PDA

View Full Version : Players Leaving v Honesty



Aggieblue
04-04-2013, 09:51
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

WeeBudsBud
04-04-2013, 09:55
Sandaza touted himself to an unkown person while still having 2 years to run on a contract. Should contracts only work one way?

He said he was happy to leave Rangers if it suited.

He`s now gone from Rangers. What`s to moan about?

blueger
04-04-2013, 09:59
Sandaza touted himself to an unkown person while still having 2 years to run on a contract. Should contracts only work one way?

He said he was happy to leave Rangers if it suited.

He`s now gone from Rangers. What`s to moan about?

Green has seen an open goal for getting rid of a player who nobody would take off our hands. We would need to do a Bain special and give him a big pay off to get rid. As for Alexander we have a younger replacement on less money to come in of course we aren't going to give him the same deal that was in offer last year.

bertram
04-04-2013, 09:59
Gregg Wylde left to get a god night's sleep.

garymack2.0
04-04-2013, 10:01
I don't think I can handle any more of Bash Ally/Bash Green/conspiricy theory or all of the above threads.

why not just add this stuff to the many threads on Sandaza/Alexander/Green that are already clogging up the board

WeeBudsBud
04-04-2013, 10:04
Green has seen an open goal for getting rid of a player who nobody would take off our hands. We would need to do a Bain special and give him a big pay off to get rid. As for Alexander we have a younger replacement on less money to come in of course we aren't going to give him the same deal that was in offer last year.

When was Sandaza put on the transfer list?

Who says we wanted rid anyway?

Sandaza was in clear breach of contract and he got the heave-ho. Green is innocent in this. Sandaza was a traitor.

goldilocks
04-04-2013, 10:04
Alexander are only here because of the situation we find ourselves in.Now we need to get back to getting a real Rangers team, so lets be honest we need far more than these 2 out, but with Kyle gone to its a start.

RSCGMBHMMBW
04-04-2013, 10:06
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

Find it hard to agree with any of the above

The Big Cheese
04-04-2013, 10:06
Green has seen an open goal for getting rid of a player who nobody would take off our hands. We would need to do a Bain special and give him a big pay off to get rid. As for Alexander we have a younger replacement on less money to come in of course we aren't going to give him the same deal that was in offer last year.

Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

craigie
04-04-2013, 10:07
Sandaza was not sacked because he was duped by some fantasist. He was sacked as he openly discussed the prospect of a move, before the Club had given him permission to do so.

The fact that is was some mentalist he was talking to is irrelevant.

As a bonus it gets a gross under achiever of the books.



25/10

Aggieblue
04-04-2013, 10:20
Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

Sensible, balanced response, this won't catch on FF.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 10:22
Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

While I agree that the manner in which Green is conducting this business is crass and absolutely IS a cost-cutting exercise, the club has identified a keeper the manager wants to sign who is younger and will cost far less than Neil Alexander wants. It's a no-brainer to say to him that we're not going to pay as much as he wants for as long as he wants if there's absolutely no need.

We all appreciate Alexander's service to the club, we all appreciate that he has shown loyalty, but let's not pretend he didn't get as much benefit out of staying, getting guaranteed first-team football on a big wage and without the unwanted hassle of moving a settled family as the club got out of keeping him.

His contract is up, he didn't accept the initial renewal and when he tried to renegotiate, the club found an alternative that meant the terms changed on what was put in front of him. I have no qualms with that whatsoever because the owner needs to run the club prudently and not keep throwing excessive money at players for emotional reasons.

We simply don't need a 10kpw goalie in the lower divisions.

bloo
04-04-2013, 10:26
I don't think I can handle any more of Bash Ally/Bash Green/conspiricy theory or all of the above threads.

why not just add this stuff to the many threads on Sandaza/Alexander/Green that are already clogging up the board

Well said. I think the majority of us are getting bored with the green bashing threads. Suppose folk are never happy and just want a constant moan Or maybe they would prefer minty back ?

Grant K
04-04-2013, 10:27
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

Are you content that players breach their contracts of employment with us. Where are the lines that divided acceptable and unacceptable behaviour if they are not laid down in the contract, agreed to by all parties?

Without the rule of contract their is nothing and no boundaries for players and staff to abide to.

