Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Jordan's Case

An old pal from university is a top employment lawyer in London, so I asked for his view on Jordan's case (and surprisingly for a lawyer, he didn't charge me for the privilege). In short he believes that Jordan only has a case if a) the alleged misrepresentation was indeed made (about wishing to return up North), and b) if Jordan then relied on the misrepresentation when foregoing the entitlement to compensation. Somewhat surprisingly, he goes on to add that so long as Dowie could persuade a court that at the time he made the alleged misrepresentation he genuinely meant it (about wanting to move up North), but Charlton then moved for him, he'll probably be in the clear.

In short, Jordan probably does have a case of sorts though whether he chooses to pursue it to its conclusion is another matter. Proving that Dowie even made a misrepresentation, and that Dowie meant it until Charlton moved in will be difficult of course. However if one was to wear a Palace hat for a second, the timing of his departure and Charlton's subsequent interest certainly seems curious. It is possible of course that Jordan wanted rid of Dowie anyhow after the Watford debacle, but if Dowie's departure genuinely was mutual, then he could hardly complain if another club took a different view of Dowie's qualities than he did. But then if this is the case, why make a fool of yourself on live television issuing writs unless your ego really is as deep as your tan?

Given that Murray claims to have followed Dowie's career with great interest, it would be surprising if he had not approached Jordan for permission to speak with Dowie whilst he was still their manager. Assuming that Jordan gave Murray short shrift, is it not possible that Dowie upon learning of this spun a story about wanting to move up North in order to free himself from his prohibitive contract? Which of course would give Jordan a pretty good case.

Either way, I'm going to be a contrarian and express a little sympathy for Jordan - he is only trying to do what is best for Crystal Palace; it's his means rather than his desired ends that rankle. I admire his admittedly fruitless attempts to banish agents from transfer dealings - these rogues have done far more damage to the game than an egocentric Chairman like Jordan ever could. And honest Charlton fans should ask themselves this as they gloat this evening - if Dowie performs well for Charlton, and in two years time a bigger Northern club is seeking a new manager (Man City perhaps), what chance the boot will be on the other foot?


At 8:17 PM, Blogger Wyn Grant said...

Thanks for posting the legal opinion although I can't say I'm any wiser about the likely outcome. Courtesy of Cynic Athletic I've just listened to Jordan's interview and his parading himself as the standard bearer of honesty and integrity does stretch credulity. This is the man who told 4-4-2 that he would like to kick Richard Murray in the butt as they say in the USA.

At 10:16 PM, Blogger Hilltothevalley said...

bet its not just in the butt that Jordan would like to kick murray now!!

At 4:30 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It seems clear from the interesting legal opinion that the key element is "Proof". T'would seem a bridge too far for the Plaintiff in this matter!
Jordan is an obnoxious jackass and my only concern is that his ridiculous posturing does not interfere with our Club's preparations for next season.


Post a Comment

<< Home