The trial of Paul Hart - Day Two - The case continues
16/12/03 | Exclusive to LTLF

The court has resumed for its second session. Paul Hart has been charged with failing as Nottingham Forest manager. Judge Robert Wollaton is hearing. Jeremy Radcliffe, counsel for the prosecution takes the floor...

Prosecution: I would like to draw the jury's attention to Exhibit C.

The usher hands copies of Exhibit C, a record of Paul Hart's transfer activities since becoming manager, to the jury.

As you can see, since becoming manager of Nottingham Forest in the summer of 2001, the defendant has made seven signings for the first team. These signings were, as you will see from the sheet in front of you:

Marcus Hall (from Coventry)
Eoin Jess (Bradford)
Davy Oyen (Anderlecht)
Brynjar Gunnarsson (Stoke)
Danny Sonner (Walsall)
Gareth Taylor (Burnley)
Marlon King (Gillingham)

I remember a day when Nottingham Forest would sign players from the great English teams like Manchester United, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur. Now they are resigned to picking up the leftovers from the likes of Stoke, Walsall, Burnley and Gillingham. Does the manager really think sending his scouts to these footballing backwaters is an effective way of strengthening his team?

William Snenton for the defense: Objection! In his time as manager, the defendant has also signed a number of loan players including Michael Stewart from Manchester United, Stephen McPhail from Leeds and Darren Huckerby from Man City. Does my learned friend think these are footballing backwaters?

Prosecution: Is that the same Michael Stewart whom the defendant is currently trying to send back to Manchester United after he has failed to make any impact, despite him still having five months to run on his loan contract? Hardly a good example to pick!

Judge: Order! Order! [To the defense] Objection over-ruled. The prosecution is entitled to make its case without interruption. You will get your chance afterwards.

Defense: Sorry, m'lud.

Prosecution: As I was saying, this list of signings is hardly impressive. Aside from the fact that they were all signed from clubs whose reputation might be considered lesser than that of the defendant's club, analysis of their respective performances since they were signed shows that the defendant is hardly astute on the transfer market.

Take Gareth Taylor for instance. Since joining Forest in September, he has scored two goals in 17 appearances. For a transfer fee of £500,000, that is hardly a good return for a striker. Or Davy Oyen, who made a handful of starts and was then dropped.

Any fan will tell you that Eion Jess has proved a waste of space in the first team, while Marcus Hall was so impressed by his new manager that he left the club after one game!

And as for star signing Marlon King - well, he has hardly set the world on fire!

Defense: Objection! Marlon King has yet to regain full fitness so one can hardly judge his performances thus far fairly.

Judge: [To prosecution] He has a good point. Perhaps it would be best if we did not consider the performances of an injured player when assessing the defendant's eye for talent.

Prosecution: Very well, m'lud, but one wonders why the defendant would insist on playing a player who he knows will not be able to play to his best due to injury.

Never-the-less, the jury will note that the records of Paul Hart's other signings have been very poor. But what is more pertinent to this case is when you contrast the players Paul Hart has brought to the club, with those he allowed to leave, as documented on page two of your handout.

We see the likes of Jermaine Jenas, David Prutton and Marlon Harewood - all young stars from the defendant's own youth academy - sold. Stern John, Alan Rogers, Riccy Scimeca, Jim Brennan, Chris Bart-Williams and many other players who had previously been considered key figures in the team, have also been sold, many of whom left for nominal fees.

So we see before us a manager whose recipe for success is to allow the best players to leave and replace them with the castoffs of nothing teams who have, to use a phrase commonly used in football grounds, "never won fuck all".

Judge: That's a double negative. It doesn't make any sense.

Defense: Nor does my learned friend's argument, m'lud. Exhibit D, Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, clearly shows that Nottingham Forest's financial situation is extremely grim. The club was, in 2002, reported to be over £20million in debt. In order to stay in business, Forest were forced to sell players or go into administration.

Given the choice, the defendant would have gladly kept all of the players my learned friend mentions, but circumstances beyond his control have forced him to sell for the survival of the club. Mr Hart is not a villain here. In fact, he should be praised for his willingness to accept the inevitable financial sacrifices he has to make in order to keep the club in business.