Harsh decision, in the eyes of the beholder, did he break his contract yes, do I have sympathy, no.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
04-04-2013, 10:27
While I agree that the manner in which Green is conducting this business is crass and absolutely IS a cost-cutting exercise, the club has identified a keeper the manager wants to sign who is younger and will cost far less than Neil Alexander wants. It's a no-brainer to say to him that we're not going to pay as much as he wants for as long as he wants if there's absolutely no need.

We all appreciate Alexander's service to the club, we all appreciate that he has shown loyalty, but let's not pretend he didn't get as much benefit out of staying, getting guaranteed first-team football on a big wage and without the unwanted hassle of moving a settled family as the club got out of keeping him.

His contract is up, he didn't accept the initial renewal and when he tried to renegotiate, the club found an alternative that meant the terms changed on what was put in front of him. I have no qualms with that whatsoever because the owner needs to run the club prudently and not keep throwing excessive money at players for emotional reasons.

We simply don't need a 10kpw goalie in the lower divisions.

I accept all that but even when Bell was allegedly signed we were still offering Alexander 4,000 a week to play back up which is utter insanity.

So in the space of weeks we went from

"Neil you are worth 10k a week" to "Neil you are worth 4k a week"

The club here haven't been consistent here IMO. At least Chelsea with the Lampard situation have been consistent even if you disagree with them.

Alexander has been messed about IMO. The club absolutely have the right to pursue other keepers but the way we have went about it doesn't sit well with me.

There is no way on earth we only went after Bell once Alexander didn't sign the initial offer.

Ozbarcode
04-04-2013, 10:28
Wasn't it Green who sanctioned the signing of Sandaza (and his wage) in the first place???

If Sandaza had not clearly breached his contract then he would still be a Rangers player today (regardless of how good or bad he was playing).

I think some on here are getting paranoid about every decision being made and trying to read something into it. I'm surprised that no-one has suggested Green as the one who set the call up FFS! :roll:

suramericaranger
04-04-2013, 10:32
I don't see the big deal with the Sandaza issue. We were opportunistic and got rid of a shit player who didn't want to be here because he said something that was a breach of contract - explicitly asking to make deals behind Rangers back whilst under contract with Rangers.

The Alexander issue is ridiculous. Almost any player in football would have the right to feel utterly offended if a club treated them like that. From a way over the top offer (we have not learned) to an offer which is an insult in the context of the first one that is begging him to reject. It is amateurish and classless.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 10:35
I accept all that but even when Bell was allegedly signed we were still offering Alexander 4,000 a week to play back up which is utter insanity.

So in the space of weeks we went from

"Neil you are worth 10k a week" to "Neil you are worth 4k a week"

The club here haven't been consistent here IMO. At least Chelsea with the Lampard situation have been consistent even if you disagree with them.

Alexander has been messed about IMO. The club absolutely have the right to pursue other keepers but the way we have went about it doesn't sit well with me.

There is no way on earth we only went after Bell once Alexander didn't sign the initial offer.

As I said, I think the way Green has handled the situation is crass and cost-cutting. I'm not defending the manner in which the parties have acted through this.

As for Bell, we'll never know when it was instigated, how sure we were we'd get him at any stage, etc.

My concern for the past couple of months has been that the club is paying way over the odds for the players we have and the quality we are getting when it is unnecessary.

I have no qualms about the wage-bill being slashed for next season and a bigger squad of players on more reasonable wages coming in who could do a perfectly good job.

Whatever has caused these changes in approach from Green, if the end result is a better run club and stronger financial footing going forward, I'll be comfortable.

As other posters have said at times, I could see Green being like The Bunnet. Rubs folk up the wrong way, the support aren't happy with him while he's here, being ruthless and getting his money, but in the long-run we might look back and realise it actually benefits us in the long-term.

kaznkev
04-04-2013, 10:36
Sandaza showed he had no desire to stay and do what's best for us so fu@k him. He got what he deserved. It puts out a message that we won't stand for people using us.
Alexander had a contract put infront of him and tried to play hard to get. Cutting the deal showed we won't be held to ransom by anyone.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
04-04-2013, 10:42
As I said, I think the way Green has handled the situation is crass and cost-cutting. I'm not defending the manner in which the parties have acted through this.

