| Hartlepool United 21:12 - Feb 22 with 15169 views | HullDale |
Keith Curle has been sacked.
|  | | |  |
| Hartlepool United on 09:12 - Feb 24 with 2952 views | fitzochris |
| Hartlepool United on 08:47 - Feb 24 by seasidedale |
Thing is if we did speak to Askey this time, a lot of manager don’t like to take a job if a manager is still in post |
Very, very rarely is a manager dismissed by a club without the club having carried out some sounding out of replacements before hand. |  |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 10:21 - Feb 24 with 2768 views | AtThePeake |
| Hartlepool United on 21:20 - Feb 23 by 442Dale |
Whatever contract a manager is given, there should be enough effective forward planning to ensure that in the eventuality it ends early, it is affordable.
It’s the nature of football that this is a possible outcome at any club. Not a surprise that can’t have been forecast. |
It should especially be forecast when the manager you're hiring doesn't exactly have a brilliant track record at previous clubs. |  |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 10:36 - Feb 24 with 2720 views | 442Dale |
What would have happened if the last 16 games which have seen us gain 6 points had been Bentley’s first 16 in charge? We’d have had 7 points from 21 games. Would a change have been made then?
For a comparison, Alan Buckley left after getting 26 points in the first 24 games of 03/04. |  |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 12:05 - Feb 24 with 2545 views | James1980 |
| Hartlepool United on 09:12 - Feb 24 by fitzochris |
Very, very rarely is a manager dismissed by a club without the club having carried out some sounding out of replacements before hand. |
Could this be why they've stuck with Bentley? They've sounded out replacements and they either are not right or they don't feel we are right for them at this time. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 14:23]
|  |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 12:53 - Feb 24 with 2418 views | fitzochris |
| Hartlepool United on 12:05 - Feb 24 by James1980 |
Could this be why they've stuck with Bentley? They've sounded out replacements and they either are not right or they don't feel we are right for them at this time. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 14:23]
|
No. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 14:25 - Feb 24 with 2227 views | James1980 |
| Hartlepool United on 12:53 - Feb 24 by fitzochris |
No. |
Was that no to all aspects of my comment? | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 16:00 - Feb 24 with 2053 views | A_Newby |
| Hartlepool United on 21:20 - Feb 23 by 442Dale |
Whatever contract a manager is given, there should be enough effective forward planning to ensure that in the eventuality it ends early, it is affordable.
It’s the nature of football that this is a possible outcome at any club. Not a surprise that can’t have been forecast. |
This is from Chris Dunphy’s autobiography regarding Keith Hill’s 5-year contract and his sacking.
“Speculation said that the club would have to pay his salary till the end of his contract, and this was hailed as one of my failures. Yes, it is true that we gave Keith Hill a five-year contract, but I also had a clause in the contract that should we dismiss him, then only 12 months would be payable, which had been the norm since I took the chair. The truth is that all contracts are about the exit clauses, the rest is just PR for the supporters.”
Dunphy, Chris. More in Hope Than Glory (pp. 205-206).
I do not know the details of the contracts handed out by the current board but let us assume they continued with a similar type of contract, if so, then the maximum pay-out to a RAFC manager removed early from the post would be 12 months’ salary.
Robbie Stockdale was appointed manager in July 2021 with a 2-year contract. He was sacked in August 2022, so he would be entitled to a pay-out of 11 months’ salary as I assume would Jimmy Shan.
Now in 2020 it was reported that the average salary for a league 2 manager was around £80,000 a year.
https://www.888sport.com/blog/league-two-salary#League%20Two%20Manager%20Salary
Assuming that Stockdale was on such a salary and his assistant on say £50,000 then removing Robbie Stockdale and Jimmy Shan from their posts early would cost the club 11 months’ salary for each or about £110,000.
Jim Bentley was given a 2-year contract in August 2022. If he, and his assistant Nick Chadwick, were also sacked from their positions then RAFC would have to pay out 12 months’ salary to each. If they again had similar salaries, then RAFC would have to pay out around another £130,000.
