View Full Version : GT wins $200k
sainter_girl
4 Jul 2008, 13:22
Sacked St Kilda AFL coach Grant Thomas has won a legal fight over nearly $200,000 in pay and entitlements he claimed the club owed him.
Thomas claimed a $100,000 hush payment promised following his sacking was never received.
He also claimed he was asked to sign away $90,000 in annual leave entitlements while in an important team meeting before the club's elimination final match against Melbourne in 2006.
Thomas was sacked just days after the Saints lost the final.
Victorian County Court Judge Katherine Bourke ruled Thomas was entitled to both the annual leave and the $100,000 severance payment.
Judge Bourke also ordered St Kilda Football Club pay Thomas more than $20,000 in legal costs.
Outside court, Thomas expressed relief the case was over.
"The judge has made a decision, we are happy with the decision and we are thrilled that the situation is finally closed," he told reporters.
Representatives of the St Kilda Football Club refused to talk to the media as they left court.
hmm, hope thats the last of it.
hopefully he'll just fade into the background now.
NeXus_Helen
4 Jul 2008, 14:05
Congratulations GT....hopefully this is the first step to you becoming our coach again. We need you back because while RL is coach St kilda will never play finals again.
Take note Rod BUTTHEAD, you destroyed my club when you sacked GT. The problem is that 90% of st kilda supporters did not realize it at the time. As time unfolds though, they will.
Att : Kildonan
One day you will apologise for deleting and locking all my threads regarding the great man.
Regards NeXus Helen.
Congratulations GT....hopefully this is the first step to you becoming our coach again. We need you back because while RL is coach St kilda will never play finals again.
Take note Rod BUTTHEAD, you destroyed my club when you sacked GT. The problem is that 90% of st kilda supporters did not realize it at the time. As time unfolds though, they will.
Att : Kildonan
One day you will apologise for deleting and locking all my threads regarding the great man.
Regards NeXus Helen.
Congratulations Nexus, when did GT propose?
Sacked St Kilda AFL coach Grant Thomas has won a legal fight over nearly $200,000 in pay and entitlements he claimed the club owed him.
Thomas claimed a $100,000 hush payment promised following his sacking was never received.
He also claimed he was asked to sign away $90,000 in annual leave entitlements while in an important team meeting before the club's elimination final match against Melbourne in 2006.
Thomas was sacked just days after the Saints lost the final.
Victorian County Court Judge Katherine Bourke ruled Thomas was entitled to both the annual leave and the $100,000 severance payment.
Judge Bourke also ordered St Kilda Football Club pay Thomas more than $20,000 in legal costs.
Outside court, Thomas expressed relief the case was over.
"The judge has made a decision, we are happy with the decision and we are thrilled that the situation is finally closed," he told reporters.
Representatives of the St Kilda Football Club refused to talk to the media as they left court.
hmm, hope thats the last of it.
hopefully he'll just fade into the background now.
The club was never going to win this, you can't sign away statutory rights nor did he break any severence deal
SaintsSeptember
4 Jul 2008, 14:40
The club was never going to win this, you can't sign away statutory rights nor did he break any severence deal
Should be sacked ...- those giving legal advice to the club.
They could have just paid up, and kept 20 big ones, plus what they paid their own lawyers.
bubblegoose
4 Jul 2008, 15:01
Should be sacked ...- those giving legal advice to the club. They could have just paid up, and kept 20 big ones, plus what they paid their own lawyers.
Yep looks like the prize money for playing well in the practice matches has really helped the club.
nexars, why would anyone be apologising to you? You continue celebrating any shit the Saints go through. Obviously you never loved the club, providing any of what you continue to rehash over & over on this board is true in the first place. GT is gone now, let him rest FFS.
SaintsSeptember
4 Jul 2008, 15:40
Yep looks like the prize money for playing well in the practice matches has really helped the club.
nexars, why would anyone be apologising to you? You continue celebrating any shit the Saints go through. Obviously you never loved the club, providing any of what you continue to rehash over & over on this board is true in the first place. GT is gone now, let him rest FFS.
Could it be that HN=GT???
Signs - Always sides with GT
- Many people think that both of them are D***heads.
Any others?
Sir Robert
4 Jul 2008, 15:51
Congratulations GT....hopefully this is the first step to you becoming our coach again.
Hahahahaha! Are you on smack?
Att : Kildonan
One day you will apologise for deleting and locking all my threads regarding the great man.
I hope Kildonan has more sense than to ever apologise to a tw@t like you!