As for Bell, we'll never know when it was instigated, how sure we were we'd get him at any stage, etc.

My concern for the past couple of months has been that the club is paying way over the odds for the players we have and the quality we are getting when it is unnecessary.

I have no qualms about the wage-bill being slashed for next season and a bigger squad of players on more reasonable wages coming in who could do a perfectly good job.

Whatever has caused these changes in approach from Green, if the end result is a better run club and stronger financial footing going forward, I'll be comfortable.

As other posters have said at times, I could see Green being like The Bunnet. Rubs folk up the wrong way, the support aren't happy with him while he's here, being ruthless and getting his money, but in the long-run we might look back and realise it actually benefits us in the long-term.

The difference with McCann and Green is that McCann from day one laid out his 5 year plan for the Filth.

I have absolutely no idea what Green has in store for us. We've been told nothing about short term, medium term or long term plans. We've been fed a lot of bluster but nothing of any substance

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 10:45
The difference with McCann and Green is that McCann from day one laid out his 5 year plan for the Filth.

I have absolutely no idea what Green has in store for us. We've been told nothing about short term, medium term or long term plans. We've been fed a lot of bluster but nothing of any substance

Don't disagree.

The man is difficult to gauge.... to say the least.

That said, much of the criticism towards him I think there's a reasonable alternative view to which may simply be the need to operate cost-effectively, even if it means leaving a bit of a sour taste over the actions required to do so..

turkish
04-04-2013, 10:49
The deal for Alexander has been on the table since October.... a very good deal of over half a million quid for a year to play in the lower echelons of Scottish football. He's dragged his feet because he wanted 2 years; given his age I agree with Rangers point in it so to come back and actually say stuff you the offer is now 4-5k a week take it or leave it is the right thing to do. He was greedy IMO asking for 2 years- the 1 year initial offer was a good deal.

As for Sandaza; kinda glad we got rid of and think it was probably the right thing to do because he broke contract rules. A wee tiny part of me does feel a bit sorry for him and his stupidity.... lets be honest, cibrari, sandaza- they are foreign players with no attachement to the club- they're not here for footballing reasons(although would expect them to bve proffesional)

WokinghamBear
04-04-2013, 10:51
Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

I agree, I expect this summer will see some significant departures and a streamlining of operations.

The kind of clear out that many have been seeking for years, decades even is about to hit Rangers. The role and value of every single appointment will be scrutinised - some freeloaders will be jettisoned, meanwhile some long-term & valued employees will be harshly cut free.

The motives for doing all of this should be given to the fans up front. Cutting costs to improve the financial wellbeing of the club is one thing - cutting the costs to the bone to improve the financial wellbeing of Charles Green is something entirely different.

Aggieblue
04-04-2013, 10:56
Well said. I think the majority of us are getting bored with the green bashing threads. Suppose folk are never happy and just want a constant moan Or maybe they would prefer minty back ?

No bashing here, think you got the wrong thread. All we need is honesty.

BarcelonaGhost
04-04-2013, 10:57
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

Think about what Sandaza said. Had I ignored my obligations to my employers, I'd have been sacked without question.

There's a right way to express yourself in a professional context and pimping yourself out to a total stranger on the telephone doesn't come close to the right way.

Rangers have acted correctly and it sets a useful base line for future players because they'll know where they stand following this precedent.

Whatever we might prefer to think we are a third division outfit and Mr. Green has to ensure when we do get back to the SPL we're equipped with the resources to meet the challenge. That requires fiscal responsibility. We know where the absence of that took us last year thanks to Mr. Whyte. Never again.

Sir Duncan Ferguson
04-04-2013, 11:06
The deal for Alexander has been on the table since October.... a very good deal of over half a million quid for a year to play in the lower echelons of Scottish football. He's dragged his feet because he wanted 2 years; given his age I agree with Rangers point in it so to come back and actually say stuff you the offer is now 4-5k a week take it or leave it is the right thing to do. He was greedy IMO asking for 2 years- the 1 year initial offer was a good deal.

McCulloch is the same age and was given two years.

I completely understand why Alexander asked for the same length of deal as Lee given McCulloch's track record with injury over the past six years.

