All Barton Chat.

[jintybear 8,536]

5 hours ago, gkb10127 said:

This is ridiculous. Got to blame the manager on this one though. If he cant handle barton's behavior he shouldn't have signed him because everyone knows what he is like. All this over a wee argument? Back in the day he would have gotten a right bollocking and then a line would have been drawn under it and everyone would have moved on. Our manager is a sensitive soul it seems

IMHO there's much more to this than meets the eye. 

[BridgeIsBlue 66,595]

How has this thread not been locked yet?

The guy is finished with us,let it go already ffs.

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

Fuckin joey ! Who calls their wean efter a fuckin budgie ! 

[Bad Robot 21,138]

7 minutes ago, BridgeIsBlue said:

How has this thread not been locked yet?

The guy is finished with us,let it go already ffs.

I'm not too sure but it's looking that way and the thread should really remain open until it's confirmed by the club or the lawyers.

[Bears r us 30,770]

2 minutes ago, BLUEDIGNITY said:

Fuckin joey ! Who calls their wean efter a fuckin budgie ! 

Maybe this guy. 

[A.T.G 10,773]

What have I missed? Is he defo not playing for us again? Has this been confirmed?

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

 

 

29 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

Maybe this guy. 

Yup tanner ba' players a dime a dozen ! Whose a cheeky boy then !

[Bears r us 30,770]

21 minutes ago, BLUEDIGNITY said:

 

 

Yup tanner ba' players a dime a dozen ! Whose a cheeky boy then !

 

[Bears r us 30,770]

48 minutes ago, A.T.G said:

What have I missed? Is he defo not playing for us again? Has this been confirmed?

I have not heard that, but it surely looks like he will be away, or should I say he will not play for us again.

The compensation if required will be a huge problem I would think. Hope I am wrong.

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

4 minutes ago, Bears r us said:

 

Tanner ba' players in ma time wid beat the tarriers on Sunday nae sweat !

[Bears r us 30,770]

1 minute ago, BLUEDIGNITY said:

Tanner ba' players in ma time wid beat the tarriers on Sunday nae sweat !

We could do with a few on Sunday for sure. Mind you the way our squad are dropping at the moment M W might be looking for some.  

[BLUEDIGNITY 33,638]

Just now, Bears r us said:

We could do with a few on Sunday for sure. Mind you the way our squad are dropping at the moment M W might be looking for some.  

If the tanner ba' players step up to the plate on Sunday they'll give the tarriers something to think about, cause they don't amount tae much more, Who Dares Wins ! 

[Reformation Bear 6,453]

I've missed the last few weeks of Barton stuff.....or more accurately the continued suspension without explanation or comment by either Rangers or Barton. 

By the line the Club is taking of saying nothing about the 'issue' it invited speculation from those on the outside looking in.  I thought it was a suspension issued as a punishment and not as a precaution.  But (still speculating) that can't be the case as the suspension was extended so it must be as a precaution pending further enquiries by the Club before reaching a decision on what action to take to bring the matter to a conclusion.  Suspension extended due to the betting charge?  Can't readily see this unless the contract Barton signed made it clear that betting (or material breach of SFA and Club rules) was a serious disciplinary offence and this entitled the Club to safely extend the suspension now on a precautionary basis pending the outcome of the SFA betting hearing.   

Clearly the first offence which resulted in suspension was not materially serious enough to justify an immediate sacking.    Whether a betting offence added to it would be enough - who knows?   Feels to me like the Club is skating on thin ice with hot blades in dealing with Barton in this way.   Perhaps the hope is that they can reach some sort of deal to release him with a commitment that both parties keep quiet about the terms and to keep the details of the 'issue' confidential.    Trouble is there are always ways round a confidentiality agreement and Barton is not exactly the type to want to keep quiet about it once a deal is done.    

