The ALM Évreux had accused him, in his letter of dismissal written on February 27, 2020, of ” serious communication problems” with his team, and for having plunged the latter into a ” catastrophic situation », two points from relegation (she had finally finished fifteenth of the season). After two and a half years on the Évreux bench, Fabrice Lefrançois, who has since rebounded at Cholet as assistant coach, was thus fired for serious misconduct.
“The game strategies you have put in place are not suitablemeans to him at the time, among other grievances, the direction of the club. Your management of the team and your communication with the players are deficient and have resulted in the current situation. Several players have also complained to the club’s management about your methods and particularly your lack of listening to them.. »
Lefrançois had received 25,000 euros in compensation at first instance
Furious with the conditions of his departure, Fabrice Lefrançois, who was also, before putting on the coach’s cap, an employee of the Évreux club since 2010 as technical coordinator of training, had then seized the Prud’hommes. In March 2021, a first judge had reclassified his dismissal as a dismissal without real and serious cause, granting him 25,000 euros in compensation. Justice considered that the grievances made to him were not sufficiently substantiated, and the certificates which pointed to his lack of communication were not precise enough.
Lefrançois had however decided to appeal and claimed 92,700 euros in damages, as well as 15,000 euros in image damage. In question: public remarks made in the local press by the president of Évreux, Patrick Roussel. If this one, a few weeks before the dismissal of his coach and after a series of bad results of the team, had pointed the finger at a ” care bear defense » In The Evreux Dispatchhe had especially had this sentence: “ Fabrice (Lefrançois) must do everything to motivate his team and stop crying over refereeing. »
500 euros for image damage
In court, the ex-trainer felt that his employer had constantly ” denigrate » and had given of him an unflattering image”. For the magistrates of the Rouen Court of Appeal, who spoke on March 16, the comments relating to the “Care Bear Defense” do not pose any difficulties, as long as they concern more the team and at the same time it is highlighted (in the interview with La Dépêche d’Évreux) his qualities with regard to the attack “.
” On the contrarycontinues the court, the statements tending to indicate that Fabrice Lefrançois would do better to ”motivate his team rather than cry over the refereeing” are excessive and unnecessarily denigrating in the way they are stated. »
Result: the Rouen Court of Appeal decided to add, to the amount received at first instance by Lefrançois, a symbolic 500 euros ” as damages for damage to his image.. What, perhaps, to set a precedent, in a sporting environment where relations are not always peaceful between a club president and his coach…