RANGERRAB 3,851 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 McCoist and/or McDowall obtaining promotion for us has been looking increasingly unlikely. The Board should have dealt with it professionally if they had any real desire to get promoted. We don't/didn't have the money to pay them off due to the onerous contracts they are on. That's why McCoist is on gardening leave & McDowall is hanging around the dug-out 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Every now and then, my cynical self rears his head. Today it looked around the corner and said: "Look, it is sure not the best way how this is being handled. Far from it. But on the other side, just look at it this way: There is nothing that would have changed McDowall's hand with regards to team selection, so maybe Llambias and Easdale (and Ashley) were just sick and tired of what passes as football these days at Ibrox?" Somewhere deep down I knew that my cynical self was right ... at least with any changes to the starting eleven. If the board are not happy with his performance then they should replace him, as would happen at any normal football club. Forcing half a team to play is just an absurd situation. If Sandy Easdale had been of any use for us, we would have had a decent manager in place some time ago. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 The contract was given to him by the previous board on oldco. It was TUPE'd over in 2012. Understand?With the benefit of hindsight the three amigos(Ally, McDowall & Durrant) should have been served their notice long ago. They weren't up to the task but the current board wrongly stuck by them probably in case it caused a backlash and the likes of Graham & Houstoun crawled out of the woodwork arranging more protests & boycotts Since when have the Board (in any of it's incarnations) cared what Graham and Houston said?. If they only kept the management team in place because they were worried about a backlash from the fans, then why did they refuse the various offers of finance from sources other than Ashley? That has caused an almighty backlash and they don't seem too worried about it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,851 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 If the board are not happy with his performance then they should replace him, as would happen at any normal football club. Forcing half a team to play is just an absurd situation. If Sandy Easdale had been of any use for us, we would have had a decent manager in place some time ago. We can't afford to hire a new manager(and his staff too presumably) whilst the present incumbents still drawing their lucrative salaries whilst working their notices 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 We don't/didn't have the money to pay them off due to the onerous contracts they are on. That's why McCoist is on gardening leave & McDowall is hanging around the dug-out Maybe they shouldn't have squandered all that IPO money then ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,851 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Since when have the Board (in any of it's incarnations) cared what Graham and Houston said?. If they only kept the management team in place because they were worried about a backlash from the fans, then why did they refuse the various offers of finance from sources other than Ashley? That has caused an almighty backlash and they don't seem too worried about it. I don't think the board had the balls to get rid off McCoist and his staff. I think they were hoping he'd get us back to the top division and then leave voluntarily as a hero for taking us back up there. It hasn't worked out though has it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 We can't afford to hire a new manager(and his staff too presumably) whilst the present incumbents still drawing their lucrative salaries whilst working their notices why not ,they have just accepted Ashley's loans, so can pay them off anytime. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 We can't afford to hire a new manager(and his staff too presumably) whilst the present incumbents still drawing their lucrative salaries whilst working their notices The Board could have given them their year's notice at any time and then said to them, we want you to stay (if they did) but we need to negotiate a more realistic salary. They didn't and seemed to prefer to keep them in place to distract our attention from other issues. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I don't think the board had the balls to get rid off McCoist and his staff. I think they were hoping he'd get us back to the top division and then leave voluntarily as a hero for taking us back up there. It hasn't worked out though has it? Huge error of judgement from the board. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) probably in case it caused a backlash and the likes of Graham & Houstoun crawled out of the woodwork That sort of rhetoric isn't acceptable here Rab and you know it fine well, so rein it in please. Edited February 5, 2015 by Zappa 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.