Midfielder Jimmy Bullard’s Hull City exit appears to have been as a result of an incident involving Tigers’ goalkeeper-coach Joe Corrigan, who left the club at the weekend. Bullard, who was suspended by the East Yorkshire side in July for a disciplinary matter during a pre-season trip to Slovenia which eventually led to his contract being terminated, joined the Blues on a two-year deal last Thursday.

Speaking after Hull’s 1-0 victory over Reading at the weekend, manager Nigel Pearson said: "Joe Corrigan is leaving us so we'll be looking for another goalkeeping coach.

"I'd like to thank him for his efforts. He leaves as a direct consequence of our incidents in pre-season surrounding a player that has left the club.

“You can read into that how you want. It's a shame for football that a man of Joe's calibre and a coach of his calibre feels he can no longer work here."

The Hull Daily Mail says 62-year-old former England and Manchester City keeper Corrigan’s resignation is related to what they call “a serious altercation with Jimmy Bullard” during the trip to Slovenia.

Bullard has until Wednesday to launch an appeal against the termination of his contract with the 32-year-old saying the issue was “in my lawyers’ hands” after rejoining the Blues last week.

Photo: Action Images

jert16 added 18:09 - Aug 30 theres only one jimmy bullard... one jimmy bullard!!!!!
0

BYRNE_16 added 18:14 - Aug 30 amber and black.....you seemed to have lost your way to your own site!
0

John added 18:30 - Aug 30 brogansnose - it is and apparently he's 62
0

Garv added 18:47 - Aug 30 Hull dug themselves their own hole offering such a ridiculous contract!
0

Bergholtblue added 19:15 - Aug 30 I read this article with a so what? attitude, but as I read some of the comments which refer to removed posts, I am now intrigued. If this was an altercation between Joe Corrigan and Jimmy B, why would JC have to leave the club now that JB has left? Was JC the instigator? Is that why they used the excuse to terminate JB's contract? Is that why JB's lawyers may sue? I haven't heard any rumours as to what went on, can anyone tell me what rumours (true or false) are circulating?

0

alexsmith111 added 19:52 - Aug 30 Donr care even if he had headbutted jose mourinio if it got him down portman rd
0

naa added 20:46 - Aug 30 amberandblack: I fail to understand your bitterness towards Bullard. It's not his fault he was offered a wage your club couldn't afford to pay. It's not his fault he got injured for a large part of the first two years of his contract. It's also not his fault you wouldn't play him last year (was that to do with top ups due that you couldn't afford? I don't know so I'm not suggesting anything,just asking). Any way I look at this I can't see how Bullad has done anything to make you not like the guy. No idea what happened in the summer. To me it looks as though Hull were more than happy to jump at the chance to offload wages they didn't want to pay. Not saying nothing happened, just that I'm sure Hull are very happy with the outcome.

0

leroy2488 added 21:00 - Aug 30 I think it is fair to assume that Corrigan left for a reason? If he was not in some large way to blame, why would he leave? Maybe he felt some sort of guilt regarding the fact that something he may have been involved in cost someone he probably gets on with £4.5 million (on paper in the short term I suggest, until Hull receive JB's solicitors letters). I also think Mr. Pearson did say rather a lot more than he needed about something he did not ever need to mention. It is clear that due to Hull's transfer naivety they were so desperate to get rid of Jimmy that anything would do to get rid. Clearly many had daggers for Jimmy at Hull probably more due to jealousy than anything else, but then Hull offered him the stupid amount they offered, Jimmy accepted, what makes it even more amusing for me is Jimmy sorted the deal without an agents help, there are certainly no fly s on Mr. Bullard, even if he does come across as a bit light headed, lol. Maybe I'm wrong about all I say, but I'm sure it is most people in footballs view too..... Unless your a Hull fan.

0

DalianAtkinson added 21:06 - Aug 30 AmberandBlack - i've just been reading through some of your posts....you're deluded pal, you seem to hang off every word that comes out of your owner and manager's mouth and then come on here like you know everything. Bullard is an Ipswich player so get back to your chips and gravy and leave our fans site alone. People I speak to you (ipswich fans or not) feel this was an oportunity too good to miss to get him off the wage bill and that's all. We'll all be watching the verdict with interest. Dennis Wise broke a team mates jaw at Leicester and still successfully claimed unfair dismissal.

0

flashblue added 21:25 - Aug 30 What goes on tour stays on tour. That's the code. Except if your trying to offload a 45k midfielder. I expect Corrigan was under pressure to break the code. He was having none of it.
0

Blue041273 added 22:25 - Aug 30 We will probably never know the real story. What is absolutely clear is that Hull overstretched themselves with the JB contract. Unfortunately 'good faith' is not an element in football contracts. Hull never wanted JB after their relegation. The pronouncement that his wages accounted for 21% of their wage bill cast JB in a bad light amongst the Hull fans even if it was not his fault. We accommodated a deal for Hull last season which given their situation must have been a 'win win' situation. Why they could not see their way to repeat the arrangement God only knows. Hull have chosen a path which is hugely risky. JB now has a contract with us; his short term future is assured. Yet Hull may yet be required to pay off his previous contract giving JB a double whammy. At worst Hull will be required to fulfil their contractual obligations to JB; at best they may get some respite at JBs expense (will really depend on the terms of the contract). But if I was a Hull fan I would really be asking questions as to why confrontation was used when whichever which way a compromise loan arrangement would have cost them much less.

0

Jesney_Havoc added 22:54 - Aug 30 Black & Amber - not bitter or what ! ? Sounds to me like you your little club just bit off a bit mote than it could chew, and then decided to construct some nonsense to save money. As you say, the lawyers will sort it all out, so you'll be paying the legal fees as well ! Black & Amber (?) ; sounds like two shades of sh1te to me
0

BrettenhamBlue added 06:46 - Aug 31 Can't see that Hull have a leg to stand on from a contractual view. They will be forced to pay up for his remaining wages as per the contract they gave him, UNLESS he has somehow made the contract void (which doesn't seem to be the case). Will be VERY costly for Hull. Would have been a much better idea to send him out on-loan to us for the year and pay 25K a week of his wages. Now they'll end up paying out 45k a week to a player who doesn't even play for them anymore!

0

bobble added 08:37 - Aug 31 it was over a pair of gloves; an xmas present from pele and a zuchinni
0

brian_a_mul added 11:18 - Aug 31 There is two sides to every argument. It could be that the other Hull players supported Jimmy following his sacking making it difficult for JC to do his job. It sounds like it could be an unfair dismissal to save on wages. Was Jimmy goaded into an argument to lay the ground work for his dismissal?? This could drag on for months if lawyers and courts are involved, its bound to effect Jimmys performances. I just hope he can settle in again quickly and get back to playing.

0

paulnstar added 17:12 - Aug 31 jewell out
0

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls