Jump to content

Confusion Over Management Team's Future


spanther22

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

Could it not be that Warburton's agent made an approach to the club saying NF were interested and he'd be prepared to forgo any compensation if they let him talk to NF, he then gets Warburton down to London, tells him the deal, either NF get cold feet or Warburton knocks it back.

There's also the possibility that warburton's agent successfully negotiated a release from the club but hadn't told warburton by the time the media got to him and the statement was released.

But, the hastily typed grammatically poor statement points towards something else going on - eg my other post about this.

Remember, folk were thinking the site had been hacked due to the poor quality of the statement. For me that speaks volumes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, WGOH said:

Right can someone tell me if Warburton is or is not the Rangers manager? 

No, because the club have allowed for ambiguity. A video statement and we'd all be able to sleep easy tonight. But that's too professional of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, murzo said:

Wealth off the radar, blah blah blah.

Jackson is an amateur  and has absolutely no credibility since his whyte statement,  should have hung up just crayons years ago.

He's a leech. Will be putting out quotes like that to get in Warburton and Weir's goodbooks in the hope of the exclusive. I remember when he was on the radio and couldn't believe a sports writer (couldn't use the word journalist) knew so little about the sport.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Jack The Flipper said:

No, because the club have allowed for ambiguity. A video statement and we'd all be able to sleep easy tonight. But that's too professional of course.

The club statement is quite categorical, Jack. As categorical as a video statement could be.

He isn't, as far as the club is concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jack The Flipper said:

No, because the club have allowed for ambiguity. A video statement and we'd all be able to sleep easy tonight. But that's too professional of course.

Had to Google the big word but aye wouldn't take much. Transparency out the window 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Inigo said:

The club statement is quite categorical, Jack. As categorical as a video statement could be.

He isn't, as far as the club is concerned.

This 47 page thread is proof that you're wrong, just accept it and move on.

I like traynor, I defended him while other ridiculed, however the way this has been handled is pathetic.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Jack The Flipper said:

This 47 page thread is proof that you're wrong, just accept it and move on.

I like traynor, I defended him while other ridiculed, however the way this has been handled is pathetic.

 

'At a meeting with the management team’s representative earlier this week the Club were advised that Mr Warburton, Mr Weir and Mr McParland wished to resign their positions and leave the Club on condition that Rangers agreed to waive its rights to substantial compensation. Rangers’ agreement to waive compensation would assist the management team to join another club. This compensation amount was agreed when Rangers significantly improved Mr Warburton and Mr Weir’s financial arrangements before the start of this season.

The Board urgently convened to consider the offer made on behalf of the management team and its ramifications and agreed to accept it and release the trio from the burden of compensation, despite the potential financial cost to the Club....

... it was decided not to agree to this additional request but to hold with the original agreement. Mr Warburton, Mr Weir, and Mr McParland have therefore been notified in writing that their notices of termination have been accepted.'

What's not categorical about that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, tannerall said:

So here comes the 6 million dollar question...........

Were Warburton, Weir and McParland stitched up or did they all make an incredibly bad business decision ?

If Warburton thought it was a good idea to take McParland to his new club with him then that certainly is one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, tannerall said:

So here comes the 6 million dollar question...........

Were Warburton, Weir and McParland stitched up or did they all make an incredibly bad business decision ?

 

No really knows mate, but for someone on warburton's behalf to negotiate a deal have it rejected, then offer a new deal but have the original deal accepted is illegal in my book. Once the second offer is made the original offer is gone.

So did that happen? Was it Warburton's agent that fucked things up? Did our board fuck this up and hastily create a statement to try and bolster their argument if this ever went to court?

It's a weird one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, tannerall said:

So here comes the 6 million dollar question...........

Were Warburton, Weir and McParland stitched up or did they all make an incredibly bad business decision ?

 

Couldn't give a fuck, they've thankfully picked their last team and hopefully their last pay check too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...