forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 [tweet]785197842868633604[/tweet] 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,291 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 He's a goner, if he's found guilty by the SFA over the betting allegation, it will be a sacking. I think this is what the club are hoping for, less of a payout imo. It looks to me that's the route we're going down but as I asked earlier why weren't Simonsen & Black sacked then ? Unlike Black at least Barton didn't bet on games he played in. Much more serious IMO 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 Different management then 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 It looks to me that's the route we're going down but as I asked earlier why weren't Simonsen & Black sacked then ?Unlike Black at least Barton didn't bet on games he played in. Much more serious IMO I can only say new board, different way of dealing with these issues? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacK1950 2,240 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 Dave King should use part of his pocket money and get rid of him now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,291 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 I can only say new board, different way of dealing with these issues? Not sure that will have anyhing to do with it. It will come down to whether club rules are the same or have changed. I suspect they haven't changed 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 He's a goner, if he's found guilty by the SFA over the betting allegation, it will be a sacking. I think this is what the club are hoping for, less of a payout imo. If it is not written in Rangers rules or even if Rangers have not presented him with a set of rules to read and entered it in his contract then i doubt we can sack him without a court case. He has broken SFA rules and unless that he signed to withhold all SFA rules then I doubt we can sack him. After Black and Simomson you would think it would have been added to a contract. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 If it is not written in Rangers rules or even if Rangers have not presented him with a set of rules to read and entered it in his contract then i doubt we can sack him without a court case. He has broken SFA rules and unless that he signed to withhold all SFA rules then I doubt we can sack him. After Black and Simomson you would think it would have been added to a contract. Eh ? How the hell can anyone sign a contract with ANY Club in Scotland and not abide by SFA rules ? Every single player is obliged to follow SFA rules as the governing body. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,291 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 I suspect there's more to his than what we know. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 Eh ? How the hell can anyone sign a contract with ANY Club in Scotland and not abide by SFA rules ? Every single player is obliged to follow SFA rules as the governing body. Somewhere down the line you will have to sign for that in a contract . Be it in your SFA registration or Rangers contract. Every citizen has a right to know the law but in occupational matters you have to sign contracts. 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.