Or alternatively people may have simply been discussing options that the club may be considering. Bang out of order if you ask me, people chatting on a chat forum!!

No one is saying he could be dismissed in relation to the charge of the offence. The dismissal would be linked to damaging the brand by being charged, which ifyou look into it a company can actually choose to do should they want to, whether the charge leads to a conviction or not. Trust me.

Couldnt Gareth get you the right ink to print them properly?

I do take your point, but that wasn't my intention when using the phrase and neither am I one of those who is willing to overlook crimes committed by sportsmen just because they play for my team. I have in the past (and will in the future no doubt) called for the sacking of players who have been found guilty of serious crimes.

Bearing in mind this would be multiple crimes, he'd be down the road.

Anyway, if he is guilty and gets bird, then he'll be gone anyway.

Quite. Not to mention Hull's own internal investigation.Who knows what may come out of it?

think the point that some are missing on here is that im not saying i would dismiss him now. I defo would if he was found guilty. My point has been that we could still legally sack him if we wanted to. Fwiw i would speak to him and get his facts, find out what his plea will be and take legal advice on the likelihood of his guilt or not to make an immediate call

I too would dismiss him if he was found guilty (or pleaded guilty).

Where we disagree is whether the club can legally dismiss him now.

I doubt his solicitor would advise him to say much to the club while the prosecution is still ongoing.

As his employer he needs to when requested.

Quite. I wasn't suggesting that you were one of those people. I just liked the turn of phrase.

When is Raynor's contract up, as I certainly wouldn't renew after this episode, even if he's found not guilty. He should have been sacked after his first court case.