Reformation Bear

And for some as yet unkown reason the man who keeps getting the vital goals still does not have a contract extension. Good job he remains focussed on doing his job. More than I can say for some of the rest of them.

Wonder if this might happen.......we win today, McLeish makes the draw for the next round and its an OF game, Rangers then announce McLeish as the next manager. Media meltdown.

With McLeish conveniently being at Ibrox today for the SC draw perhaps he is to be the man appointed. But of course Rangers could not say so ahead of the game as McLeish is there on SFA business and no risk a perception of conflict of interest could be allowed ahead of the draw taking place, But after the draw......its a gilt-edged media opportunity to announce the replacement.

A convenient convergence of co-incidental opportunities perhaps......and maybe too convenient an opportunity for the Rangers' Board to ignore?

Wonder who at Rangers has been given the job of finding a new manager? Last time round I think it was Murray who led the selection process to recommend Warburton. I think that pre-dated Robertson's arrival as MD so maybe its Robertson's job as MD to recommend a new manager to the Board. Or maybe King, having gotten wind of the rumours of the gang of 3 looking to leave, has been putting in the calls himself and has someone already lined up with on the contract terms to finalise? I guess we'll hear this week who they want to appoint.

Murty has had little time to make any changes of any note. The squad is such, and the results this season so far are such that any pick of a starting 11 was likely to please some and displease others and many others being open-minded about the selection. To my mind its not really about what Murty has said and done in preparing the team for this game. Its about the players. They need to do get themselves into the mindset that this is Rangers, they have their jobs to do today and they go out and to them well. And be seen to have done so. We can take it from there after the result today - which I hope will be a good win for us.

Dodoo also missing from the bench. Nor Kiernan. King made the point about players acquired in Summer on high salaries but not getting game time. But then, Murty is caretaker for today and probably just playing safe as he sees it.

Thank you

This is where you'd like to think the captain steps up a gear or two ahead of the game and during the game to provide some inspiration and leadership. We'll see.

Maybe doing the team talk. Fire and brimstone message to warm them up a bit.

I certainly do recall it being said by him and reported about him that he didn't go to opposition grounds to watch them play. I'm only guessing here, and its not looking to justify his approach, but maybe he figured (or was told by DW) that there was no great benefit in going to look at the opposition as they'd change the way the play against Rangers anyway (everyone behind the ball) and regardless of whether it was home or away.

Yes.

He may yet need some good fortune for the game today. Looking at the training gallery from yesterday in the Rangers website the players looked a bit subdued, maybe even a bit shocked, even with Murty clearly adding his voice of encouragement and waving his arms about. I'd still expect a very positive response today from a squad of players who will presumably have enough about them to take personal and collective team responsibility and produce a winning performance.

I don't think he'd respond in public, at least initially, other than to put out a notice that the matter had been referred to his lawyers and to the League Management Association. And then probably silence from the Warburton camp and from Rangers while respective lawyers or representatives or both engage behind the scenes. Chances are from Rangers we'd get a Bartonesque type statement advising that no more information will be given on the matter. And then - when the dust is settled and a conclusion reached - a further joint statement confirming the matter is concluded and everyone has moved on. The reason I say this is it seems already clear that the gang of 3 do not believe they resigned and if that's the case I'd be very surprised if they just quietly accepted this. If they really believe that then what have they got to lose by lawyering up and referring the case to the LMA. They will presumably be looking to protect what's left of their reputation. We may not hear too much more about this in the short term. But I have a feeling that this may rumble on for a while to come and may yet.

Assuming we get a reasonably experienced interim manager, one who has something of the knack of consistently getting the winning best out of even average players then I'd fully expect to see a very positive reaction from the players. To a meaningful extent the players themselves bear responsibility for not achieving as many wins as we should have done this season. They have something to prove to themselves as individuals, to the team, to the Support, and to the new manager whoever that will be. The time is here for more personal responsibility to be taken by the players to deliver strong winning runs until the end of the season.

Its reported in the Sunday Telegraph

According to the Telegraph Warburton is adamant no agreement was reached between Rangers and his agent that the 3 would resign and the paper thinks the case has been referred to Warburton's lawyers and the League Managers Association. The paper reckons that overtures had been made to Notts Forest on behalf of the gang of 3 a few weeks ago and overtures also made to Aston Villa at one point in time. The Telegraph seems to think McLeish is favourite to be appointed interim manager.