There could be prolonged bad press on this for a while to come and perhaps much of it might find Warburton in the line of fire.  As Warburton himself said to the press this week "It was a vert heated discussion when we went over the game as a squad because the local boys know what it takes.   They understood it and it was important to relay that message to the new boys. You lose an Old Firm game 5-1, you'd better recognise what we have to do now because you don't want to feel that way again. .......".   Now that is further confirmation that a very heated exchange of views took place.   No bad thing I hear you say.  And I'd agree - with a proviso.  

The proviso being that that no matter how heated and no matter who is contributing views it needs to be in an environment which has some sort of effective chairman to ensure that order is maintained.  If - as it seems to me - it ran out of control and Warburton could not control events then maybe little wonder that too much may have been said in firing from the hip with full transmission of feeling.    That tells me......still speculating of course......that Warburton lost control of the heated discussion which went too far with maybe some direct blame also fired Warburton's way for his choice of tactics and his choice of players and his choice of subs.    Result?  (still speculating) Warburton refuses to work with Barton and no option but to find a reason to suspend him then toss the matter into Rangers HR to find a way to ease him out of the Club.  

Reading too much - and imperfectly - between the lines?   Probably.   But for sure Barton himself is bound to be taking expert advice on how to play this.  

This whole saga with Barton has not gone well, is not going well and may not end well (financially) for the Club.    I still think part of the 'issue' is Warburton's own approach to how he sought to manage the player and his approach to managing a heated discussion which he permitted (maybe even encouraged) but may have lost control of (hence Barton being suspended).   A lot of the focus is on Barton, but maybe more should be on Warburton.   The Club of course has no option but to back the manager but it sure would be interesting if fuller and more complete explanations of why suspension was deemed to be the only suitable action to take and only the Club can answer that.   Trouble is, no one seems to be asking them that question. 

[Bears r us 30,770]

50 minutes ago, BLUEDIGNITY said:

If the tanner ba' players step up to the plate on Sunday they'll give the tarriers something to think about, cause they don't amount tae much more, Who Dares Wins ! 

Hoping for a good result, that last game at the piggery was hellish. 

Let's hope no more players get injured. 

 

[Grundy 731]

This whole saga with Barton has not gone well, is not going well and may not end well (financially) for the Club.    I still think part of the 'issue' is Warburton's own approach to how he sought to manage the player and his approach to managing a heated discussion which he permitted (maybe even encouraged) but may have lost control of (hence Barton being suspended).   A lot of the focus is on Barton, but maybe more should be on Warburton.   The Club of course has no option but to back the manager but it sure would be interesting if fuller and more complete explanations of why suspension was deemed to be the only suitable action to take and only the Club can answer that.   Trouble is, no one seems to be asking them that question.

Reformation Bear, I have been as guilty as most of speculation and I kinda agree with your post, but where we differ is I think Warburton is capable of dealing with and thinking through a situation like this. He comes across as an intelligent guy, the sort who would think before acting. My feeling is Barton has decided he knows better than  anyone else ( pretty sure he has a big ego ) and really ripped in to everyone. All speculation, again, but I think Barton has gone way beyond open and truthful debate.

 

[trueblueal 2,117]

53 minutes ago, Reformation Bear said:

I've missed the last few weeks of Barton stuff.....or more accurately the continued suspension without explanation or comment by either Rangers or Barton. 

By the line the Club is taking of saying nothing about the 'issue' it invited speculation from those on the outside looking in.  I thought it was a suspension issued as a punishment and not as a precaution.  But (still speculating) that can't be the case as the suspension was extended so it must be as a precaution pending further enquiries by the Club before reaching a decision on what action to take to bring the matter to a conclusion.  Suspension extended due to the betting charge?  Can't readily see this unless the contract Barton signed made it clear that betting (or material breach of SFA and Club rules) was a serious disciplinary offence and this entitled the Club to safely extend the suspension now on a precautionary basis pending the outcome of the SFA betting hearing.   

Clearly the first offence which resulted in suspension was not materially serious enough to justify an immediate sacking.    Whether a betting offence added to it would be enough - who knows?   Feels to me like the Club is skating on thin ice with hot blades in dealing with Barton in this way.   Perhaps the hope is that they can reach some sort of deal to release him with a commitment that both parties keep quiet about the terms and to keep the details of the 'issue' confidential.    Trouble is there are always ways round a confidentiality agreement and Barton is not exactly the type to want to keep quiet about it once a deal is done.    

