Uilleam

If a man lies about his age, well......

Was he not touted for the job before? Anyway, he is Portuguese, a seemingly fashionable nationality in football these days.

I agree, and many will agree that the impression given by the Club, for years, is of one inclined to overpay, and undersell.

The Board must feel, under advisement, whatever, that it had received bona fide resignations. Kite flying in current circumstances would be foolhardy: it can be expensive (very), to say nothing of reputational damage, and its negative impact on recruitment, sponsorship, and other areas.

There is a CEO, in situ, although how much leeway he has (is given) to manage is perhaps moot. Quite whether a DoF would be the person to deal with the current imbroglio is likewise debatable, although it seems a matter to be more the province of others.

Indeed. Ammunition for the deplorables.

Nothing of benefit to Rangers occurred when Gessler had a couple of his shills on the Board. Of course, should the fat philistine have come to own and/or control Rangers, then there would have been no ground high enough for the moral Gardai to occupy, and from which to sanctimoniously condemn, and continuously condemn, the Club, given his reprehensible business practices: much like an East St Louis pimp, an unacceptable face of capitalism.

You want to ritually sacrifice rasellik and its support, then?

Oh Christ!! What a heap of tosh. Rubbishing the article would require a modicum of time and attention, far more than it deserves. I wonder if he came up with this crap himself, or did a big bhoy do it for him.

Brenda Brent's sellik lost 9 - 0 to Barcelona, over two legs. That is the kind of score you expect big teams to rattle up against teams from Gibraltar, say. Oh.....wait....

It appears so, as the post, no 51, from truebluesince1982 makes clear.

One day, one day, my friend, you will log in to this site, and the talk will be solely of football. Oh, and our chances of Title no 60.

I can follow that, it makes sense, even if the process, if we may call it that, remains some way short of being a thing of beauty.

And some will believe it.

Working a notice period, then. I'm reading DK's statement, so how much, or, better, which parts, of it should I believe?

Of course, but they know that they have resigned, that the resignation has been accepted, and that they are on a notice period.

Ian, the last thing we want is a rabbit. A lion, perhaps, a giant, hungry, fucking lion.

So Warburton was working on Friday, not knowing that his employment had been terminated with "immediate effect" on Wednesday.

We could give King the benefit of the doubt, and say that the statement is badly written. (It is.) I should still like to know when the "resignations" were accepted.

"Immediately terminated", but the fellow thus despatched did not know?

Does your mate know that the source of leaks was the boardroom, or has he made that assumption? Surely even clowns like Jackson & Co will keep quiet about who their informant actually is?

Working his Notice? They are all lying.

I was therefore not surprised when the management team’s agent approached the Club’s Managing Director Stewart Robertson to request a meeting which was held in Glasgow on Monday this week. The outcome of this meeting was that the agent subsequently offered that Mark, David and Frank would resign with immediate effect without compensation as long as the Club, in turn, agreed to waive compensation from any new Club that they signed for. After discussion the Board accepted this offer and employment was immediately terminated. So why was Warburton holding the Press Conference on Friday, if his employment was terminated on Monday?

Allegedly, the Board was minded to bag them, anyway, next week it seems, with all the requirements for compensation for contract termination that that would entail. Thus the offers to resign fell like manna from Heaven.

You would hope!