Every football club is exposed to the risk of its manager and other top people in the management structure resigning at short notice, or being poached by another club at short notice, or of having to sack them at short notice. Happens all the time. Some departures are matter of fact - here today and gone tomorrow and the replacement arrives the day after. Some are more controversial perhaps because of the circumstances, or because of the size of the club, or both. It happens. In all cases though the next steps are vital. For instance who is appointed to replace the departing person(s); how quickly can they make an effective positive difference to the side; and over the rest of the season were they successful in delivering the results and performances that the Club was looking for. I imagine King and the Board will want to appoint an experienced interim management team. A team which understands in good detail Scottish football in the SPFL and which has a clear plan of how they can materially improve the results and performances of the current squad. And a management team that understands the importance of this to Rangers, understands what Rangers is about, and understands how to deal effectively with the players, the Board, the Support and the media. I'd like to think the Board would be able to make an interim appointment in the early part of next week and in good time before the next league game. So really at this time the main thing is to get that replacement management team appointed and take it from there. No matter what the circumstances were of the departures of Warburton, Weir and McParland a replacement management team would be needed. I suppose in theory they could have gone back in January if an English club had made an approach to sign them - there were plenty of managerial departures recently and at any one of them there was always a risk that a club with more money might have made an approach to Rangers. Or they may have been marked down for the sack in the near future because of a failure to be anywhere near a strong second in the league, and with recent results showing no indication that hauling back to become a strong second was on the cards. It's not a question of the Support becoming so scunnered that it chucks in the towel. We've had that sort of tripe when the threat was no football at Rangers and other clubs blindly assumed that our Support would go and watch their teams instead. Then the move to Div 3 and the response of massive home and away support at Ibrox. Wind-up talk on radio / TV panels and in newspapers is just that - an attempted wind up. Dismissed in a nanosecond. As Oleg says its about moving onwards. The first step is to win the cup game today. The next step after that is to see the appointment of an interim management team, hopefully early next week. Then to get the next league game won and take it from there for the rest of the season during which time a longer term management team needs to be appointed.

Ah yes, they may be well hidden though and hard to find. Just as the players found them hard to find.

I imagine the three of them, and their agent (if he's still their agent), are taking stock, consulting lawyers and working out how to respond. I guess that'll take them a day or two at least. In the meantime, wonder if they have been to the Rangers Training Centre to collect their coffee-makers, tea-makers, mathematical tables, random number generators, lists of scouting contacts and so on.

King states in his comment 3 that it is the duty of the Board to take steps to get things back on track having acknowledged it is clear the Club is behind on its target for next season. He also believes we can finish a strong second (comment 2). He also states - starkly - that we have not repeated the success of the signings from the previous season. Now factor into the above the need for an interim manager who will energise the team and make a quick and significant impact on the way the team plays to work our way back to attaining a 'strong second.' Factor in the inherent criticism of players signed who are not performing as expected. King's statement about this is bound to be read by the players. How they respond to it will be something to look out for. They are in the spotlight having been called out by King. They - and the rest of the squad - will need a manager of some stature and experience to haul the squad into the sort of team that demonstrates it can achieve that strong second. Quite a tall order for the interim manager. I suspect we're done for now with taking a punt on managers who are not sufficiently experienced. My guess is that whoever comes in will absolutely need to hit the management ground running, and be very effective very quickly in transforming the team into one which wins far more regularly than before, and which wins the big games home and away. A manager familiar with Scottish football and sufficiently tuned-in to what it takes to manage Rangers. No room for experiments here. A winner is needed. Someone who can grab the managerial reins and achieve the objective. I'm looking forward to seeing who will step up to the challenge of interim manager, and who will be selected for the longer-term solution.

Teflon. Maybe they chose to leap elsewhere - anywhere in fact - because of the Teflon effect. It's common enough these days. Maybe more so in public sector senior appointments, and any job which is high pressure, often in the public eye where job performance / targets are monitored and reported in the press (eg NHS or big private corporations). It's where a person brought in to do a big job with big responsibility and big public or shareholder exposure and for big rewards gets out before they are found out and pushed out so that they move to the next job with their CV relatively intact......usually having accomplished very little of lasting value but leaving legacy issues to be repaired. The art in applying the Teflon effect is in the timing.

No such luck.