There could be prolonged bad press on this for a while to come and perhaps much of it might find Warburton in the line of fire.  As Warburton himself said to the press this week "It was a vert heated discussion when we went over the game as a squad because the local boys know what it takes.   They understood it and it was important to relay that message to the new boys. You lose an Old Firm game 5-1, you'd better recognise what we have to do now because you don't want to feel that way again. .......".   Now that is further confirmation that a very heated exchange of views took place.   No bad thing I hear you say.  And I'd agree - with a proviso.  

The proviso being that that no matter how heated and no matter who is contributing views it needs to be in an environment which has some sort of effective chairman to ensure that order is maintained.  If - as it seems to me - it ran out of control and Warburton could not control events then maybe little wonder that too much may have been said in firing from the hip with full transmission of feeling.    That tells me......still speculating of course......that Warburton lost control of the heated discussion which went too far with maybe some direct blame also fired Warburton's way for his choice of tactics and his choice of players and his choice of subs.    Result?  (still speculating) Warburton refuses to work with Barton and no option but to find a reason to suspend him then toss the matter into Rangers HR to find a way to ease him out of the Club.  

Reading too much - and imperfectly - between the lines?   Probably.   But for sure Barton himself is bound to be taking expert advice on how to play this.  

This whole saga with Barton has not gone well, is not going well and may not end well (financially) for the Club.    I still think part of the 'issue' is Warburton's own approach to how he sought to manage the player and his approach to managing a heated discussion which he permitted (maybe even encouraged) but may have lost control of (hence Barton being suspended).   A lot of the focus is on Barton, but maybe more should be on Warburton.   The Club of course has no option but to back the manager but it sure would be interesting if fuller and more complete explanations of why suspension was deemed to be the only suitable action to take and only the Club can answer that.   Trouble is, no one seems to be asking them that question. 

I've set 3 hours aside tonight to either watch Shawshank Redemption or read this post. 

[bam74 966]

Can we just get him to fuck please and close this topic. Sick of it.....

 

 

 

Apologies but I've had a few tonight.

[Gaz52 11,837]

16 minutes ago, bam74 said:

Can we just get him to fuck please and close this topic. Sick of it.....

 

 

 

Apologies but I've had a few tonight.

Living up to your username expectations I see 

 

[Gaz52 11,837]

The only thing I can think of that he's done that's so bad is bet on the taigs to beat us 

[pcbear 10,913]

4 minutes ago, Gaz52 said:

The only thing I can think of that he's done is bet on the taigs to beat us 

I wish I had, I got tempted by the 4/1 and emptied my PP account on to us to win, 9/2 on Sunday I might have to replendish and lump on again.

[Thewhitesettler 2,711]

7 hours ago, pcbear said:

I wish I had, I got tempted by the 4/1 and emptied my PP account on to us to win, 9/2 on Sunday I might have to replendish and lump on again.

I never bet on us to win. The team have got a hard enough job as it is, without being weighed down with a few pounds from me.

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,510]

15 hours ago, Gaz52 said:

The only thing I can think of that he's done that's so bad is bet on the taigs to beat us 

Games he bet on never involved us.

[Bad Robot 21,138]

Footballing wise, I think he could still play a massive part in our season.  Whether he gets the opportunity only time will tell. I think we'll hear more one way or another after Sunday.

[.Williamson. 81,992]

Genuinely wouldn't be surprised if he ended up at the taigs at some stage 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

31 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

Footballing wise, I think he could still play a massive part in our season.  Whether he gets the opportunity only time will tell. I think we'll hear more one way or another after Sunday.

You could be right, but he would need to up his game. I was wanting to see the tough bastard in him. Digging, closing down, breaking forward. TBH I hate that holding role. Whether it's Barton or Halliday, it takes a special player in the Ray Wilkins mould to pull it off.