Why is McCulloch afforded two years but the keeper isn't ?

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 11:08
McCulloch is the same age and was given two years.

I completely understand why Alexander asked for the same length of deal as Lee given McCulloch's track record with injury over the past six years.

Why is McCulloch afforded two years but the keeper isn't ?

Coz big Lee is staunch as ****?

Shane Vendrell
04-04-2013, 11:09
Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

Bell is a far superior keeper to alexander, i dont seem to recall any scotland call up for alexander.

Plus bell will be on a quarter of the wages so its a no brainer.

craigie
04-04-2013, 11:10
Bell is a far superior keeper to alexander, i dont seem to recall any scotland call up for alexander.

Plus bell will be on a quarter of the wages so its a no brainer.

Seriously?



25/10

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 11:10
Bell is a far superior keeper to alexander, i dont seem to recall any scotland call up for alexander.

Plus bell will be on a quarter of the wages so its a no brainer.

Pretty sure Alexander has been capped a few times for Scotland.

GallowBear
04-04-2013, 11:11
[QUOTE=The Big Cheese;19473330]Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.[/QUOTE

Great, a name slating our incoming keeper already. This place sickens me.

craigie
04-04-2013, 11:12
Bell is a far superior keeper to alexander, i dont seem to recall any scotland call up for alexander.

Plus bell will be on a quarter of the wages so its a no brainer.


Pretty sure Alexander has been capped a few times for Scotland.

10 Under 21 caps, 1 "B" international and 3 full caps.

In goal when Scotland last won a trophy. Indeed he was outstanding in that tournament.




25/10

greggyboy
04-04-2013, 11:12
Sandaza showed as much commitment on the telephone as he did on the pitch.

He was in breach of contract by inviting offers for his services behind his employers back, he deserved the chop.

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 11:13
Alexander is not looking for the same deal though,is he?
If you're happy with Catastrophe Bell then I'm happy for you.
The OP is spot on,what we're seeing from Green is a cost cutting exercise being conducted in an overly crass manner.
A turbulent summer beckons.

A new low for FF.

Childish name calling of a Rangers player before he has even arrived at the club.

This is a sad sad place at times.

GallowBear
04-04-2013, 11:13
McCulloch is the same age and was given two years.

I completely understand why Alexander asked for the same length of deal as Lee given McCulloch's track record with injury over the past six years.

Why is McCulloch afforded two years but the keeper isn't ?

Before Lee's injury he was banging the goals in, and playing well, he has since moved back to try and steady the defence.

Alexander has been a great servant but perhaps it's time to bring someone younger in.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:16
Well said. I think the majority of us are getting bored with the green bashing threads. Suppose folk are never happy and just want a constant moan Or maybe they would prefer minty back ?

or maybe they are sick of underhand tactics used to treat people in a disgusting manner?
is sandaza first player ever to discuss a move even though under contract?
makes it even worse that it was an absolute loonball celtic fan that set it up with a procedure that is illegal and even heard some on here saying it was a setup with directors from our board which a more of a serious matter in my eyes than what sandaza did.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 11:18
McCulloch is the same age and was given two years.

I completely understand why Alexander asked for the same length of deal as Lee given McCulloch's track record with injury over the past six years.

Why is McCulloch afforded two years but the keeper isn't ?

That's making a massive leap in assuming that age is the be all and end all in determining contract length.

A replacement for Alexander has been signed up at a much lower cost.

Perhaps the club and manager view Jig as having more to offer over 2 years and being more versatile in the roles the manager plays him will make him a more reasonable longer term signing?

Not my personal view, just a theory....

marlborough1650
04-04-2013, 11:22
or maybe they are sick of underhand tactics used to treat people in a disgusting manner?
is sandaza first player ever to discuss a move even though under contract?
makes it even worse that it was an absolute loonball celtic fan that set it up with a procedure that is illegal and even heard some on here saying it was a setup with directors from our board which a more of a serious matter in my eyes than what sandaza did.

Sandaza got found out, and as we all know, if you are going to break the rules, don't get caught.

Formally, as I understand it, the Club dismissed Sandaza for a material breach of his contract. That is the Club's prerogative in such circumstances.
Everything else is, really, an irrelevance.

isawthat
04-04-2013, 11:22
When was Sandaza put on the transfer list?