This would bring the total for changing managers this season to between £200,000 and £250,000.
I do not think that these end of contracts payments have to be made in a single cash lump sum but can be and are usually phased payments over several months (maybe someone else knows).
Now assuming it would cost the club £130,000 to remove Jim Bentley in a “last roll of the dice”, the reward if the gamble was successful would be that the club would keep it’s £1 million + A YEAR funding from the Premier league. However, if the gamble failed the club would be relegated to the national league with a (slightly) larger debt. |  | | |
| Hartlepool United on 16:17 - Feb 24 with 1996 views | EllDale |
I believe that a lot of clubs come to a financial arrangement when sacking a manager that they effectively keep them on the payroll and continue to pay them a monthly amount.
This helps cash flow and also helps if the manager gets another job at which stage he is no longer entitled to further compensation for being out of work. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Hartlepool United on 16:24 - Feb 24 with 1979 views | 442Dale |
| Hartlepool United on 16:00 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
This is from Chris Dunphy’s autobiography regarding Keith Hill’s 5-year contract and his sacking.
“Speculation said that the club would have to pay his salary till the end of his contract, and this was hailed as one of my failures. Yes, it is true that we gave Keith Hill a five-year contract, but I also had a clause in the contract that should we dismiss him, then only 12 months would be payable, which had been the norm since I took the chair. The truth is that all contracts are about the exit clauses, the rest is just PR for the supporters.”
Dunphy, Chris. More in Hope Than Glory (pp. 205-206).
I do not know the details of the contracts handed out by the current board but let us assume they continued with a similar type of contract, if so, then the maximum pay-out to a RAFC manager removed early from the post would be 12 months’ salary.
Robbie Stockdale was appointed manager in July 2021 with a 2-year contract. He was sacked in August 2022, so he would be entitled to a pay-out of 11 months’ salary as I assume would Jimmy Shan.
Now in 2020 it was reported that the average salary for a league 2 manager was around £80,000 a year.
https://www.888sport.com/blog/league-two-salary#League%20Two%20Manager%20Salary
Assuming that Stockdale was on such a salary and his assistant on say £50,000 then removing Robbie Stockdale and Jimmy Shan from their posts early would cost the club 11 months’ salary for each or about £110,000.
Jim Bentley was given a 2-year contract in August 2022. If he, and his assistant Nick Chadwick, were also sacked from their positions then RAFC would have to pay out 12 months’ salary to each. If they again had similar salaries, then RAFC would have to pay out around another £130,000.
This would bring the total for changing managers this season to between £200,000 and £250,000.
I do not think that these end of contracts payments have to be made in a single cash lump sum but can be and are usually phased payments over several months (maybe someone else knows).
Now assuming it would cost the club £130,000 to remove Jim Bentley in a “last roll of the dice”, the reward if the gamble was successful would be that the club would keep it’s £1 million + A YEAR funding from the Premier league. However, if the gamble failed the club would be relegated to the national league with a (slightly) larger debt. |
As you say, that’s all assuming so any or none of those figures may be right or wrong.
The bigger problem the club have is losing the fan base, with supporters getting more and more frustrated and, in some cases, walking away. That is costing more than pounds in the long run.
The uncertainty needs addressing. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 16:31 - Feb 24 with 1951 views | James1980 |
| Hartlepool United on 16:00 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
This is from Chris Dunphy’s autobiography regarding Keith Hill’s 5-year contract and his sacking.
“Speculation said that the club would have to pay his salary till the end of his contract, and this was hailed as one of my failures. Yes, it is true that we gave Keith Hill a five-year contract, but I also had a clause in the contract that should we dismiss him, then only 12 months would be payable, which had been the norm since I took the chair. The truth is that all contracts are about the exit clauses, the rest is just PR for the supporters.”
Dunphy, Chris. More in Hope Than Glory (pp. 205-206).
I do not know the details of the contracts handed out by the current board but let us assume they continued with a similar type of contract, if so, then the maximum pay-out to a RAFC manager removed early from the post would be 12 months’ salary.