Anyways congrats GT for getting your rightful money... Now bye bye now;)
Should be sacked ...- those giving legal advice to the club.
They could have just paid up, and kept 20 big ones, plus what they paid their own lawyers.
To be fair he was asking for close to 300K and they got him down to 180K (Plus costs:D) IIRC the new Westaway board tried to settle, maybe his legal team didn't budge on the high figure. But given the extra costs to take it to court probably cost 50K the club hardly won
Congratulations GT....hopefully this is the first step to you becoming our coach again. We need you back because while RL is coach St kilda will never play finals again.
Take note Rod BUTTHEAD, you destroyed my club when you sacked GT. The problem is that 90% of st kilda supporters did not realize it at the time. As time unfolds though, they will.
Att : Kildonan
One day you will apologise for deleting and locking all my threads regarding the great man.
Regards NeXus Helen.
YOU TOOL
you have no loyalty to this club at all looking at all the threads u post and the replys u send.
i bet you wont us to lose all of our games this year just to say oh bloody ross lyon hes a crap coach sack him get GT back
please stop posting crap and have a hard look at yourself in the nearest mirror ( a very large mirror will be needed)
Thank god this is behind us and everyone can move on. I'm only new to this forum but I'm quite amused by this nexus helen character. What sane person could possibly think:
1. GT would ever coach St Kilda again.
2. He had the strategic coaching skills required to win us a flag. He couldn't do it when we were in our finest form so how on earth could he have done it now! :confused:
About time this is cleared up. The stink lines left by GT and Butterssss can finally blow away. Time the club, players and supporters move on once and for all. The new era at the club has restarted as of tonight. :thumbsu:
Kildonan
4 Jul 2008, 18:22
I am glad that this episode in our club's history is over.
Grant Thomas was a good coach for St Kilda FC and he remains possibly the second most successful (albeit he was the second-longest serving) coach.
He has eaned respect for his loyal service to the club, then he was unceremoniously sacked - promised hush money to keep a low profile - then not paid this - or what he was owed (it would seem - otherwise our legal system needs an overhaul). This is an unfortunate way for any person in an esteemed position such as senior coach of an AFL club to be treated.
He has not ever been popular with the fans of other clubs, but he had won the hearts of a number of St Kilda supporters.
The drawn out proceedings that eventuated in GT gaining the monies that he was owed was an unnecessary tarnishment on the St Kilda Football Club.
That GT dared to not succumb to the pressure of the club and persist in legal procedings in order to recoup the monies owed to him meant that he lost a lot of fans - most of whom could not believe that the club would want to cheat someone of their owed payments.
I would hope that the club is more "up front" in the future and honours its dealings with respect and timeliness more akin to the professional body it is.
Kildonan
5 Jul 2008, 00:17
Post deleted above
What one can get legally....and what one should get morally are often two different things.
Morally GT should have paid back Butters the $1 million loan long ago. Legally he "stalled" the process as long as he could.
Legally RB as President could arrange that GT get paid half a million dollars per year as a rookie coach (well above the odds for someone of his then experience) who had never even been an AFL assistant. Morally that the two then "mates" did this, and furthermore that both admitted that the process used to hire him was a sham, was a moral outrage.
Pratt is reviled for his backroom deals and price rigging. GT's hiring was a shady back room deal which BOTH GT and RB lied about.
If he had been paid a "market rate" salary that someone of his background actually warranted we would have had more $$$ for extra conditioning and recruiting staff.
GT has now admitted the $100,000 was shut up money. Why was "shut up" money even required...and what of the ethics of the person seeking it??? I have no problem soeone getting severance pay....but "shut up" money????
Just more evidence of shadey money for a shadey character.
Have no doubt, GT is money oriented first, second and third!!!!!
Kildonan
5 Jul 2008, 20:19
...Morally GT should have paid back Butters the $1 million loan long ago. Legally he "stalled" the process as long as he could.
This is an issue between two private individuals. This has nothing to do with anyone else either at the club or anyone associated with the club.
...Legally RB as President could arrange that GT get paid half a million dollars per year as a rookie coach (well above the odds for someone of his then experience) who had never even been an AFL assistant. Morally that the two then "mates" did this, and furthermore that both admitted that the process used to hire him was a sham, was a moral outrage.
GT certainly did not start out coaching on $500,000 per year :)
Please tell me exactly what the other coaches are paid.
Both did not admit that the process used to hire GT was a sham.
Where are you getting this from? :confused:
...GT's hiring was a shady back room deal which BOTH GT and RB lied about.
