Rangers 2017

[Uilleam 5,948]

Precisely what was "shambolic" about Warburton's resignation?

It was unexpected, for sure; unusually, perhaps, it was conditional on a compensation waiver, which, I imagine, meant that it required the imprimatur of the Board, which was given, as I understand it, reasonably timeously; Warburton, or his man, tried to withdraw it; this was declined, again in a reasonable timescale.

Warburton pitching up at Murray Park was outwith the control of the Board, and was, clearly, a tactic on his part, probably under advisement, designed to provide some kind of "evidence" of good faith, etc., for any future claim against the Club.

Shambles? At best, arguable, and not of the Club's making.

 

I need hardly say that after tendering a resignation, esp. in the particular circumstances, Warburton could not have been welcomed back into the fold without let or hindrance.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Uilleam

[Uilleam 5,948]

Thing is all the people ''in the know'' whether true or not have an advantage over the rest of us fans so it is very frustrating for the rest of us without substantiated evidence of such matters!, I suppose it must be equally frustrating for the ''in the know'' guys?, however posting cryptic messages and then expecting the rest of us to believe them is asking a bit much!.

As for the current board yes they are having problems, however I believe they have Rangers best interests at heart. We could do with a couple of big hitters on the board for sure.

We have all heard a rumour of the fresh investment, possibly March?, then we can only wait to see if that materialises!.

 

Most of the ITK stuff is, as they would say in court, hearsay. It may be accurate, but, generally, it seems to be filtered through at least two pairs of lugs.....Add in that the information is from one witness or participant, or one side, is always off the record, and one may be inclined to take a measured view.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Uilleam

[Walterbear 557]

Agree with both of you. I would only really post something of ITK status if it was generally my view based on putting 2 and 2 together anyway and then I get a 'titbit' usually because i have steered a conversation a particular way to verify my opinion. My ITK stuff is not at the the level of the Russian secret service however. In the end we all put 2 and 2 together based on what we think is reliable evidence and we don't do it in isolation. For example rbr (who i do not know) posted something which I recognised as having truth and from completely different sources I would guess (it certainly isn't from Celtic bloggers btw). So I thought it was worth adding to that based on whatt I understand. In the interests of integrity and credibility of the gersnet board it would always be wise not to draw too many conclusions from people like me and outside formal comms from the club. But then if I have something that i think fans who invest their time and money should know it is difficult to say nothing. At the end of the day I am just another anonymous internet being but I hope my posts at least show I'm a Rangers fan and want the club to succeed. That's all I hope to be recognised but rangers fans have generally been to unquestioning in the past and it didn't help.

 

With respect to Ulis comment re what was shambolic about warburtons 'resignation' I can only respond by saying I have never seen any Rangers manager moved on or moving with such public disagreement about what actually happened. It does not seem clear cut. Resignation is a pretty straightforward process normally. Right now we are skint and we are paying for a manager and team who are not working whilst we have no effective leadership of the first team squad at a critical part of the season and we are behaving in a reactive mode rather than dictating the direction.. That's what's shambolic. Whatever the facts turn out to be in the end the board and chairman are accountable to the shareholders and fans for everything and the way the whole club is managed and that includes giving the right perception of the club to the public and projecting the best image possible. I don't think that has happened here.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Walterbear

[rbr 1,256]

My biggest issue with MWs removal , is the way it was engineered , this will eventually come out ( unless there is a deal that suits MW and the other 2 and they sign a non disclosure ) , because the club took advantage of something that was partly of their doing without having fully discussed the "what next " bit , you know the important bit after the old regime has gone , but they had nothing , they were so hell bent on getting rid of them now that they rushed it and now we are in the shambolic situation of certain board members barely talking to each other .

 

Any board of any club has the right to run that club in the best way they see fit , our board are a million miles away from that situation , and God only knows how they will get non exec directors to take up a post , something we badly badly need .

[SteveC 150]

Thing is all the people ''in the know'' whether true or not have an advantage over the rest of us fans so it is very frustrating for the rest of us without substantiated evidence of such matters!, I suppose it must be equally frustrating for the ''in the know'' guys?, however posting cryptic messages and then expecting the rest of us to believe them is asking a bit much!.

As for the current board yes they are having problems, however I believe they have Rangers best interests at heart. We could do with a couple of big hitters on the board for sure.

We have all heard a rumour of the fresh investment, possibly March?, then we can only wait to see if that materialises!.

 

Outside of football I've been in a position of having a lot of information that a fan base is desperate to know (I still am, occasionally, albeit to a much lesser extent nowadays). Being part of that same fan base means that you want to try and hint and give a steer and guide them as much as you can without actually divulging things that would betray a source or break a promise. Sometimes people's jobs are at stake if they are later found to have divulged information.

 

What you might interpret as an arrogant "I know more than you" tease could be all that a person can actually reveal and they are trying to be helpful in putting it this way. Unfortunately the "I know this fact and you just have to trust me" statement is often all one can say even in the knowledge that the internet (and bars and newspapers) are full of people saying that and who are not to be trusted an inch. It is, alas, the way of things.