Who says we wanted rid anyway?

Sandaza was in clear breach of contract and he got the heave-ho. Green is innocent in this. Sandaza was a traitor.



I am shocked that some of our supporters are supporting Sandaza.

Here is a player who spoke to what he thought was an agent, that's bad enough, but to tell this unknown person his salary, tell him he is only at Rangers for the money, would be willing to move for better money, and worst of all to say, don't contact Rangers until its a done deal, deserves everything that thrown at him.

Just imagine Rangers had ignored all of this and selected him in the future. What kind of treatment would he have faced from both us and the opposition fans. Better to get rid of him, we have done the same to far better players. Roberts and Butcher spring to mind.

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 11:23
I am shocked that some of our supporters are supporting Sandaza.

Here is a player who spoke to what he thought was an agent, that's bad enough, but to tell this unknown person his salary, tell him he is only at Rangers for the money, would be willing to move for better money, and worst of all to say, don't contact Rangers until its a done deal, deserves everything that thrown at him.

Just imagine Rangers had ignored all of this and selected him in the future. What kind of treatment would he have faced from both us and the opposition fans. Better to get rid of him, we have done the same to far better players. Roberts and Butcher spring to mind.

No end to the utter ****wittery and complete wallopery on here at the moment mate.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:23
Bell is a far superior keeper to alexander, i dont seem to recall any scotland call up for alexander.

Plus bell will be on a quarter of the wages so its a no brainer.
what about when he lifted trophy whilst playing for scotland?
and with bell on 6k how does that equate to a quater of what alexander is on?
and in no chance in hell is he far superior what a load of nonsense

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:25
Sandaza got found out, and as we all know, if you are going to break the rules, don't get caught.

Formally, as I understand it, the Club dismissed Sandaza for a material breach of his contract. That is the Club's prerogative in such circumstances.
Everything else is, really, an irrelevance.

found out in a illegal manner?

Ozbarcode
04-04-2013, 11:26
or maybe they are sick of underhand tactics used to treat people in a disgusting manner?
is sandaza first player ever to discuss a move even though under contract?
makes it even worse that it was an absolute loonball celtic fan that set it up with a procedure that is illegal and even heard some on here saying it was a setup with directors from our board which a more of a serious matter in my eyes than what sandaza did.

The only underhand tactics used in this whole sorry episode were from Sandaza. It's on tape and he doesn't deny it so it is probably the first time ever that a club has concrete evidence of a deliberate breach of contract. No-one put words in Sandazas mouth. He fecked up and has paid the price.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that people from inside our club were involved although I jokingly commented earlier in this thread that it wouldn't surprise me if someone did try to pin the blame on Green such is the desire to bash the guy for everything at the moment! :blink:

bearmind
04-04-2013, 11:29
I agree that Sandaza has 'not set the heather on fire' with his performances and I was hoping that he would be moved before next season anyway.

However, is anyone else not dismayed that this whole affair was instigated by some rabid Celtic supporting sociopath who is given much local radio air-time to spout erroneous anti Rangers statements? And I don't buy into the, 'He done us a favour theory'. Yes, Sandaza should not have been chasing the money during this conversation.

I am also uneasy about it because I think Green has given every rabid Celtic supporting sociopath carte-blanche to deceive Rangers players. What if it had been a Striker who was hammering in the goals for us and was a mainstay of the team who was caught out? This applies to future players as well.

I posted this on another thread but I think it is more appropriate here.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:29
Before Lee's injury he was banging the goals in, and playing well, he has since moved back to try and steady the defence.

Alexander has been a great servant but perhaps it's time to bring someone younger in.

maybe he was moved back because his ankle is totally goosed?

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:31
The only underhand tactics used in this whole sorry episode were from Sandaza. It's on tape and he doesn't deny it so it is probably the first time ever that a club has concrete evidence of a deliberate breach of contract. No-one put words in Sandazas mouth. He fecked up and has paid the price.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that people from inside our club were involved although I jokingly commented earlier in this thread that it wouldn't surprise me if someone did try to pin the blame on Green such is the desire to bash the guy for everything at the moment! :blink:

its been in a few threads about brian stockbridge playing games

Sir Duncan Ferguson
04-04-2013, 11:33
maybe he was moved back because his ankle is totally goosed?

