Because Redfearn was sacked after it came to light that he knew of simon Lenighan's pending conviction before he offered him a contract and kept it from the board.
The board only found this out after the internal investigation and Lenighans contract termination last week,The contract had already been offered to Eaden before all this came to light.
Its not a Theory,Its the truth.
I can't say how i know due to the source of this will get sombody in a lot of trouble.
This only came to light after the cancellation of the players contract.
From what i was told yesterday the board called Redfearn into a meeting at short notice after the players agent recieved the findings of the clubs investigation on his player that stated the player had not been truthfull about his situation regarding the pending court case.
The agent then sent correspondance back to the club denying the matter in hand and stating the manager was fully aware of the players pending court case as the agent was present during the whole discussions between Redfern and his player.
All very plausible. The club try to get out of paying Lenighan what he is owed due to him withholding information. The agent proves no information was withheld.
Redfearn sacked because of this with much reduced payoff but club cites league position to save face for both parties.
Interesting one Slider. It sounds to me like the sort of thing you could overlook if the manager was doing well (Lenighan was an embarrassment but no real financial damage done - he won't have been on any significant money while he was with us) but equally the sort if thing that you could use as a pretext if you wanted him out anyway for other reasons, perhaps without having to pay him any compensation. But then it doesn't chime in with the club statement that it was with a heavy heart and purely results based. Not sure what to make of it, but it would at least explain the apparent sudden change of mind.
does indeed sound plausible. If it is true then Good riddance. Liars cannot be trusted and it puts more evidence in to the 'weak' box that Redfern has been accused of and does seem to exude.
of course, I must add we cant be sure but if it were then there cant be any moans from Redfern and its the kid and Tony stewart that must be deeply hurt.
it was just a theory based on the suddenness of the decision Len.
Its what I would do if the situation had arisen whereby awful results and no improvement came together with a strong candidate giving the nod that hed be interested. I was fantasising it could only be Warnock in such cir***stances due to him being at the game a couple of weeks ago and booked for a talk. All that cir***stantial evidence would give the chance for talks that could easily bend towards such a subject. I also wouldnt make such a drastic step unless there was a real calibre manager on board.
Anyway, in light of sliders post, I must say that his post seems very plausible to me.