Robbie Stockdale was appointed manager in July 2021 with a 2-year contract. He was sacked in August 2022, so he would be entitled to a pay-out of 11 months’ salary as I assume would Jimmy Shan.
Now in 2020 it was reported that the average salary for a league 2 manager was around £80,000 a year.
https://www.888sport.com/blog/league-two-salary#League%20Two%20Manager%20Salary
Assuming that Stockdale was on such a salary and his assistant on say £50,000 then removing Robbie Stockdale and Jimmy Shan from their posts early would cost the club 11 months’ salary for each or about £110,000.
Jim Bentley was given a 2-year contract in August 2022. If he, and his assistant Nick Chadwick, were also sacked from their positions then RAFC would have to pay out 12 months’ salary to each. If they again had similar salaries, then RAFC would have to pay out around another £130,000.
This would bring the total for changing managers this season to between £200,000 and £250,000.
I do not think that these end of contracts payments have to be made in a single cash lump sum but can be and are usually phased payments over several months (maybe someone else knows).
Now assuming it would cost the club £130,000 to remove Jim Bentley in a “last roll of the dice”, the reward if the gamble was successful would be that the club would keep it’s £1 million + A YEAR funding from the Premier league. However, if the gamble failed the club would be relegated to the national league with a (slightly) larger debt. |
Could it simply be behind the board room doors the directors don't believe we have a chance of staying up. But if that is the case if the severance pay is 12 months salary it will be the same if JB and NC go now or at the end of the season, because both will still have over 12 months on their contracts.
Sacking them now would have the additional cost of the new management teams wages till the rest of the season. But if there was an upswing in form that might be offset by additional gate receipts and more season ticket sales even if we are in national league next season. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 16:31 - Feb 24 with 1953 views | surb_dale |
| Hartlepool United on 16:00 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
This is from Chris Dunphy’s autobiography regarding Keith Hill’s 5-year contract and his sacking.
“Speculation said that the club would have to pay his salary till the end of his contract, and this was hailed as one of my failures. Yes, it is true that we gave Keith Hill a five-year contract, but I also had a clause in the contract that should we dismiss him, then only 12 months would be payable, which had been the norm since I took the chair. The truth is that all contracts are about the exit clauses, the rest is just PR for the supporters.”
Dunphy, Chris. More in Hope Than Glory (pp. 205-206).
I do not know the details of the contracts handed out by the current board but let us assume they continued with a similar type of contract, if so, then the maximum pay-out to a RAFC manager removed early from the post would be 12 months’ salary.
Robbie Stockdale was appointed manager in July 2021 with a 2-year contract. He was sacked in August 2022, so he would be entitled to a pay-out of 11 months’ salary as I assume would Jimmy Shan.
Now in 2020 it was reported that the average salary for a league 2 manager was around £80,000 a year.
https://www.888sport.com/blog/league-two-salary#League%20Two%20Manager%20Salary
Assuming that Stockdale was on such a salary and his assistant on say £50,000 then removing Robbie Stockdale and Jimmy Shan from their posts early would cost the club 11 months’ salary for each or about £110,000.
Jim Bentley was given a 2-year contract in August 2022. If he, and his assistant Nick Chadwick, were also sacked from their positions then RAFC would have to pay out 12 months’ salary to each. If they again had similar salaries, then RAFC would have to pay out around another £130,000.
This would bring the total for changing managers this season to between £200,000 and £250,000.
I do not think that these end of contracts payments have to be made in a single cash lump sum but can be and are usually phased payments over several months (maybe someone else knows).
Now assuming it would cost the club £130,000 to remove Jim Bentley in a “last roll of the dice”, the reward if the gamble was successful would be that the club would keep it’s £1 million + A YEAR funding from the Premier league. However, if the gamble failed the club would be relegated to the national league with a (slightly) larger debt. |
Thats a good summary but i dont think we'd be liable for as much costs as you suggest.
Ive no real insight to this but would expect payments would continue monthly rather than as a lump sum and these would stop once they start a new role. In the case of Stockdale he is now an assistant at Hull City so i wouldnt expect were still paying him.