Again - where are you getting this from? :confused:
...GT has now admitted the $100,000 was shut up money. Why was "shut up" money even required...and what of the ethics of the person seeking it??? I have no problem soeone getting severance pay....but "shut up" money????
Does it not concern you more that it was our club that was offering the "hush money" to GT? Are you suggesting that GT is shady for being offered hush money and the club is squeaky clean for offering it then reneging on the deal?
...Just more evidence of shadey money for a shadey character.
Have no doubt, GT is money oriented first, second and third!!!!!
This is what I was afraid of. Here is a noble past office holder of our great club being publicly humiliated and lambasted by people who do not know the whole truth. Talk about burning bridges.
We need to hold the club to a higher standard than what they are serving up here.
We want better transparency and a greater adherence to professional standards
This is what I was afraid of. Here is a noble past office holder of our great club being publicly humiliated and lambasted by people who do not know the whole truth. Talk about burning bridges.
Sorry I thought we were talking about Grant Thomas here.
I know people that have worked with him and at the club. None of them describe him as noble. Indeed they are all at the polar opposite.
GT certainly did not start out coaching on $500,000 per year :)
Where are you getting this from? :confused:
Why certainly?
I rounded off things off to half a million.
But according the recent court case:
1st year $325 k (as caretaker) .....7 games . Pro rata-ed up this is at the rate of $1,000,000 per season!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not bad as had never been an assistant coach. I guess he just took over from Blight's rate (mind you Blight had 2 Premierships and GF coaching appearances at Geelong)
then $420k for his first full season.
then $465k
then $508k
then $525k
So where are you getting your figures from since you don't like the half million tag?
What figure do you believe he was on?
Kildonan
6 Jul 2008, 00:32
...Legally RB as President could arrange that GT get paid half a million dollars per year as a rookie coach (well above the odds for someone of his then experience) who had never even been an AFL assistant.
GT certainly did not start out coaching on $500,000 per year
Why certainly?
I rounded off things off to half a million.
But according the recent court case:
then $420k for his first full season.
That's not half a million though, is it?
1st year $325 k (as caretaker) .....7 games . Pro rata-ed up this is at the rate of $1,000,000 per season!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not bad as had never been an assistant coach. I guess he just took over from Blight's rate (mind you Blight had 2 Premierships and GF coaching appearances at Geelong)
...and Blight was in Queensland while the team was in Victoria !!!
Firstly - you may have forgotten to take into account that Grant Thomas was an employee of the club before he became caretaker coach - a board member. I'm not sure when the financial year starts and ends for footballers as it is seasonal employment, but you are quoting seasonal totals suggesting that they are totals for years rather than financial years.
Secondly - you also neglected to mention that with Blight - we got a coach for a million dollars a year - nothing else - and he only turned up when he felt like it.
With Grant Thomas, part of the reason cited for his dismissal was that he was entrenched too deeply in the club - doing too many jobs. He negotiated the player payments, he was head of the football department; I can't remember all of the titles, but I do remember the restructure of the club with whole new departments created, several new staff - all to replace one man.
Please understand that I am not trying to pump GT's tyres. Nexus can do that (and probably will).
I want to highlight that the senior coach of the St Kilda football club is not being treated with the respect due to the position.
Here is a noble past office holder of our great club being publicly humiliated and lambasted by people who do not know the whole truth.
Sorry I thought we were talking about Grant Thomas here.
I know people that have worked with him and at the club. None of them describe him as noble. Indeed they are all at the polar opposite.
I assure you the position of senior coach of any AFL club is a "noble office".
This is not the first time the St Kilda football club has been entrenched in contraversy over unwillingness to provide payments due to past employees.
Are our players going to be paid what they are owed - when their time comes to leave the club - for whatever reason? Surely there must be a professional standard to live up to.
I am embarassed that this became so public.
I am annoyed that the highly respected senior officials of our club can be turned upon so totally when they are no longer needed - and treated with such disrespect. It doesn't matter who they are. We need to be more transparent with our dealings. We need to stop burning our bridges. We need to be seen to be the professional organisation that we strive to become.
I assure you the position of senior coach of any AFL club is a "noble office".
.
Well that may be your view. But not mine. We obviously have vast differences as to what "noble" means.
The senior coach at an AFL club today is a paid professional position that many aspire too....and is not more "noble" that what many people do to earn a crust.
You want "noble"....then give me the unpaid worker at a soup kitchen etc...someone that is selfless and not ego driven.
