Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
How much it would cost Tottenham to sack Thomas Frank moved sharply into focus on Saturday night after Spurs suffered a damaging 2–1 home defeat to West Ham, deepening a crisis shaped as much by employment law and finance as results on the pitch.
Tottenham Hotspur’s season hit a new low as they were beaten late by West Ham United, leaving Spurs 14th in the Premier League and prompting fresh chants of “you’re getting sacked in the morning” directed at head coach Thomas Frank.
The loss came just days after renewed scrutiny of the club’s finances following a £90 million loan agreement — a deal that complicates any decision to change manager midway through the season.
Tottenham started brightly but fell behind early before captain Cristian Romero headed Spurs level. Despite pushing for a winner in the second half, Spurs switched off late, conceding a last-minute goal to hand West Ham their first league win in 11 matches.
Boos rang out at full time inside the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium, with fan frustration now boiling over during a run that has seen Spurs exit both domestic cup competitions.
Speaking after the match, Frank acknowledged the familiar pattern of Spurs’ defeats this season.
On conceding late, he said Spurs were “on top of the game” but “switching off in the last moment,” adding that while his side created chances, they failed to finish the match out.
Frank said halftime tweaks helped Spurs control the second half, but admitted the team’s defending at set pieces against West Ham was “probably our worst game” in that area this season.
Asked directly about the chants calling for his dismissal, Frank said he understood the frustration but insisted he still feels “the absolute backing from everyone here at the club,” adding: “We just don’t get the results, which is super crucial and important, so we just keep going.”
Spurs captain Cristian Romero did not hide the scale of the problem after another home defeat.
“This moment is disastrous for us,” Romero said. “We need to stay together, silence in this moment, work harder and go again.”
Frank earns an estimated £8 million per year and has around two-and-a-half years left on his contract, putting its total remaining value close to £20 million.
However, under UK football employment contracts, clubs almost never pay the full remaining value of a manager’s deal.
Instead, contracts usually include liquidated damages clauses, which set a fixed compensation amount if the club terminates early without misconduct.
In practical terms:
Spurs would not owe Frank his full remaining salary
A pre-agreed termination fee would apply
That figure is commonly equivalent to six to twelve months’ pay
Based on Premier League norms, Tottenham’s likely exposure to sack Frank now is estimated at around £8 million, though the exact figure would remain confidential.
The legal calculation is sharpened by Tottenham’s recent £90 million loan from Macquarie Bank.
While the loan does not prevent Spurs from dismissing their manager, compensation payments are immediate cash liabilities. Spurs are already managing:
Significant transfer-related debt
Annual interest payments estimated at £20–30 million
High operating and wage costs
Adding a multi-million-pound termination payment so soon after securing external financing makes timing critical.
This is not a misconduct dismissal and would not automatically give rise to an employment tribunal claim. From a legal perspective, Tottenham’s decision would be treated as a contractual termination without cause, governed entirely by the terms written into Thomas Frank’s employment agreement.
If the club chooses to remove Frank, it would formally terminate his contract early and rely on the agreed termination provisions, most commonly a liquidated damages clause. That clause sets out a fixed compensation amount payable by the club in exchange for ending the contract before its natural expiry, avoiding any dispute over future salary, bonuses, or lost earnings.
In practice, this means Frank would receive a pre-agreed payment, typically made as a lump sum or in short instalments, rather than continuing to be paid for the remaining term of his deal. Because the compensation figure is contractually defined, there is usually no requirement for court or tribunal involvement.
The only circumstances in which legal proceedings would arise is if one party alleged that the termination provisions were not correctly followed or that the clause itself was breached. Otherwise, the legal test is narrow and procedural: whether Tottenham complied with the termination mechanism set out in the contract.
Each Premier League place is worth millions in prize money, and European qualification can quickly offset the cost of managerial compensation. But continued poor results risk a far greater financial hit than a single termination payment.
After another late collapse, mounting fan unrest, and growing financial scrutiny, Tottenham’s decision on Thomas Frank is no longer theoretical. It is a live employment-law and cash-flow question unfolding week by week — and results like this only accelerate the countdown.
👉👉 Related: What happens to Ruben Amorim now after Manchester United sacking?
