Mark Warburton - Resigned - Page 4 - Football related - Discussion of non TA football - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Mark Warburton - Resigned


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, DaveyDenoon said:

I'm no expert but I would doubt that seeking alternative employment would be seen as breaching your contract, after all there must be a pretty significant proportion of the population on the lookout for a different job?

If they did say as alleged and ask if the compensation could be waived if they were to resign, then unless they did actually formally hand in their resignations then I can't see how Rangers could be on solid ground here?

But as I said I'm far from expert.

 

Based on recent history there are no experts at Ibrox either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 334
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm sure our smsm will be all over this with headlines about the shambles that is the rangers and how  they are bringing the game into disrepute, like they did with Hearts.   What a total shambles of a club and I look forward to yet more court cases to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's never dull.

So, from what I can interpret, Warburton et al approached the club last week with a view to being released from their contracts FOC to enable them to join Nottingham Forest, who they had presumably been in dialogue with. That is in breach of contract - 'tapping up' - but it won't come to anything, I suspect, because it would have been informal. I also presume that Nottingham Forest, in the interim, changed their minds and opted to maintain their current caretaker manager to the end of the season, leaving them in limbo once Rangers decided to accede to their request.

According to some journalists, Rangers were going to pay them off next week anyway (somewhere between £700k and £1.2m was mentioned) so this was a convenient time for Forest to apparently make their approach.

It all depends on the paperwork, or lack of. If a formal resignation letter is in place then Rangers are in a strong position. If there isn't, and resignation discussions were informal, Warburton et al would likely be entitled to compensation, which Rangers were apparently willing to pay anyway. The only certainties (probably...) is that Mark Warburton will not take charge tomorrow and that Rangers have handled it poorly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, dipped flake said:

I'm sure our smsm will be all over this with headlines about the shambles that is the rangers and how  they are bringing the game into disrepute, like they did with Hearts.   What a total shambles of a club and I look forward to yet more court cases to come

Why would there be a court case and why have Rangers brought the game into disrepute? It's an employment law issue at best so calm your jets.

Edited by thewolf_1980
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlueGaz
19 minutes ago, thewolf_1980 said:

The only certainties (probably...) is that Mark Warburton will not take charge tomorrow and that Rangers have handled it poorly.

I don't think anything is certain at this juncture.  If they did approach and offer their resignation, cut a deal via their representation and then seek to withdraw it, when forest withdrew their offer - how have Rangers handled it badly?  A lot of ifs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DaveyDenoon said:

I'm no expert but I would doubt that seeking alternative employment would be seen as breaching your contract, after all there must be a pretty significant proportion of the population on the lookout for a different job?

If they did say as alleged and ask if the compensation could be waived if they were to resign, then unless they did actually formally hand in their resignations then I can't see how Rangers could be on solid ground here?

But as I said I'm far from expert.

Think you're right. Unless Rangers have some sort of documentation backing their side of things up it'll be a settlement. 

It did,  however, allow Rangers a way out without looking bad until their amateur hour PR twats messed it up. 

Now who will want the job? 

Seen loads of names linked and apart from the ones we can't afford (De Boer) they all inspire depression rather than hope. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueGaz said:

I don't think anything is certain at this juncture.  If they did approach and offer their resignation, cut a deal via their representation and then seek to withdraw it, when forest withdrew their offer - how have Rangers handled it badly?  A lot of ifs.

They've handled it badly by announcing the 'resignation' before it was contractually resolved, opening us up to ridicule. They also handled it badly by allowing a 5 year old child to format their official statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Rangers ‘have’ or Rangers ‘has’ the correct form? Both are correct, depending on 'who' is using them.

Here it isn't a case of whether the grammar is absolutely linguistically accurate or not. It’s simply a case of the language convention used in the different worlds of business and journalism.

Rangers (the club/business) are using both corporate and public relations language convention, which is to express the entity in singular format, hence the use of ‘has’. In business and PR lingo it also suggests - (in Rangers' case, don't :lol: ) - a sense of unity of purpose, organisation and cohesion in the business world. 

But newspapers (mainstream media in general) use journalistic convention when referring to both football clubs and the Police, hence 'have' is used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, AlfieMoon said:

I'm sure that is the correct grammar if they present 'Rangers' as a singular entity as opposed to a collection of people (which would be 'Rangers have'). 

 

Not 100% sure so I may be corrected. 

Bang on. There is only one Rangers, therefore "has".

Even if it was a collection of people, it would be "a" collection of people, singular, and "has" would be right again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RenfrewBlue said:

? That's exactly what I thought when I read that. 

Perhaps Flure is coming out as a secret Hun? 

 

3 minutes ago, Flure said:

No secret.

 

2 minutes ago, RenfrewBlue said:

Och that ruins the fun. ?

Oi!

Where did that "k" go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...