. He negotiated the player payments, he was head of the football
Yes hewas arragont enough to do jobs that distracted him from what he should have been doing to do do others badly..but which he was "comforatbale" in doing.
Too little time to develop rookies and younger players.
But time to do contracts and player payments badly;
We played just short of the salary cap and had to play short of players. all this ata time when poor onditioning management of players saw us short (lauded by GT spinners as beinga good think which kept our list together , whereas the reality was that other clubs had no problems in keeping list together with 1/ a FULL complement of senior players and 2/ MORE rookies than the Saints used). The reality is that GT rolled over and handed out too much cash too easily because he was too close to the people he was doing the deal over.
Long term contracts to Penny and Hamill which cost us dearly.
Firstly - you may have forgotten to take into account that Grant Thomas was an employee of the club before he became caretaker coach - a board member. I'm not sure when the financial year starts and ends for footballers as it is seasonal employment, but you are quoting seasonal totals suggesting that they are totals for years rather than financial years.
.
????? What since when do Board members of AFL Clubs get paid apart from the CEO??? Was GT on some other rort that I have not heard of before?
And by the way the source of my figure had it as caretaker coach only.
Face it. GT was way overpaid for someone of his very limited experience.
That's not half a million though, is it?
.
Yes it is.
You perhaps are not familar with the principles of rounding??
Kildonan
6 Jul 2008, 20:59
Stop attacking GT with such singleminded hatred and try to see what my message is.
No matter who is our coach.
No matter who it is - in any other senior official position at our club - that person should be treated with respect by the club.
Respect in their dealings while employed by the club and
Respect in their dealings when that employment ends and
Respect in their dealings as a past employee / official of the club.
Putting your abject hatred aside for one minute - GT was a past player of the club who had gained experience elsewhere and returned. He was already independently wealthy. He assumed an office at the club and later when the Blight problem became manifest, the club decided that the 2001 season was irredeemable. They sacked the underperforming coach and put a caretaker coach in place. He treated the remaining seven games of the season as an opportunity for the players to exibit their desire to play for the club. They played with more heart and passion. He knew how to inspire the players. In the off season the club undertook a serious search for a replacement coach. For various reasons they decided that no-one available was superior to GT and he was appointed to the senior coaching position. The club then paid GT as befits a senior coach of an AFL club. That was 2002, same 2003, same 2004, same 2005, same 2006 - but at the end of 2006 they sacked him. They told him that they did not want any adverse publicity for the decision, so if he agreed to go away quietly and generally do what was in the best interests of the club, they would give him $100,000. He was gutted but he complied. They didn't paid him the $100K and they had tried to cheat him out of some other owed monies. That is the findings of the court.
Why did they offer him a dodgy $100K ? Was it because he wasn't given credible grounds for his sacking. Public explanations given by Butterss and others were obfuscations rather than explanations. There was a sense of "with the list available - he has underachieved". A season and a half later there is now an argument that GT ruined our list. No-one argued that at the time. Rather, they all talked about our list being first rate and that the main change needed was at the coaching level in order to take us that next step to win a premiership. The failure of instant or even delayed success with the new coach (who HAS earned his stripes through the assistant coach route - GT's most highlighted failing) has been attributed to inheriting a worse list than was first thought.
We have seen unsavoury dealings with another past employee of the club in Peter Everitt, who the club decided not to pay the $80K owed because of some bad blood.
Why ?
Why has our club tarnished it's good name.
They tarnish the name of every St Kilda supporter when they do so.
We are NOT Carlton.
We have a moral centre, we have a reputation for fairness and honesty and that is being eroded by the short-sightedness of a few persons who don't seem to follow standard business practices.
As I have said - what is to stop the players from wondering if they are going to be cheated when they finally leave the club?
HoldenMCaulfield
6 Jul 2008, 21:45
... they had tried to cheat him out of some other owed monies. That is the findings of the court. ...
Apologies, Kildonan, but isn't the use of the word "cheat" a bit disrespectful, too ?
The court found that St Kilda owed Grant Thomas certain monies and also ordered to pay interest and legal costs. But this was a civil case and not a prosecution involving issues like fraud, duress or - in non-legal terms - cheating.
St Kilda may have had suboptimal legal advice (not for the first time - the Baker / Farmer case immediately comes to mind), but I would not consider it appropriate to accuse both the Butterss and Westaway led boards and the St Kilda management around Archie Fraser to have "cheated" which by definition involves deliberate action with the aim to deceive.