Out of a possible 221 League games, McCulloch has only played in 138 because of injury and suspension. That's nearly 40% of games he's been absent from over six years.

Forgetting all the other palaver surrounding this, I find it incredible he gets a two year deal but Alexander doesn't.

Crisps
04-04-2013, 11:35
I hate that players play the sympathy act in the media yet forget to mention that they earn more in a month than most people do in a year.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:35
I agree that Sandaza has 'not set the heather on fire' with his performances and I was hoping that he would be moved before next season anyway.

However, is anyone else not dismayed that this whole affair was instigated by some rabid Celtic supporting sociopath who is given much local radio air-time to spout erroneous anti Rangers statements? And I don't buy into the, 'He done us a favour theory'. Yes, Sandaza should not have been chasing the money during this conversation.

I am also uneasy about it because I think Green has given every rabid Celtic supporting sociopath carte-blanche to deceive Rangers players. What if it had been a Striker who was hammering in the goals for us and was a mainstay of the team who was caught out? This applies to future players as well.
I posted this on another thread but I think it is more appropriate here. absolute 100% spot on mate bad days when we have to rely on an absolute hater of our club to get rid of a player that came to play for us at our lowest when the 'RANGERS MEN' ran

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:37
Out of a possible 221 League games, McCulloch has only played in 138 because of injury and suspension. That's nearly 40% of games he's been absent from over six years.

Forgetting all the other palaver surrounding this, I find it incredible he gets a two year deal but Alexander doesn't.

i agree with you mate, am just saying ive heard that is reason that hes been shunted back.

PSVRANGER
04-04-2013, 11:41
He deserved the sack.

Usual Green haters jumping on the bandwagon. If it was brushed under the carpet am sure the same people would be giving Green pelters.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 11:52
He deserved the sack.

Usual Green haters jumping on the bandwagon. If it was brushed under the carpet am sure the same people would be giving Green pelters.

im not a green hater but a smell a rat,
sandaza shocking season but celtic loonball fan gets his number sets him up boom DISMISSED
kevin kyle(injury prone for years) talks about medical staff in paper over shoddy treatment them pip yates DISMISSED
papers full of storys of shoddy signings then murray suspended pending an investigation, neil murray DISMISSED
then absolutely shaft alexander and leave him no option but to leave and also all the malcolm murray stuff there is something going on which isnt right.

Grant K
04-04-2013, 12:03
im not a green hater but a smell a rat,
sandaza shocking season but celtic loonball fan gets his number sets him up boom DISMISSED
kevin kyle(injury prone for years) talks about medical staff in paper over shoddy treatment them pip yates DISMISSED
papers full of storys of shoddy signings then murray suspended pending an investigation, neil murray DISMISSED
then absolutely shaft alexander and leave him no option but to leave and also all the malcolm murray stuff there is something going on which isnt right.

Correct me if I'm wrong,

Yates, left the club, don't remember him being dismissed!

Murray, left the club, don't remember him being dismissed!

Sandaza, broke his contract and his duty of care to the club. Due process was followed and after an investigation during which time he was represented, he was dismissed.

Something is going on, you are right. New owners, new ethos. The one thing I do like is that if you enter into a well paid contract with us you are expected to live up to it. Now isn't this a radical suggestion!

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:14
Correct me if I'm wrong,

Yates, left the club, don't remember him being dismissed!

Murray, left the club, don't remember him being dismissed!

Sandaza, broke his contract and his duty of care to the club. Due process was followed and after an investigation during which time he was represented, he was dismissed.

Something is going on, you are right. New owners, new ethos. The one thing I do like is that if you enter into a well paid contract with us you are expected to live up to it. Now isn't this a radical suggestion!

maybe a used wrong choice of words there sorry what other way can a put it, politely asked to leave with a payoff with a gagging clause?

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:19
maybe a used wrong choice of words there sorry what other way can a put it, politely asked to leave with a payoff with a gagging clause?

People seem to act as if this is some kind of sinister or unusual thing in order to paint up dodgy dealings.

Confidentiality clauses upon termination of employment are fairly standard across the board. I had to sign one when made redundant a few years ago.

