All Barton Chat.

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,586]

1 hour ago, cushynumber said:

 Everyone involved cannot be a complete imbecile.

have you seen our board

[Glasgowrangersafc 450]

See if not for the fact he hadnt kicked his own arse yet, i'd probably side with him. Whats he has said probably is nothing different from what we all think. We arent good enough, certain players get away with murder, manager is tactically naive and his stubborness to change a system that isn't working is frustrating and ridiculous? The way it has been handled is farcical and makes the club look shambalic and amateur  

[Inigo 33,324]

2 minutes ago, Smile said:

Could have been but i think we all know contract details have found a way into the public domain before.

What's the relevance though? To the current discussion, I mean.

 

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

@Smile & @Inigo giving us the tamest internet fight ever here...

[Spectre 1,663]

13 minutes ago, The Dude said:

You sure? I was under the impression fixed term had the same protections but with slightly different rules around eligibility for tribunal and early conciliation.

Fixed terms have the same eligibility timescale as any other employee, but as you said they can always raise an action for breach of contract and it's going to explore very similar ground

[The Dude 20,027]

Just now, jim white's a bear said:

Are you an expert on employee tribunals or even knowledgeable on any internal discussions of Rangers FC? The actual penalties for betting regulations in the SFA handbook aren't clear but what is clear is they "aren't allowed". You don't have any knowledge of what happened at the training ground either.

You don't know whether MW is in anyway responsible or Barton in that respect or even "the club", just the usual opinionated shite you see on here all the time. But you're sure the club are either just trying to fuck the fans over or are incompetent. Stick to your shitey blogs.

Not an expert but spent the last 12 months in a dispute with a FTSE100 company with revenue of 25 billion and over 100k employees and won after initially being suspended for a) leaving early (as agreed with my line manager) to go to a Rangers game and then b) allegedly using "offensive and aggressive" language towards said manager and then c) bringing the brand into disrepute by having a little coverage of what was going on in the national press before making a counter claim of bullying against them and winning. All with very little help from my union and until recently, when we started negotiating financial terms for me to leave the company, a lawyer.

I don't have any direct knowledge og what happened at the training ground but thanks to my "shitey blogs" I've been able to get to know and work with people employed, both now and in the past, by the club and even ghostwrote a full column for one on this very subject in the latest WATP magazine. I've also read the various reports across the media about what is alleged to have happened and almost all of them, despite the journalists all having various different sources, are reporting roughly the same thing. Heated argument with Halliday before criticising Warburton directly over his tactics in the OF game.

I've not said anything close to this being about the club fucking the fans over or being incompetent. They've not handled one issue well imo. Does it make them incompetent? No. Have they made a bollocks of this? Yes.  

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,586]

10 minutes ago, Smile said:

Could have been but i think we all know contract details have found a way into the public domain before. I think we know it something that has always happened even using useful journalists.

they only found a way out when we had a mole leaking to the outside, the mole doesnt work here anymore, its my opinion bnut make of that what you will

[Inigo 33,324]

Just now, TheLoudenTavernier said:

@Smile & @Inigo giving us the tamest internet fight ever here...

Here, if I was fighting you'd know all about it, cuntybaws.

[Smile 26,624]

Just now, Inigo said:

What's the relevance though? To the current discussion, I mean.

 

1

If the board wanted us to know what was going on they would release it through their usual sources they don't so we won't. Even Barton been unusually quiet for him it adds more fuel to the fire as this thread shows.

[JWAC 2,335]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Not an expert but spent the last 12 months in a dispute with a FTSE100 company with revenue of 25 billion and over 100k employees and won after initially being suspended for a) leaving early (as agreed with my line manager) to go to a Rangers game and then b) allegedly using "offensive and aggressive" language towards said manager and then c) bringing the brand into disrepute by having a little coverage of what was going on in the national press before making a counter claim of bullying against them and winning. All with very little help from my union and until recently, when we started negotiating financial terms for me to leave the company, a lawyer.

I don't have any direct knowledge og what happened at the training ground but thanks to my "shitey blogs" I've been able to get to know and work with people employed, both now and in the past, by the club and even ghostwrote a full column for one on this very subject in the latest WATP magazine. I've also read the various reports across the media about what is alleged to have happened and almost all of them, despite the journalists all having various different sources, are reporting roughly the same thing. Heated argument with Halliday before criticising Warburton directly over his tactics in the OF game.

I've not said anything close to this being about the club fucking the fans over or being incompetent. They've not handled one issue well imo. Does it make them incompetent? No. Have they made a bollocks of this? Yes.  

So basically no then. Just another internet loafer spouting shite.

[LaudrupsPatrickBoots 13,540]

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

Here, if I was fighting you'd know all about it, cuntybaws.