Prosecution: The club will not stay in business long if it is relegated to the Second Division, as is the likely outcome based on the performance of the players signed by the accused.

Defense: Ah yes, my learned friend's expert assessment of my client's signings. As I was trying to say earlier, when it has come to loan transfer, the defendant has proved that he does indeed have an eye for talent, signing Darren Huckerby to aid the team's play-off push last year.

However, due to the club's terrible financial status, he has been somewhat restricted in the players he has been able to sign. It would be unreasonable to expect the defendant to sign star players when his transfer budget is continually swallowed up by the club's debts.

Prosecution: Mr Hart has spent £1.5m on buying players this season, the aforementioned Gareth Taylor and Marlon King, not to mention signing-on fees for the various other players who have been signed.

Compared to the spending of other clubs this season, the defendant has actually had a relatively large amount of money to spend. For example, Norwich City, who are currently second in the league, have not spent any transfer money this season. Sheffield United have spent only £100,000, yet they are in third. Even Wigan Athletic, who were in the Second Division last year, have spent only £1m, yet they look set for a play-off place and a shot at the Premiership this year.

But in the same time that these teams have all been improving their squads on short budgets, Paul Hart's squad have slipped to 15th thanks to his poor spending.

Defense: With all due respect to my learned friend, none of the clubs he mentions have been forced to sell players on the scale that Forest have been in recent years.

Prosecution: This is just a pathetic excuse! In order to prove that the club's debts are not to blame for the club having to sell players as the defense claims, I would like to call my next witness.

The usher calls Jack Lester, who takes his place in the witness box.

Mr Lester, you played for Nottingham Forest between January 2000 and July 2003. Is this correct?

Lester: Yes it is.

Prosecution: And during this period, you scored 24 goals in 77 starts and 27 substitute appearances, did you not?

Lester: I did.

Prosecution: Would you say that, for a striker, such a record was good?

Lester: I was quite proud of myself, especially considering how many games I started on the bench.

Prosecution: Quite. Could you tell the court how many goals you have scored since joining Sheffield United?

Lester: Eight, in thirteen starts and five substitute appearances.

Prosecution: Another good scoring record.

Some members of the jury are seen nodding in agreement.

How much was your transfer fee to Sheffield United?

Lester: Nothing. My contract wasn't renewed by Forest.

Prosecution: Did you want it renewed?

Lester: Yes I did. I really enjoyed playing for the club.

Prosecution: Then why wasn't it renewed? Were your wage demands too high?

Lester: No, I was willing to stay on the same wages I was already on, but the manager told me I wasn't in his plans.

Prosecution: So are you telling the court that the defendant allowed you, a proven goal-scorer whose contract demands were well within the club's limits, to leave on a free transfer to join one of Forest's closest rivals?

Lester: Err, yeah, pretty much…

Prosecution: Thank you, Mr Lester.

Defense: Mr Lester, did Mr Hart give you any reasons for why you were no longer in his plans?

Lester: Err, well he did mention something about me getting booked and sent off too often…

Defense: Ah, then is it not reasonable to expect a manager whose team is made up of many impressionable young players to want to his senior players to set a good example? Your poor disciplinary record would hardly make you a good role-model for new players coming from the academy, would it?

Lester: No, but, well, some of those red cards weren't fair! One was by that twat Mark Cowburn!

Judge: Mr Lester, you please refrain from using such language in this court.

Defense: Mr Lester, could you please tell the court which team you supported as a boy?

Lester: Erm, yes… Sheffield United.

Defense: The club you currently play for, correct?

Lester: Yes.

Defense: But you say you wanted to stay with Forest. Surely with your boyhood team interested in signing you, you would have preferred to move there than to continue playing for Forest?

Prosecution: Objection!

Judge: Mr Snenton, the person on trial here is Mr Hart, not Mr Lester.

Defense: M'lud, I was merely trying to demonstrate that my client released Jack Lester on a free transfer, not because he was a poor judge of ability, but because Mr Lester had a poor disciplinary record and was possibly not entirely committed to the club.

Lester: But…

Defense: I have no more questions.

Judge: Very well then, we shall carry on tomorrow. I believe the prosecution has a star witness for us?

Prosecution: We do indeed, m'lud.

Judge: I shall look forward to it.