As for Bentley his clear remit will have been to keep us in league 2. At this moment in time it looks like he will fall some way short of that so despite having a contract to end of next season. I'd like to think we do have a release clause that can be activated but not till relegation is confirmed. Getting rid now might mean we need to keep paying him till he gets a new job which could be sometime given his track record! | | | |
| Hartlepool United on 16:53 - Feb 24 with 1871 views | fitzochris |
Most exit payments are paid monthly and cease when said party finds other employment. Therefore, had we agreed a contract with Stockdale and Shan that is considered the “industry norm”, we should no longer be paying either as they are both in employment again.
What Dunphy says in his book is typical of the industry too - anything between six months and 12 months tends to be the maximum payable duration on severance. The idea is that people in football management and coaching tend to want to get back into work rather than sit on their backside any longer than that, lest they be forgotten. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 16:53 - Feb 24 with 1868 views | A_Newby |
| Hartlepool United on 16:31 - Feb 24 by James1980 |
Could it simply be behind the board room doors the directors don't believe we have a chance of staying up. But if that is the case if the severance pay is 12 months salary it will be the same if JB and NC go now or at the end of the season, because both will still have over 12 months on their contracts.
Sacking them now would have the additional cost of the new management teams wages till the rest of the season. But if there was an upswing in form that might be offset by additional gate receipts and more season ticket sales even if we are in national league next season. |
Hi James,
I don't think the board have resigned themselves to relegation to the national league, they have too much personally invested in the club to "give up" and resign themselves to the club being relegated.
It would be easier to find an "investor" for a league club that receives funds from the premier league and is entered in the EFL cup and trophy than one that is in the national league.
I think they will continue on with trying to maintain our league 2 status until we have reached a point where it is mathematically impossible to do so. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 16:55]
| | | |
| Hartlepool United on 17:10 - Feb 24 with 1765 views | 442Dale |
| Hartlepool United on 16:53 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James,
I don't think the board have resigned themselves to relegation to the national league, they have too much personally invested in the club to "give up" and resign themselves to the club being relegated.
It would be easier to find an "investor" for a league club that receives funds from the premier league and is entered in the EFL cup and trophy than one that is in the national league.
I think they will continue on with trying to maintain our league 2 status until we have reached a point where it is mathematically impossible to do so. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 16:55]
|
Problem is, there’s a question to be asked around whether continuing with something that isn’t working is giving us our best chance to avoid relegation. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 17:15 - Feb 24 with 1755 views | davidab2202 |
| Hartlepool United on 16:53 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James,
I don't think the board have resigned themselves to relegation to the national league, they have too much personally invested in the club to "give up" and resign themselves to the club being relegated.
It would be easier to find an "investor" for a league club that receives funds from the premier league and is entered in the EFL cup and trophy than one that is in the national league.
I think they will continue on with trying to maintain our league 2 status until we have reached a point where it is mathematically impossible to do so. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 16:55]
|
I am sure that the reality of our situation is not being denied in the Boardroom.
The hard fact is that we need to win a minimum of 7 if not 8 games out of the remaining 13 and if that happens most of US would be proverbially happy to "show our asses on the Town Hall steps" | | | |
| Hartlepool United on 17:30 - Feb 24 with 1693 views | TVOS1907 |
| Hartlepool United on 17:10 - Feb 24 by 442Dale |
Problem is, there’s a question to be asked around whether continuing with something that isn’t working is giving us our best chance to avoid relegation. |
Quite.
Got to say, I'm very impressed, for such a small club, that we've got two posters on here with such a wonderful insight and ability to construct lengthy posts about the club's finances at the drop of a hat. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 17:33 - Feb 24 with 1687 views | James1980 |
| Hartlepool United on 16:53 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James,
I don't think the board have resigned themselves to relegation to the national league, they have too much personally invested in the club to "give up" and resign themselves to the club being relegated.
It would be easier to find an "investor" for a league club that receives funds from the premier league and is entered in the EFL cup and trophy than one that is in the national league.
