Not gonna lie, that title made me more than a little uncomfortable.
Not sure why he needs direct communication from the CEO or the owner to be told his services aren’t required.
Nowhere in the article was it suggested that he needed direct communication from the CEO or Boehly. They just included those two in the list of people he had not heard from, including any department heads.
He was basically given no communication at all until just before the season and even then it was sort of a gradual reduction of duties with no reason given.
It’s definitely a non-standard way of letting someone go.
Way too much information missing to care about this.
Was he always alerted before the year whether or not he’d be involved or was this season different?
Did he not receive any communication at all or just not from the owners or CEO? The article specifies that the publisher of the program told him - so it goes against the point that Law is trying to push here.
Have other media personalities been let go that got the message from ownership or the CEO? I don’t see why they would involve themselves in specific media talent decisions.
Way too much information missing to care about this.
Dropping a club legend from that role unexpectedly is something I would have thought warranted comment.
Have other media personalities been let go that got the message from ownership or the CEO? I don’t see why they would involve themselves in specific media talent decisions.
He’s not just a “media personality” though. Plus, if you have someone in a role long term, it’s common courtesy for someone at the place to inform him that it’s ending.
Amazing pundit.
Oh ooow
