craig 5,199 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 For me it is pretty obvious and in fact I now feel we are treating him very shabbily. I am starting to wonder if Warburton has lost the plot. The guy did something wrong and got punished for it. All of a sudden the goal posts got moved time and again. If I get arrested for stealing I am not kept in jail until a trial, I am released on bail to return to my everyday life. Barton will get a punishment from the SFA but Rangers are now punishing him before he is even been found guilty. If the SFA trial was 6 months away would he be sidelined for 6 months? He will be getting paid for doing nothing but I think he would rather be playing for nothing. If Rangers wanted Barton playing he would be playing. They are not even letting him train so he can hit the ground running after his punishment and that is pretty unheard of. Sorry Craig as I say it is obvious to me he is not wanted and probably the person that committed the biggest crime here was the person that signed him in the first place. Irrelevant. The player asked for a postponement to his disciplinary hearing from the Club. Bringing up the SFA charge is completely irrelevant to what happens between Club and player. I think you need to re-read the Club statement. The meeting due to take place was between Club and player, nothing to do with SFA. And Barton asked for the Club to postpone the meeting. For you to then take the quantum leap to blame Barton's request on Warburton is highly unfair. You seem, at least to me, to be suggesting that the extension is because of the SFA hearing. The reality is that Joey Barton asked the Club to postpone his internal club disciplinary hearing.... and you have laid the blame at the managers feet. Incorrectly in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,563 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Agree with pete. It begs the question if there is more to it. Perhaps Barton needs the time to get his agent going to find him a new club if we "release" him? I can't see it that we sack him because this gambling stuff, mind you, the Scum will have a field day if "big mouth Barton" will get the sack because he betted against them. I don't know the contract, but a essentially minor "offence" such as this can't be used as a means to instantly sack him. Dunno whether it was said on here, but the whispers were that he wasn't too clever in that training ground argument with MW word-wise and did not apologize later on. If that was the case though, we do not need to wait any longer. Getting 5 out of 2+2 then, one might assume that both parties agreed to part company and we keep him as long as it takes him to find himself a new club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Sorry but you can't simply say it is a "minor offence". He breached the regulatory bodies written legislation. That in itself would be "cause" for a sacking under "gross misconduct". Whether you agree with the rules is a different argument. Whether you believe that this action should warrant a sacking is a different argument. But I don't believe that breaching the rules of the very body that has to approve your player registration in the first place can be swept under the carpet as a minor offense. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,563 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Sorry but you can't simply say it is a "minor offence". He breached the regulatory bodies written legislation. That in itself would be "cause" for a sacking under "gross misconduct". Whether you agree with the rules is a different argument. Whether you believe that this action should warrant a sacking is a different argument. But I don't believe that breaching the rules of the very body that has to approve your player registration in the first place can be swept under the carpet as a minor offense. Maybe so, but have you ever had a club who sacked a player because such an offense? I.e. 12 bets including 1 with a Scottish club? They'll get a slap on the wrist for such a "first time offense" and that would be that. A slap by the SFA, btw. Had he or anyone else bet against his club, things might be different. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Craig is right we are misreading this. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 It's a distraction a side show, but the sooner we get rid of Barton the better for the club. There must be lessons to be learned here? Always look a gift horse in the mouth, beware of Greeks baring gifts, If something looks to good to be true, then it probably is. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Maybe so, but have you ever had a club who sacked a player because such an offense? I.e. 12 bets including 1 with a Scottish club? They'll get a slap on the wrist for such a "first time offense" and that would be that. A slap by the SFA, btw. Had he or anyone else bet against his club, things might be different. As I said dB.... Disagree all you like with the rules or indeed the punishment but I don't think you can call it a minor offence. Again, with all due respect, it doesn't matter if he had only ever placed one solitary bet and that bet had nothing to do with Scottish games - the legislation is very clear - no gambling on ANY football matches worldwide... So the number of bets is irrelevant. Doesn't matter if a club has sacked a player previously or not. If this is considered gross misconduct, which seems it could given he breached SFA rules, then he CAN be sacked. Whether we as fans agree with it is another matter. We can even believe he's being treated shabbily, but that too is to ignore his own part in this. Had he not blown a gasket at team-mates and management (allegedly) then the betting thing would see him supported by the Club more than likely. However, if this gives the Club a legal avenue of relieving the Club of an undesirable without having to pay him £2 million over 2 years then you can't really blame them. I personally would like to see Barton back... But I think he would struggle to get back in the team ahead of Halliday 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 For me it is pretty obvious and in fact I now feel we are treating him very shabbily. I am starting to wonder if Warburton has lost the plot. The guy did something wrong and got punished for it. All of a sudden the goal posts got moved time and again. If I get arrested for stealing I am not kept in jail until a trial, I am released on bail to return to my everyday life. . If I get arrested for stealing I am not kept in jail until a trial, I am released on bail to return to my everyday life. If the SFA trial was 6 months away would he be sidelined for 6 months? He will be getting paid for doing nothing but I think he would rather be playing for nothing. If Rangers wanted Barton playing he would be playing. They are not even letting him train so he can hit the ground running after his punishment and that is pretty unheard of. Sorry Craig as I say it is obvious to me he is not wanted and probably the person that committed the biggest crime here was the person that signed him in the first place. We know nothing about what went on. It's all speculation but who's to say Bartons indiscipline is not continuing behind the scenes ? However, to address your points pete, " If I get arrested for stealing I am not kept in jail until a trial, I am released on bail to return to my everyday life. " - not if the offence happened at your work you wouldn't. " Barton will get a punishment from the SFA but Rangers are now punishing him before he is even been found guilty. " - that is assuming that he is being punished for betting. Nobody at Rangers has commented as far as I'm aware. As for him not training with us - it was at training that he reportedly lost it and became the subject of punishment. Maybe he has shown no contrition ? Stepping to the side for a second, I think it was on the other thread that mention was made of how certain players, including Black only received minor punishments for the same alleged offence. We have a new regime in charge so maybe they are now placing it in contracts that such behaviour won't be tolerated ? There is too much speculation around this subject. Too many are reading between the lines and creating conspiracy theories. That's not aimed at you mate. Just my view of what's going on, with the usual suspects in the vanguard creating a feeding frenzy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 Football clubs have no morals. If he was Messi we would be fighting shoulder to shoulder with him. If we get an opportunity to get rid for free here we will take it. People might as well just get used to that. It happens in normal work places as well. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhunter 0 Posted October 15, 2016 Share Posted October 15, 2016 going to go down as one of the worst signings in our history and one of the most mystifying 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.