I think they will continue on with trying to maintain our league 2 status until we have reached a point where it is mathematically impossible to do so. [Post edited 24 Feb 2023 16:55]
|
Thank you AN for your respectful response. So going round in circles here why aren't the board taking action? Even if it is to make a statement of confidence in JB his backroom staff and the squad? Tell us if Platt Lane is improving performances in training which will transfer to match day also if fitness tests are showing improved results. Give the fanbase a chink of light, a bit of positivity something make us think when going to the match this next game our fortunes are going to take a turn for the better | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 18:51 - Feb 24 with 1523 views | finberty |
The Board may be working on the basis that all that is needed are a couple games in which Hendo, or someone, nicks a goal, while Eastwood and the rest do all that's necessary to keep it out at the other end.
Manage this a couple of times in the next three games and the mood (and confidence) will change. |  | | |
| Hartlepool United on 19:19 - Feb 24 with 1435 views | A_Newby |
| Hartlepool United on 17:33 - Feb 24 by James1980 |
Thank you AN for your respectful response. So going round in circles here why aren't the board taking action? Even if it is to make a statement of confidence in JB his backroom staff and the squad? Tell us if Platt Lane is improving performances in training which will transfer to match day also if fitness tests are showing improved results. Give the fanbase a chink of light, a bit of positivity something make us think when going to the match this next game our fortunes are going to take a turn for the better |
Hi James
As I was trying to point out, if a pay-out of £130,000 over a year was the cost of removing the current management team and if the reward was increasing the probability of retaining league 2 status and an income of over £1 million a year then it is probably a gamble worth taking.
From reading responses of others on this thread (Fitzochris, Surbdale) my estimate of £130,000 is probably too high making the gamble even more worth taking.
For me that can only mean that either the board think that Jim Bentley is the right man to turn the performances of the team round, or they cannot find a suitable replacement.
Having had their fingers burned after they put Jim McNulty in temporary charge when they removed Robbie Stockdale I think they would be loathed to make the same mistake removing Jim Bentley without a suitable successor. | | | |
| Hartlepool United on 19:46 - Feb 24 with 1346 views | 49thseason |
| Hartlepool United on 18:51 - Feb 24 by finberty |
The Board may be working on the basis that all that is needed are a couple games in which Hendo, or someone, nicks a goal, while Eastwood and the rest do all that's necessary to keep it out at the other end.
Manage this a couple of times in the next three games and the mood (and confidence) will change. |
It looks as though its boiling down to 2 from 4 for the drop. We have 1 point from 6, the others have 5 or 6 points from 6, I am assuming that Gillingham will continue to improve and Harrogate will drop into the bottom 4. All of which means we have to out-perform Crawley by 6 points, Hartlepool by 7 points and Harrogate by 10 points over the next 13 games and even then Crawley have 4 games in hand and Harrogate have 2. Its going to take a monumental change of fortune to avoid relegation.
We are now entrenched in a mini Division of 4 teams three of whom have at least a 6 point plus advantage ..
Based on form, over the last 6 games, we will end up on 23 or 24 points, to,that extent we are already relegated as Hartlepool will end up on 38, Crawley and Harrogate on 40. Put another way we have to do better than 1.4 points per game more than 2 of our competitors over all of our last 13 games. It seems a very tall order. |  | | |
| Hartlepool United on 19:51 - Feb 24 with 1322 views | 442Dale |
| Hartlepool United on 19:19 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James
As I was trying to point out, if a pay-out of £130,000 over a year was the cost of removing the current management team and if the reward was increasing the probability of retaining league 2 status and an income of over £1 million a year then it is probably a gamble worth taking.
From reading responses of others on this thread (Fitzochris, Surbdale) my estimate of £130,000 is probably too high making the gamble even more worth taking.
For me that can only mean that either the board think that Jim Bentley is the right man to turn the performances of the team round, or they cannot find a suitable replacement.
