Warburton, Weir & McParland Statement

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT said:

Friendly or otherwise I'm sure no long after this broke Sky had spoke to him and he was quoted as saying he had not resigned and also knew nothing about it 

Aye that came via the BBC iirc. Even from there, what are the questions he's been looking to get answered. Surely if he never resigned we'd not be almost into Thursday now and he'd not have started action against the club.

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

Just now, The Dude said:

Aye that came via the BBC iirc. Even from there, what are the questions he's been looking to get answered. Surely if he never resigned we'd not be almost into Thursday now and he'd not have started action against the club.

Ye would hope not .it's all just too many ifs buts n maybes 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,742]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Aye that came via the BBC iirc. Even from there, what are the questions he's been looking to get answered. Surely if he never resigned we'd not be almost into Thursday now and he'd not have started action against the club.

maybe warburton wants it sorted amicably instead of impending court cases etc, as for what i think, i havent a fucking clue, only way i can even see it is

Warburton and co's agents seemingly offers their resignation on monday according to the board, who then convened a board meeting and accepted it (according to king), you say by tuesday morning latest

According to rangers, the trio's agent attempted to change the terms of their original meeting about said supposed resignation, board convened again and said no (according to the unbelievably shite worded statement issued on friday night) and then proceeded to remove them from their positions

Warburton says he never resigned, Dave King issues a statement (which tbh is a strange one given all the info he has is classed as second hand) full of nothing really, he is the one that now states that the board accepted said resignations early in the week (by tuesday is your guess, of the first board meeting)

Warburton still took training up to friday and the pre match press conferences, when according to dave king he had resigned and it had been accepted

Today Warburton still claims he never did chuck it, and now rangers arent answering any questions from either him or his LMA rep

all i can make out of that is that it is an almighty clusterfuck jumble of contradictions,

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

maybe warburton wants it sorted amicably instead of impending court cases etc, as for what i think, i havent a fucking clue, only way i can even see it is

Warburton and co's agents seemingly offers their resignation on monday according to the board, who then convened a board meeting and accepted it (according to king), you say by tuesday morning latest

According to rangers, the trio's agent attempted to change the terms of their original meeting about said supposed resignation, board convened again and said no (according to the unbelievably shite worded statement issued on friday night) and then proceeded to remove them from their positions

Warburton says he never resigned, Dave King issues a statement (which tbh is a strange one given all the info he has is classed as second hand) full of nothing really, he is the one that now states that the board accepted said resignations early in the week (by tuesday is your guess, of the first board meeting)

Warburton still took training up to friday and the pre match press conferences, when according to dave king he had resigned and it had been accepted

Today Warburton still claims he never did chuck it, and now rangers arent answering any questions from either him or his LMA rep

all i can make out of that is that it is an almighty clusterfuck jumble of contradictions,

So why has he involved the LMA? If he isn't interested in court cases he simply rides off into the sunset instead of releasing a statement like this morning.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,742]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

So why has he involved the LMA? If he isn't interested in court cases he simply rides off into the sunset instead of releasing a statement like this morning.

because maybe he wants answers and rangers wont give him them

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

because maybe he wants answers and rangers wont give him them

I think he's more interested in making sure he's free to join someone else.

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

14 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

maybe warburton wants it sorted amicably instead of impending court cases etc, as for what i think, i havent a fucking clue, only way i can even see it is

Warburton and co's agents seemingly offers their resignation on monday according to the board, who then convened a board meeting and accepted it (according to king), you say by tuesday morning latest

According to rangers, the trio's agent attempted to change the terms of their original meeting about said supposed resignation, board convened again and said no (according to the unbelievably shite worded statement issued on friday night) and then proceeded to remove them from their positions

Warburton says he never resigned, Dave King issues a statement (which tbh is a strange one given all the info he has is classed as second hand) full of nothing really, he is the one that now states that the board accepted said resignations early in the week (by tuesday is your guess, of the first board meeting)

Warburton still took training up to friday and the pre match press conferences, when according to dave king he had resigned and it had been accepted

Today Warburton still claims he never did chuck it, and now rangers arent answering any questions from either him or his LMA rep

all i can make out of that is that it is an almighty clusterfuck jumble of contradictions,

Aye an almighty clusterfuck jumble of contradictions that we're all gonna have to pay towards no doubt 

[Reformation Bear 6,453]

18 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Aye that came via the BBC iirc. Even from there, what are the questions he's been looking to get answered. Surely if he never resigned we'd not be almost into Thursday now and he'd not have started action against the club.

