Quote Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds View Post
"The League Appeals Committee has heard and dismissed an appeal under the Regulations of the EFL by Derby County (“the Club”) against the decision of the Player Related Dispute Commission (“the PRDC”) in the case of Richard Keogh," said the EFL in a statement.

"The case arose out of events on 24 September 2019 in which Mr Keogh was seriously injured in a road traffic accident and his subsequent dismissal by the Club.

"The PRDC held that Mr Keogh had not committed gross misconduct, that he had not brought the Club into serious disrepute, and that he had been wrongfully dismissed by the Club."

Derby County declined to comment on the matter.


Sacked for gross misconduct, but the other two were not?
The other two were convicted in a court of law?
Keogh was not.

Yet only one was sacked for gross misconduct.

I fail to understand which piece of this confuses you RA?

Yes morally he should have been sacked. but so should the other two, based purely on offence seriousness.

The fact his injury turned out to not to be season ending, also calls Derbys eagerness to get rid into question.
None of it ‘confuses’ me Tricky...I just have a different take on the outcome and the morality involved. That’s my opinion, yours is different...we disagree but I can’t say it any other way.

To clarify...his ‘injuries’ were ‘season ending’...I don’t believe he made his debut for MK Dons until late September meaning that the injuries sustained in the drink driving incident effectively made him unavailable for selection for twelve months.