Rangers close to Davis in, Gow out

[pete 2,499]

DARRYL BROADFOOT, Chief Football Writer July 25 2008

 

Rangers' search for midfield reinforcements will continue, as Hearts and Dundee United rekindle their interest in Alan Gow, the forgotten man of Ibrox.

 

The proposed transfer of Steven Davis remains unresolved, despite Fulham lowering their asking price for the 23-year-old. Another day of negotiations ended with Davis a step closer to returning to Rangers after the clubs came close to agreeing a fee in the region of �£3.5m.

 

Walter Smith, the Rangers manager, has also been linked with a move for Dickson Etuhu, the Nigerian midfielder who joined Sunderland from Norwich City for �£1.5m last summer and made 20 appearances, but is no longer part of Roy Keane's plans. However, Rangers' tentative approach for Portsmouth's Pedro Mendes is unlikely to bear fruit with Harry Redknapp keen to keep the Portuguese playmaker, whose �£32,000-a-week salary is prohibitive to any permanent transfer.

advertisement

 

The plight of Gow, signed last season on a Bosman from Falkirk and consigned to two cup outings against third division opposition, could at last be reaching its conclusion. Rangers have told the striker he can leave for free, but he has already passed up the opportunity to join Burnley and watched a proposed move to Norwich City collapse.

 

Gow's wages remain a stumbling block to any move within the Clydesdale Bank Premier League, but Rangers may consider increasing their compensation offer to terminate the remaining two years of his contract. Gow was offered a �£60,000 severance package, but is holding out for his full entitlement.

 

A compromise deal of a year's wages would give Gow financial security to accept a wage cut in order to stay in Scotland. Csaba Laszlo, the Hearts manager, has stated his intention to recruit young Scottish talent but could face competition from Dundee United.

 

Craig Levein, the United manager, made an enquiry last season to take the player on loan, but the �£600,000 transfer of Noel Hunt to Reading has given Levein greater latitude in his wage bill and that could revive his interest in Gow.

 

Yet again a player who so called cost us nothing has cost us at least a million + without playing a game. keep going Walter your doing well.

[Wija 0]

Not the players fault in any way, Rangers really are fcuking awful with this type of situation.

 

No one can have any complaints about the player wanting his dues. A shambles, and this free player is going to cost us a few bob. Well done the Management.

[Bluedell 5,621]

Gow had the option of furthering his careering by moving to another club on the same money as he was on at Rangers.

 

If he wants fully paid up for his contract then feck him. Let him rot in the reserves or at home. What benefit do we have buying paying him off?

[UCF2008 0]

If he wants fully paid up for his contract then feck him. Let him rot in the reserves or at home. What benefit do we have buying paying him off?

 

Agreed. There's no way we should be paying his wages while he plays for one of the opposition. That's insanity.

 

Who knows, he might still have a future at the club, but somehow I doubt it. If he's not willing to move to another club, taking a pay-cut if need be, to get his career back on track then let him rot.

[pete 2,499]

Agreed. There's no way we should be paying his wages while he plays for one of the opposition. That's insanity.

 

Who knows, he might still have a future at the club, but somehow I doubt it. If he's not willing to move to another club, taking a pay-cut if need be, to get his career back on track then let him rot.

 

I think if i read the story right we were offering him one year out of two. That would have saved us a year and gave him roughly the same money as he had with us. The other team would pay the rest. If we stick him in the reserves we pay the full sum. It sounds good business but obviously signing him in the first place was a mistake, and that was Walter Smith's decision.

[pete 2,499]

I guess we will have to beat Kaunus with the players we have as the deadline has now passed. Anyone feel like we are playing Russian roulette?

[Wija 0]

I guess we will have to beat Kaunus with the players we have as the deadline has now passed. Anyone feel like we are playing Russian roulette?

 

 

No, feels more like 4-5-1

[UCF2008 0]

I think if i read the story right we were offering him one year out of two. That would have saved us a year and gave him roughly the same money as he had with us. The other team would pay the rest. If we stick him in the reserves we pay the full sum. It sounds good business but obviously signing him in the first place was a mistake, and that was Walter Smith's decision.

 

Personally, I don't think signing him was a 'mistake'. He's a good player and could have done a job for us, but something has obviously happened behind the scenes for him to have been frozen out. While I have to admit he's probably on a half decent wage, he's not exactly one of our top earners.

 

There's hardly been a year gone by in the past decade where we haven't had a player in his situation, more often than not on a much higher salary. Whether that's down to poor management or not is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that as much as we can criticise for more money down the drain, that's nothing compared to the criticism the club will face if he scores against us for our rivals, whilst living it up on our fat pay-off.

[UCF2008 0]

If we're going to offer Gow a pay-off, I'd insert a clause in the deal that he has to look outside the SPL, then give him a game to let potential buyers get a look at him. We might still get a fee for him after all. This would also serve as an insurance policy that he won't move down south and then straight back to an SPL club within the same season. This way, we might only have to pay him what we get for him and at the same time avoid getting egg on our faces.

[UCF2008 0]

Likewise, I suppose if one of the interested SPL clubs are willing to cough up a fee which in effect covers his pay-off then at least we wouldn't be leaving ourselves open to criticism on the business side of things.