Just a thought.  Warburton (and the other 2) may have started action against the Club but have deliberately not made the details public.   They, and their legal team, may yet be looking to obtain a settlement without having to take recourse to more formal proceedings.   They will know that its far more efficient, far less contentious, and far quicker to meet and agree a compensation package than it is to set off down the tribunal / courts pathway so maybe they figure its worth trying to get the Rangers Board to come to its senses (I know, I know) and re-engage to try to conclude a settlement.  You'd keep that process quiet to reduce the risk of details escaping and risking inflaming things further.

But if attempts to persuade the Rangers Board to meet with the aim of obtaining a fair and reasonable settlement failed then I guess we'd hear pretty quickly from the Warburton camp of a referral via the appropriate legal channels. 

It's early days yet.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

2 hours ago, The Dude said:

I was supposed to be going up and spending a day at Auchenhowie with him doing an interview and then watching U20s training and then sitting down with some of the players. Hed been given the heads up that he'd be taking charge this week (unless an alternative short term replacement was found like McLeish). I don't think MW was oblivious. He referenced a story which hadnt been reported much by Friday morning (him going to Forest) during his presser. I think he's as sneaky as his dodgy wee pal Frank.

So does the timeline look something like this?

Monday offer was put to Rangers by the agent 

Tuesday meeting of the board and acceptance of resignation

Wednesday Could Murty have been in meetings with the board, hence why you couldn't interview him?

Thursday MW agent wants to retract on resignation,board refuse

Friday announcement made that MW and team have resigned

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,881]

17 minutes ago, Jimbeamjunior said:

because maybe he wants answers and rangers wont give him them

Naive

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

9 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

So does the timeline look something like this?

Monday offer was put to Rangers by the agent 

Tuesday meeting of the board and acceptance of resignation

Wednesday Could Murty have been in meetings with the board, hence why you couldn't interview him?

Thursday MW agent wants to retract on resignation,board refuse

Friday announcement made that MW and team have resigned

You could add that late on Friday ,Warburton denies he's resigned 

[Grundy 735]

Got a feeling that Sweetheart might not be far off the mark.  Whether the board have handled it right only time will tell but I'm sure the threesome thought they were getting the gig at Nottingham ( remember the stories about Warburton being in London or somewhere down south for talks with a potential signing ?) and when that went tits up it was too late as their agent had already started the exit negotiations which our board accepted.  There was no going back and I hope we don't have to pay the conniving bastards a single penny, especially disappointed with Davie Weir but Warburton has shown himself not to be the gentleman most of thought him to be.

[pcbear 10,924]

Your history guys, fuck off and have a mess up somewhere else.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

1 minute ago, Grundy said:

Got a feeling that Sweetheart might not be far off the mark.  Whether the board have handled it right only time will tell but I'm sure the threesome thought they were getting the gig at Nottingham ( remember the stories about Warburton being in London or somewhere down south for talks with a potential signing ?) and when that went tits up it was too late as their agent had already started the exit negotiations which our board accepted.  There was no going back and I hope we don't have to pay the conniving bastards a single penny, especially disappointed with Davie Weir but Warburton has shown himself not to be the gentleman most of thought him to be.

Dude did all the Sherlock Holmes work, I was asking for clarification.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 54,035]

So it sounds like we weren't outraged when they allegedly resigned. We weren't outraged when they appeared to be speaking to NF. It was amicable enough that we kept them doing their day jobs up til Friday and they were actually going to manage team on Saturday.

But their request to stay til the end of the season. That outraged us. That got us angry enough to cancel right there and then the plans for the next day. And revert back to Mondays actions but now say it was over from then.

Whilst we were writing up amicable departure contracts that took over 3 days but never materialised.  As we got outraged.

Gotcha.