(on the other hand, I am convinced that you did not intend do just that and that you have merely chosen an unfortunate word to make you point)
We have seen unsavoury dealings with another past employee of the club in Peter Everitt, who the club decided not to pay the $80K owed because of some bad blood.
Now that is an interesting matter to be mentioned in this context, isn't it ?
Who was the head coach in 2002 whose known unfruitful coaching relationship (bad blood) with Spida Everitt has at least contributed to the latter's move to Hawthorn and who was known within the club to negotiate and control player contracts ?
You guessed it - Grant Thomas !
(and I am not saying that this legitimates the non-payment of monies due to him in 2006)
ChrisFooty
6 Jul 2008, 22:35
I am just very happy this is all over. No more please.:)
Kildonan
6 Jul 2008, 23:41
Apologies, Kildonan, but isn't the use of the word "cheat" a bit disrespectful, too ?
The court found that St Kilda owed Grant Thomas certain monies and also ordered to pay interest and legal costs. But this was a civil case and not a prosecution involving issues like fraud, duress or - in non-legal terms - cheating.
St Kilda may have had suboptimal legal advice (not for the first time - the Baker / Farmer case immediately comes to mind), but I would not consider it appropriate to accuse both the Butterss and Westaway led boards and the St Kilda management around Archie Fraser to have "cheated" which by definition involves deliberate action with the aim to deceive.
(on the other hand, I am convinced that you did not intend do just that and that you have merely chosen an unfortunate word to make you point)
I used the word cheat because it has been asserted that GT was approached whilst busy in a team meeting before the 2006 Melbourne final match. He was handed a form to sign. This was later produced as evidence that he had signed away his leave entitlements. The court found that this was not admissable and found that he was entitled to the monies he had claimed.
It appears as if they did try to cheat him.
This is why I am so bloody concerned.
This is the club I love - that I have put so much time, money and emotion into - and they are serious disappointing me with this amateur hour stuff.
We need a more transparent club. Accountable for its interaction with every employee / official. Honourable with its dealings.
. He was already independently wealthy.
Was he?
How do you know this?
I know that RB was due the business he created and sold but I have never heard that GT was.
GT had his good points. But I cannot agree with sentiments painting him as noble or hard done by.
You accuse me of "hating" GT.
For mine I am justing telling it like it is.
By contrast your posts on him contain inaccuracies.
And the fact remains that he only got the coaching job in the first place by himself and RB acting inappropriately.
You can argue that he was a good coach if you wish, but to hold him up being "noble" is something that I will not agree with based upon what I know.
Anyway I will say no more as I have made my point.
Others wil hold their views as is their right.
ultimate hater
7 Jul 2008, 14:32
Jeeze, i'm a little suprised at the outcome, i though it was open/close, you dont get your cash GT, case....
$100,000 to shutup... but GT never shuts up and never will shutup..
didn't hold up his end of the "deal" so why should he have been paid the $100,000 if he claimed it was to "shut him up"... would have been better to say it was simply severance pay i would have thought.. seeing as all he did was hang sh1t on the club when he left..
oh well... hopefully he can disappear into oblivion now, never to be seen/heard from again..
Jeeze, i'm a little suprised at the outcome, i though it was open/close, you dont get your cash GT, case....
$100,000 to shutup... but GT never shuts up and never will shutup..
didn't hold up his end of the "deal" so why should he have been paid the $100,000 if he claimed it was to "shut him up"... would have been better to say it was simply severance pay i would have thought.. seeing as all he did was hang sh1t on the club when he left..
oh well... hopefully he can disappear into oblivion now, never to be seen/heard from again..
It wasn't a 'shutup' everything clause it was a payout promised with a condition for basically not slagging the club off. GT never did that so he was owed the money and thats what the court confirmed
Kildonan
19 Jul 2008, 17:10
From a July 18, 2008 St Kilda press release published in The Age:
St Kilda Football Club has today reached a mutually agreeable position with Grant Thomas and will now settle the case out of Court for an undisclosed sum.
Saints CEO, Archie Fraser said, “We respect that this has been a difficult time for Grant, and for the Club, and are glad that we have now reached a resolution.”
“Grant is, and always will be, an important part of the history of the St Kilda Football Club. Grant has played a significant role in shaping St Kilda into what it is today and it’s important for Grant and the Club that we can both now move on. We look forward to a time when Grant and his family are welcomed back to the St Kilda fold.”
In the interests of moving forward, both parties have agreed that this is the end of the matter and that nothing more will be said.
(St Kilda FC had until July 18 to file an appeal against the court ruling)