It doesn't mean anything.

Being paid a compensation package of whatever may or may not have been paid could also suit both parties to just get on with the process and avoid lengthy or difficult appeals and battles going forward.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:27
People seem to act as if this is some kind of sinister or unusual thing in order to paint up dodgy dealings.

Confidentiality clauses upon termination of employment are fairly standard across the board. I had to sign one when made redundant a few years ago.

It doesn't mean anything.

Being paid a compensation package of whatever may or may not have been paid could also suit both parties to just get on with the process and avoid lengthy or difficult appeals and battles going forward.

well if there is something going on mate we as fans should know about it after all the goings on hushed up behind the scenes over past year or so a think a lot are on there guards out of fear of what the **** is coming next.

Barca Bear
04-04-2013, 12:30
the football world is different from other employment. players are worth transfer money, where you and i aren't.
sandazza broke a rule and has been sacked (appeal to sfl pending).
unfair dismissal case pending.
if he was worth anything to the club, would he have been sacked?
that really is the discussion on here.
imo, had that been one of our top players from the title winning team, the answer would be no. a two week wages fine, tops.
sandazza, worth nothing, sacked.
simple really, thats how football works.
you dont sack a worthwhile comodity.

JohnK1972
04-04-2013, 12:31
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

get a grip aggie and calm yourself down. :confused:

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:32
well if there is something going on mate we as fans should know about it after all the goings on hushed up behind the scenes over past year or so a think a lot are on there guards out of fear of what the **** is coming next.

We have absolutely no right to know about the details of his disciplinary process or the sums paid to terminate his contract.

Despite what fans seem to think, there are still boundaries as to exactly how much information we are entitled to in these things.

The guy discussed a move away from the club and details of his contract without permission, whether he thought he was talking to a genuine agent or not is irrelevant. He was deemed by the club to have breached his terms of employment and his services have been terminated.

If he chooses to appeal, we will see what the outcome is.

Otherwise, there's nothing more we really need to know in terms of detail and there's nothing we have a right to know in that sense either.

All the detail we need is there in the public domain now. He's no longer a Rangers player having breached his contract.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:37
We have absolutely no right to know about the details of his disciplinary process or the sums paid to terminate his contract.

Despite what fans seem to think, there are still boundaries as to exactly how much information we are entitled to in these things.

The guy discussed a move away from the club and details of his contract without permission, whether he thought he was talking to a genuine agent or not is irrelevant. He was deemed by the club to have breached his terms of employment and his services have been terminated.

If he chooses to appeal, we will see what the outcome is.

Otherwise, there's nothing more we really need to know in terms of detail and there's nothing we have a right to know in that sense either.

All the detail we need is there in the public domain now. He's no longer a Rangers player having breached his contract.

well if stories are true that he was setup by someone within our group of directors that to me is absolutely disgusting and in no way to treat someone.
would you be happy if someone done that to you in your line of work?

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 12:38
well if stories are true that he was setup by someone within our group of directors that to me is absolutely disgusting and in no way to treat someone.
would you be happy if someone done that to you in your line of work?

The first five words of that post say it all... and the second word sums the tone of this thread up.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:39
the football world is different from other employment. players are worth transfer money, where you and i aren't.
sandazza broke a rule and has been sacked (appeal to sfl pending).
unfair dismissal case pending.
if he was worth anything to the club, would he have been sacked?
that really is the discussion on here.
imo, had that been one of our top players from the title winning team, the answer would be no. a two week wages fine, tops.
sandazza, worth nothing, sacked.
simple really, thats how football works.
you dont sack a worthwhile comodity.

With respect, that's nothing but empty speculation.

We don't know if he would've been treated differently or not had he been playing well and banging goals in.

I think if there's any suspect reason for the dismissal it is related to him being a higher earner, as much as a poor player, so maybe they'd still want him off the wage-bill - but again, that's nothing but guesswork and speculation.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:40
well if stories are true that he was setup by someone within our group of directors that to me is absolutely disgusting and in no way to treat someone.
would you be happy if someone done that to you in your line of work?

Are you basing your opinions on that?

A completely wild and unsubstantiated conspiracy theory?