Having had their fingers burned after they put Jim McNulty in temporary charge when they removed Robbie Stockdale I think they would be loathed to make the same mistake removing Jim Bentley without a suitable successor. |
When did anyone think we’d had our “fingers burned” by McNulty? | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 19:58 - Feb 24 with 1299 views | fitzochris |
| Hartlepool United on 19:19 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James
As I was trying to point out, if a pay-out of £130,000 over a year was the cost of removing the current management team and if the reward was increasing the probability of retaining league 2 status and an income of over £1 million a year then it is probably a gamble worth taking.
From reading responses of others on this thread (Fitzochris, Surbdale) my estimate of £130,000 is probably too high making the gamble even more worth taking.
For me that can only mean that either the board think that Jim Bentley is the right man to turn the performances of the team round, or they cannot find a suitable replacement.
Having had their fingers burned after they put Jim McNulty in temporary charge when they removed Robbie Stockdale I think they would be loathed to make the same mistake removing Jim Bentley without a suitable successor. |
I worked on the theory that the board were close to securing investment to the level where they felt they couldn’t make any long-term decisions until a deal was done. There was certainly enough talk to suggest this. The Trust statement yesterday, however, has dispelled that.
The only other possibility is that they’ve not sufficiently protected themselves to take the financial hit of getting rid of the manager.
It certainly can’t be that there isn’t an experienced manager waiting in the wings, as I know for a fact that there is.
The supporters are visibly hurting and the failure to act - or at least make a mitigating statement - is hurting us even more. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 20:06 - Feb 24 with 1268 views | James1980 |
| Hartlepool United on 19:19 - Feb 24 by A_Newby |
Hi James
As I was trying to point out, if a pay-out of £130,000 over a year was the cost of removing the current management team and if the reward was increasing the probability of retaining league 2 status and an income of over £1 million a year then it is probably a gamble worth taking.
From reading responses of others on this thread (Fitzochris, Surbdale) my estimate of £130,000 is probably too high making the gamble even more worth taking.
For me that can only mean that either the board think that Jim Bentley is the right man to turn the performances of the team round, or they cannot find a suitable replacement.
Having had their fingers burned after they put Jim McNulty in temporary charge when they removed Robbie Stockdale I think they would be loathed to make the same mistake removing Jim Bentley without a suitable successor. |
Hi A_N
Perhaps I didn't ask the question in the right way but this is what I meant in response to Fitz's comment about clubs sounding out potential new managers before removing the incumbent. I know it's daft to ask about whether potential replacements have been sounded out because it further undermines Bentley's standing with any members of the dressing room who lack respect for him if that became public knowledge, whilst he is the serving manager. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 20:12 - Feb 24 with 1233 views | fitzochris |
| Hartlepool United on 20:06 - Feb 24 by James1980 |
Hi A_N
Perhaps I didn't ask the question in the right way but this is what I meant in response to Fitz's comment about clubs sounding out potential new managers before removing the incumbent. I know it's daft to ask about whether potential replacements have been sounded out because it further undermines Bentley's standing with any members of the dressing room who lack respect for him if that became public knowledge, whilst he is the serving manager. |
James, it goes on. All. The. Time.
Not in our instance though, quite possibly for the reason I suggest above. | |
| |
| Hartlepool United on 20:43 - Feb 24 with 1142 views | bluevein64 |
| Hartlepool United on 19:58 - Feb 24 by fitzochris |
I worked on the theory that the board were close to securing investment to the level where they felt they couldn’t make any long-term decisions until a deal was done. There was certainly enough talk to suggest this. The Trust statement yesterday, however, has dispelled that.
The only other possibility is that they’ve not sufficiently protected themselves to take the financial hit of getting rid of the manager.
It certainly can’t be that there isn’t an experienced manager waiting in the wings, as I know for a fact that there is.
The supporters are visibly hurting and the failure to act - or at least make a mitigating statement - is hurting us even more. |
I've been waiting for someone to come up with a theory along the lines of the "board being close to securing investment" I suggested the same/similar afew days ago on this forum and someone in not so many words implied that I was on drugs !
I've explored all the potential suggestions, ideas and opinions as to why JB hasn't been relieved of his position and I'm left with the only plausible explanation is that the B of D are close to securing investment and the new "owner/s" wishes to be involved in the selection process. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
