well thats pie in the sky as well.

Only showing your inexperience of how these thing actually work. I will never accept that MM was rushed into anything, especially and "Arse Lick Apology" to VT because what he said was qualifed with "If". It's called expediency and intended to get out of town with the payoff he was entitled to under his contract of employment.

Even VT stopped short in his rant about MM transfer dealings because of this Settlement Agreement and although he is absolutely right about how bad a deal the Corneluis transfer was he run for cover behind the legal agreement when pressed for details on the Settlement.

I'm right you think I'm not but life is all about opinions and it would be a strange world if we all saw things the same way. The thing is I've been involved in a number of settlement agreements or compromise agreements so I know how they work and that's how I can say things with such conviction.

A compromise agreement or settlement agreement can be massively skewed in one sides favour. Here is a hypothetical scenario:

MM is entitled to 6 months gardening leave under his contract. This is worth approx £500k.

MM wants more as he wants the remainder of his contract paid up so threatens to sue Tan

Tan says F you and refused to pay a penny and is prepared to go all the way.

New evidence comes to light that paints MM in a bad light and could cause him embarrassment if it went to court.

So they agree a settlement agreement where the club pay MM some of what he is owed (could be 10k, could be 100k) as long as he makes a public apology Tan.

They agree and make the compromise agreement.


Whatever happens Tan has won massively.

I think that is the most convincing view on it yet.

Only showing your inexperience of how these thing actually work. I will never accept that MM was rushed into anything, especially and "Arse Lick Apology" to VT because what he said was qualifed with "If". It's called expediency and intended to get out of town with the payoff he was entitled to under his contract of employment.

Even VT stopped short in his rant about MM transfer dealings because of this Settlement Agreement and although he is absolutely right about how bad a deal the Corneluis transfer was he run for cover behind the legal agreement when pressed for details on the Settlement.

I'm right you think I'm not but life is all about opinions and it would be a strange world if we all saw things the same way. The thing is I've been involved in a number of settlement agreements or compromise agreements so I know how they work and that's how I can say things with such conviction.

A compromise agreement or settlement agreement can be massively skewed in one sides favour. Here is a hypothetical scenario:

MM is entitled to 6 months gardening leave under his contract. This is worth approx £500k.

MM wants more as he wants the remainder of his contract paid up so threatens to sue Tan

Tan says F you and refused to pay a penny and is prepared to go all the way.

New evidence comes to light that paints MM in a bad light and could cause him embarrassment if it went to court.

So they agree a settlement agreement where the club pay MM some of what he is owed (could be 10k, could be 100k) as long as he makes a public apology Tan.

They agree and make the compromise agreement.


Whatever happens Tan has won massively.

So there could be a scenario where MM could have received some of what he was entitled to under the terms of his contract of employment. I accept that but it does fly in the face of MM received nothing doesn't it But in fairness I agree that some of what you outline is a very reasonable scenario, except the £10k as MM would likely receive £74k were he to win an unfair or constructive dismissal case in an Employment Tribunal so, in my opinion and experience £100k would be more likely. Hypothetically of course.

However as the club has contributed to this litigation process by potentially opening itself to an unfair or constructive dismissal case and failed to pay MM his entitlement under his contract of employment, Hypothetically would it be unreasonable to expect the club to pay towards the legal costs of MM. In my experience the hypothetical doesn't even come into it and the club would pay somewhere in the region of 20% of the costs.

How about this for a scenario VT offers MM not £100k but £200k to make some form of public apology, it's clearly very important to VT so how much money would he be willing to pay to get it. £100k? £200k who knows but in my experience VT has paid a sizeable chunk of money for this meaningless apology and more fool him.

Interesting these hypothetical scenarios aren't they.