As is often the case with King you get some information and also some unknown unknowns. For instance. The leak of Board meeting review of transfer window & performance. King advises the Board's questioning was leaked to the media and asserts the leak did not come from a Board member. That leaves 3 sources. Warburton himself. Or someone who attended the meeting but was not a Board member. Or someone who has access to Board Minutes and decided it would be jolly good fun to leak the details to journalists. No comment from King as to whether the leak was Warburton himself or from somewhere else inside the Club. If the latter then it needs to be rooted out and dealt with. If it was Warburton then the only reason I can think of for doing this is to help put a deflecting context around his reasons for leaving when the time came. Is he astute enough to plan a move like that in advance of jumping ship? I don't know. The manager did not respond well to the Board questioning, King bases his view on the subsequent media comments. It would take some research to dig out the comments Warburton made to the media to check if King's assertion is fair and accurate. But aside from that, and imo probably a lot more important than that, if King and the Board was aware from the media comments that Warburton was not responding well to the Board questioning why did King - or probably more likely the MD (Stewart) not intervene with Warburton to seek to put matters straight and to clarify any remaining concerns, or comments or questions Warburton may have had following the Board meeting. The impression I have from King's statement is that the Board knew Warburton was not responding well but did nothing positive to bring about a better reaction from Warburton. They seem to have knowingly left him to fester. If that is a reasonably correct interpretation the question would then be why do this. Unless of course it suited the Board to do so in the hope that Warburton would seek to leave. In fact, could it perhaps be interpreted as being a covert encouragement for him to leave. Experienced manager. King makes the point that Warburton's reaction was not one an experienced manager would adopt. So I guess King is acknowledging in a back-handed sort of way that the Board now recognise, if they did not recognise before, that they had recruited a manager with insufficient managerial experience. I guess King's comments will do Warburton no favours at all when he goes for another job. Of course, it could also generate a response from Warburton since King is arguably really saying Warburton had been found out as not having the calibre or experience needed apply the full range of managerial skills needed to manage a football club. Also, for King to state that no manager in the world can reasonably expect to be beyond scrutiny is pretty punchy stuff. The context in which he makes that statement infers that Warburton was considered to be so inexperienced in management that he did not fully appreciate that he would be under strong Board scrutiny of his performance........or perhaps so high handed that he thought he was above that level of scrutiny or that the scrutiny itself was inappropriate. In making that statement King sure is leaving himself, and the Club, open to a counter-comment from Warburton. I imagine he's read King's statement and may well be fuming. So much then for the oft stated good levels of communication that Warburton claimed existed between himself and Robertson and King. An illusion it seems. Rumours of negotiating with English clubs. King was aware of rumours that Warburton's agent was actually negotiating with English clubs. It implies that things had moved beyond exploratory 'what if' types of discussion, or discussions to check facts, check contract terms and so on. They had moved to actual negotiation. Which to my mind implies the agent had received instruction from the band of 3 to see if a firm offer was able to be tabled which they could then consider for acceptance. So I wonder why Robertson and King did not move bring the 3 in for discussion and put to them the rumours they'd heard. Seems from King's explanation that the Club elected to do nothing other than wait and see what happened. They had deduced from the rumours that Warburton was unhappy and this was acknowledged by King to be reinforced by Warburton's comments to the media. Again it seems the Board, and Robertson elected not to take any pro-active action to bring Warburton in for discussions to clarify the situation. They seem to have let the festering deepen. No surprise. King was not surprised when the agent approached Robertson for a meeting. Not surprised, but having done nothing pro-active to head an emerging problem off. The Board seems to have simply waited to see what the agent had to say and when the agent - presumably with the underlying authority from Warburton, Weir and McParland - offered that 3 would resign with immediate effect the Board accepted the resignations. To my mind its clear the Board had no desire to try to keep the 3 employees and made no effort to do so before the meeting when they could have reacted to the rumours and invited all 3 for talks to clarify. They were not surprised to be confronted with a discussion about resigning, got the resignation offer at the meeting and decided pretty quickly to accept it. Defer the resignation. It's interesting to note that the agent only sought to defer the resignations, not to revoke them. The clear inference is they 3 were looking to get out asap and it was only a matter of time. I guess the agent requesting a deferral must have been received with near incredulity by the Board. A revocation - we got it wrong, we apologise and we'd like to stay - is very different from a 'we want out and will get out but we're not quite ready to go yet'. There would never be any question of simply accepting a deferral. It would be ludicrous. Will be interested to see how the band of 3 respond to King's statement. Maybe they'll just accept that they are done at Rangers and quietly move on. I hope we don't end up with a Barton-like situation of dialogue about compensation and then making a payment to them. But in the statement by King there are a few things that are left to inference, and its a curious way to go about business......... That's not to say the outcome isn't correct. I never did believe that Warburton had the management and leadership skills or experience to manage a club of the stature of Rangers.

Yes, seemed that way to me too. But if he did know, or suspect as presumably he should have done if his agent was keeping him in the loop, then it pretty good acting, Will be interested to see what the Club has to say when it releases a further statement, and then what Warburton has to say in response.