Well played  

[Misteral 2,948]

11 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The club really havent played this well at all they've let it drag on and on when it should have been dealt with sooner. If the club had grounds to sack him, he'd be gone. If the betting stuff had any part he wouldn't have been in for an hour today. That it became a disciplinary issue in the first place is beyond ridiculous and doesn't reflect well on MW imo. Barton's charge with the SFA is no bigger an issue the MWs for being aggressive to a referee. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that if a player approached MW in that way he'd be on a formal disciplinary too.

I'm sure the club don't think they have grounds to sack him ATM, or they would have already. That's why it has dragged on. The betting charges have hopefully given the club a way to get rid of him with the least financial costs. The original SFA hearing was set for today so it is a shame it was postponed. This thread would have taken a different turn had it not been. I doubt the betting stuff came up at all today during the 'reported 30 minute' meeting. I still think he'll be sacked for exactly that and that will be the end of the matter completely, in legal terms anyway. But that's just my opinion. 

[Smile 26,624]

Just now, Misteral said:

I'm sure the club don't think they have grounds to sack him ATM, or they would have already. That's why it has dragged on. The betting charges have hopefully given the club a way to get rid of him with the least financial costs. The original SFA hearing was set for today so it is a shame it was postponed. This thread would have taken a different turn had it not been. I doubt the betting stuff came up at all today during the 'reported 30 minute' meeting. I still think he'll be sacked for exactly that and that will be the end of the matter completely, in legal terms anyway. But that's just my opinion. 

 

Does no one know why it was postponed ?

[Inigo 33,324]

Just now, Smile said:

If the board wanted us to know what was going on they would release it through their usual sources they don't so we won't. Even Barton been unusually quiet for him it adds more fuel to the fire as this thread shows.

I meant in terms of the rights and wrongs of saying anything about or during contract disputes.

 

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,586]

whats the bet that the betting charge gets moved by the SFA, they will be hoping we sack Barton and they can offer up a pishy ban and if anyone complains they can say "whi gives a fuck he isnt here anymore"

[cushynumber 25,178]

11 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

have you seen our board

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt 

[Misteral 2,948]

3 minutes ago, Smile said:

Does no one know why it was postponed ?

Barton asked to be given more time to consider the charge and the SFA granted him it.  

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,586]

3 minutes ago, cushynumber said:

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt 

they'll struggle with that, mini struggles when someone calls his name, he needs to be kicked under the table by king for a response

[Jimfanciesthedude 25,586]

4 minutes ago, Misteral said:

Barton asked to be given more time to consider the charge and the SFA granted him it.  

aye he's trying to get odds on him getting an under 3.5 game ban

[The Dude 20,027]

4 minutes ago, Misteral said:

I'm sure the club don't think they have grounds to sack him ATM, or they would have already. That's why it has dragged on. The betting charges have hopefully given the club a way to get rid of him with the least financial costs. The original SFA hearing was set for today so it is a shame it was postponed. This thread would have taken a different turn had it not been. I doubt the betting stuff came up at all today during the 'reported 30 minute' meeting. I still think he'll be sacked for exactly that and that will be the end of the matter completely, in legal terms anyway. But that's just my opinion. 

In the spirit of it, fancy a wee flutter to Erskine? £10 it's not part of it (either going by any official reason given by the club/player or, failing that. what's reported by the at least 2 of 3 media outlets (say BBC, SKY and both MW & JB's pals at Talksport?)?

[The Dude 20,027]

7 minutes ago, Smile said:

Does no one know why it was postponed ?

Think his agent was unavailable.

EDIT: Thought you meant the meetibg the club pulled at Barton's request.

[siddiqi_drinker 14,635]

3 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

they'll struggle with that, mini struggles when someone calls his name, he needs to be kicked under the table by king for a response

I'd happily kick him in the nuts to see his response

[TMB 14,167]

Barton told the manager he could take Halliday.  Warburton thought he said 'holiday' and sent him home.

[Gascoigne8 3,471]

3 hours ago, CaptainDandy said:

2 hours ago, Rfc52 said:

It's funny as fuck in here.

Watched a boy use his union to rifle our company for 6 months before even his union said for him to be bumped.

He was asked to provide evidence of his claims and he delayed it and delayed it and got 6 months pay and probably another job before walking. That was countless meetings.

It's no just as easy as bumping someone and that's it done. Any employer will need to make sure they're not leaving themselves wide open. 

Should add his was as easy a gross misconduct case you'll ever find and he still took 6 months worth of pay. 

[The Dude 20,027]

10 minutes ago, jim white's a bear said:

So basically no then. Just another internet loafer spouting shite.

Literally the first 3 words said "not an expert". I must apologise for using my own experience of similar proceedings and the legislation surrounding that to offer an opinion. I'm sorry. I'll go back to my usual, glib cuntiness and shitey blogs you all know and love (remember to visit http://www.gotthebattlefeveron.com/ and make my bosses happy).

Thank you for making me see the light.