 

Bit in bold = I think that was an internet started rumour, though, and it was based on nothing more than wishful thinking, I fear.

Edited February 25, 2017 by SteveC

[BEARGER 1,830]

Ok , since last nights anger has passed , I will attempt to give my reasons for my post .

1. My best mate works in the sports dept of a major new paper , Frankie knows who he is , so I'm not going to post his name , but he is legit .There are also things I have been asked not to post , sorry but I can't answer everything .

2 . The board are split , there are certain board members doing their own thing , ie DK meeting potential new managers in London weeks, possibly months ago behind the rest of the boards back .

3 . They do not agree on the way forward , who is going to supply the funding .

 

I could go on and on , we are where we are , I certainly don't agree with the way they handled MW s sacking , I don't agree that the board had made enough fund available to secure a new team for this season , but that's just my opinion , I know others have the totally polar opposite opinion and I can see where they are coming from , I just think we are back at square one with no clue how to move forward .

 

Sorry for the negativity guys I wish it was better news , there are rumours of major investment in March but that didn't come from inside the club , it's all went quiet since last week so I have no updates .

 

You may be in the know you may not be. But I find the quote in bold to be highly unlikely for two,main reasons;

1. The chances of keeping the meetings secret is very difficult, agents, potential managers etc. talk if it suits their plans for the future.

2. Why has no board member resigned if it's true, nobody with any self respect would stay on a board/committee where they are being not just ignored but deliberately not informed of serious discussions going on. The other board members positions are untenable imo if it's true.

[Uilleam 5,948]

Agree with both of you. I would only really post something of ITK status if it was generally my view based on putting 2 and 2 together anyway and then I get a 'titbit' usually because i have steered a conversation a particular way to verify my opinion. My ITK stuff is not at the the level of the Russian secret service however. In the end we all put 2 and 2 together based on what we think is reliable evidence and we don't do it in isolation. For example rbr (who i do not know) posted something which I recognised as having truth and from completely different sources I would guess (it certainly isn't from Celtic bloggers btw). So I thought it was worth adding to that based on whatt I understand. In the interests of integrity and credibility of the gersnet board it would always be wise not to draw too many conclusions from people like me and outside formal comms from the club. But then if I have something that i think fans who invest their time and money should know it is difficult to say nothing. At the end of the day I am just another anonymous internet being but I hope my posts at least show I'm a Rangers fan and want the club to succeed. That's all I hope to be recognised but rangers fans have generally been to unquestioning in the past and it didn't help.

 

With respect to Ulis comment re what was shambolic about warburtons 'resignation' I can only respond by saying I have never seen any Rangers manager moved on or moving with such public disagreement about what actually happened. It does not seem clear cut. Resignation is a pretty straightforward process normally. Right now we are skint and we are paying for a manager and team who are not working whilst we have no effective leadership of the first team squad at a critical part of the season and we are behaving in a reactive mode rather than dictating the direction.. That's what's shambolic. Whatever the facts turn out to be in the end the board and chairman are accountable to the shareholders and fans for everything and the way the whole club is managed and that includes giving the right perception of the club to the public and projecting the best image possible. I don't think that has happened here.

 

It looked (and looks) to this observer that MWs departure was almost a fait accomplit presented by his man to the CEO/Board, and the Club, therefore had to react. As I said, it was not a clean offer, but was circumscribed by financial conditions, to which the Club, also, had to react. That the Club did not have a new man in place was surely determined by the fact that the resignation was unanticipated. It would have been, in my view, close to ludicrous to retain Warburton & Co as management, after the resignation.

The outcome is less than optimal, and perhaps the Board should have installed a manager, pro tem, but that is easier said than done, quite frankly, as, if it was not to be an audition for the Big Picture, it would have to be a favour; given the circumstance, and the possibility of reputational damage a pretty big favour, at that.

 

The description "shambles" is one I have heard bandied about on many, many occasions over the years, mostly inaccurately, lazily, and based on little analysis. It's a great shorthand for a situation you don't like, or which is not covered in the textbook.

 

Again, I would say that if Board members are unhappy, let them say so, publicly, telling the truth and shaming the devil, rather than pee heeing with 'football writers', pals, or second cousins twice removed, powering the rumour factory, and, I may say, making themselves look like school lassies, and young ones at that.

[rbr 1,256]

You may be in the know you may not be. But I find the quote in bold to be highly unlikely for two,main reasons;

1. The chances of keeping the meetings secret is very difficult, agents, potential managers etc. talk if it suits their plans for the future.

2. Why has no board member resigned if it's true, nobody with any self respect would stay on a board/committee where they are being not just ignored but deliberately not informed of serious discussions going on. The other board members positions are untenable imo if it's true.

 

 

Probably because we don't have a proper " board" as it were . We have a group of business men with vested interests not wanting to lose any grip on what small bit of power they have , I don't know how this is going to play out , I just don't like the way it's going .

[chilledbear 16]

The sooner it comes to a head the better, we cannot go on like this.

[rbr 1,256]

The wording of frank deboers agent , about him taking a " new project from scratch " has at least given me a bit of optimism , however if it does come to fruition we will need serious money to fund it .