M
M
mat
Guest
They don’t under Mourinho.I guess they play football?
They don’t under Mourinho.I guess they play football?
Right, so they didn’t sack anybody. They made people redundant.The discussion was about clubs looking after staff. Or not. What Arsenal have done is the latter. That is the point. I genuinely don’t know what point you are trying to make. I’d be grateful if you could clarify. In the meanwhile, this article explains Arsenal’s reasoning. And it seems that cost saving was at the core of the decision.
Arsenal's head of recruitment to leave amid 55 planned redundancies
Arsenal have announced they are to make 55 redundancies due to the effects of the coronavirus pandemic on the club’s financeswww.theguardian.com
Right, so they didn’t sack anybody. They made people redundant.
So your tactic to defend Tottenham is to lie about Arsenal? Ok.
No, the discussion is about the All or Nothing series, which is about Tottenham. Arsenal haven’t allowed Amazon in as far as I know.Ah.......I see what you’re getting at now. It’s a matter of semantics.
Point still remains that making 55 people redundant in order to save costs is not looking after staff. That’s what the discussion was about.
No, the discussion is about the All or Nothing series, which is about Tottenham. Arsenal haven’t allowed Amazon in as far as I know.
Semantics doesn’t come into the difference between redundancy or sacking. I’ve been at the same place for 20 years and 4 weeks. Would it be semantics to say I’d rather be made redundant next week rather than get the sack?
Harry Kane's captains speeches are embarrassingly woeful, intact for E3 I fast forwarded through them as they're that toe curlingly bad.
Part of me can’t help but like Mourinho.
I actually like Mourinho too.