 

[The Dude 20,026]

30 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

So does the timeline look something like this?

Monday offer was put to Rangers by the agent 

Tuesday meeting of the board and acceptance of resignation

Wednesday Could Murty have been in meetings with the board, hence why you couldn't interview him?

Thursday MW agent wants to retract on resignation,board refuse

Friday announcement made that MW and team have resigned

That would sound about right. I'm told the retractions came Friday (which is why we got a statement at 9pm friday night) but yeah that all pretty much fits.

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

So it sounds like we weren't outraged when they allegedly resigned. We weren't outraged when they appeared to be speaking to NF. It was amicable enough that we kept them doing their day jobs up til Friday and they were actually going to manage team on Saturday.

But their request to stay til the end of the season. That outraged us. That got us angry enough to cancel right there and then the plans for the next day. And revert back to Mondays actions but now say it was over from then.

Whilst we were writing up amicable departure contracts that took over 3 days but never materialised.  As we got outraged.

Gotcha.

 

I think it's more that we were to be doing things at their convenience. They wanted to go. Their new job fell through. They wanted to stay but only until they got a new job, And then they still wanted to go for nothing.

There wasn't much outrage when the initially wanted to go because it saved us having to pay them to go.

[Big Al 55 9,289]

Hopefully they find a new club and we can claim our rightful compensation.

[Bears r us 30,889]

9 minutes ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

So it sounds like we weren't outraged when they allegedly resigned. We weren't outraged when they appeared to be speaking to NF. It was amicable enough that we kept them doing their day jobs up til Friday and they were actually going to manage team on Saturday.

But their request to stay til the end of the season. That outraged us. That got us angry enough to cancel right there and then the plans for the next day. And revert back to Mondays actions but now say it was over from then.

Whilst we were writing up amicable departure contracts that took over 3 days but never materialised.  As we got outraged.

Gotcha.

 

I am sure I should not have been amused by your post giving the circumstances we are speaking about, but it did make me  my bad.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 54,035]

6 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I think it's more that we were to be doing things at their convenience. They wanted to go. Their new job fell through. They wanted to stay but only until they got a new job, And then they still wanted to go for nothing.

There wasn't much outrage when the initially wanted to go because it saved us having to pay them to go.

So why were we amicable on Monday to the extent that we allowed training, presser and match day to run as normal?

We had them allegedly resign, we were in the knowledge it wouldn't cost us, what benefit was there to the club to continue with them in charge?

Why business as normal rather than deal with it there and then?

Honestly something stinks with the timelines and justification of decisions made during them.

 

 

[smartypants 4,449]

11 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That would sound about right. I'm told the retractions came Friday (which is why we got a statement at 9pm friday night) but yeah that all pretty much fits.

Alright mate, when does your shift finish? 

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, smartypants said:

Alright mate, when does your shift finish? 

What shift? I've already managed to talk myself out of a job at Ibrox this week.

[Bears r us 30,889]

50 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

So does the timeline look something like this?

Monday offer was put to Rangers by the agent 

Tuesday meeting of the board and acceptance of resignation

Wednesday Could Murty have been in meetings with the board, hence why you couldn't interview him?

Thursday MW agent wants to retract on resignation,board refuse

Friday announcement made that MW and team have resigned

I am sure Murty said when interviewed on TV either before or after the game, that he was at the Glasgow Warriors game on Friday night when he was asked to come back to Ibrox to discuss taking the team on Sunday. So either he was telling porkies or then that part would not work out S. 

[smartypants 4,449]

Just now, The Dude said:

What shift? I've already managed to talk myself out of a job at Ibrox this week.

Your shift on here. Who is taking over? 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said:

So why were we amicable on Monday to the extent that we allowed training, presser and match day to run as normal?

We had them allegedly resign, we were in the knowledge it wouldn't cost us, what benefit was there to the club to continue with them in charge?

Why business as normal rather than deal with it there and then?

Honestly something stinks with the timelines and justification of decisions made during them.

 

 

It suited both parties. We were letting him go/getting rid of him for nothing when he would the walk into the Forest job (or so his agent assumed).

Forest went a different way short-term. They panicked and tried to save their jobs here.