That Mad Tommy was actually acting on behalf of the board?.....

logielynn
04-04-2013, 12:40
if green starts messing with the supporters heads he could be playing to a half full stadium,we the supporters have been taken for mugs here, mr green be honest with us or we dont buy your tickets . SIMPLE . i do not advocate for fans not to buy tickets i want our club back to where we belong, but im not been taken for a mug any more mr green.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:44
if green starts messing with the supporters heads he could be playing to a half full stadium,we the supporters have been taken for mugs here, mr green be honest with us or we dont buy your tickets . SIMPLE . i do not advocate for fans not to buy tickets i want our club back to where we belong, but im not been taken for a mug any more mr green.

Likewise, many will argue that if he keeps throwing money at Ally for a load of dud signings and shite football they won't renew.

There's two sides to this.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:45
Are you basing your opinions on that?

A completely wild and unsubstantiated conspiracy theory?

That Mad Tommy was actually acting on behalf of the board?.....

not basing my opinions on it just think its weird 3 stories appear in paper 3 gone then all the stuff with malcom murray.
and only time will tell if he was or wasnt.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:47
Likewise, many will argue that if he keeps throwing money at Ally for a load of dud signings and shite football they won't renew.

There's two sides to this.

yes theres two sides so is it allys chief scout takes all the blame yet will be used as a consultant?

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:48
not basing my opinions on it just think its weird 3 stories appear in paper 3 gone then all the stuff with malcom murray.
and only time will tell if he was or wasnt.

:D

Brilliant! Love this one... Mad Tommy, undercover agent for Green....

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:50
yes theres two sides so is it allys chief scout takes all the blame yet will be used as a consultant?

... what are you talking about?

In what way does Murray take all the blame?

There was an investigation into irregularities and an outcome that he has apparently agreed to.. do you think if he was that unhappy with what happened, he'd be happy to be a 'consultant'?

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:50
:D

Brilliant! Love this one... Mad Tommy, undercover agent for Green....

where did a say green??
there was stuff on here about stockbridge

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:53
where did a say green??
there was stuff on here about stockbridge

You're fishing, right? :D

I mean... you have to be....

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:54
... what are you talking about?

In what way does Murray take all the blame?

There was an investigation into irregularities and an outcome that he has apparently agreed to.. do you think if he was that unhappy with what happened, he'd be happy to be a 'consultant'?

so what was the outcome of these serious allegations or do fans not have to know?
the whole lot of this stinks to the high heavens

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 12:56
so what was the outcome of these serious allegations or do fans not have to know?
the whole lot of this stinks to the high heavens

The outcome was that he was let go, but will still act as a consultant.... but you know that already....

Yeah, it's not the best the way it's been handled, but that doesn't mean it's a fcking conspiracy featuring Mad Tommy.. :D I mean, FFS....

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 12:56
so what was the outcome of these serious allegations or do fans not have to know?
the whole lot of this stinks to the high heavens

If Sandaza has been dismissed illegally we'll soon know about it. If we don't, we can only assume he had no grounds to contest the dismissal and was indeed in breach of the terms of his contract.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 12:57
You're fishing, right? :D

I mean... you have to be....

not fishing in the slightest feel free to search the board ;)

dougieb
04-04-2013, 12:57
Its called business - something footballers and fans are unwilling to accept too often.

If you have a high performer who mucks up then you are likely to issue formal warning or bollocking to. If you have someone who is not performing, shirking responsibility, absence at drop of a hat and you get a circumstance where gross misconduct as defined by contract or business policies apply then on majy occasions you grab it quickly and move on.

Nothing sinister, just strong (and ruthless) management

marlborough1650
04-04-2013, 12:59
found out in a illegal manner?

He got caught, and that is the base line. I don't think that the prankster's actions were, strictly speaking, "illegal", although Sandaza may have recourse to civil law (and I wish him well in that enterprise).

As for "Mad Tommy, the taxi driver" (or whatever his name is) colluding with the Club or its Director(s) , I feel that he would have got considerably more (ahem) mileage out of exposing a conspiracy by the Club against one of its players.

Dunantblue
04-04-2013, 13:01
He got caught, and that is the base line. I don't think that the prankster's actions were, strictly speaking, "illegal", although Sandaza may have recourse to civil law (and I wish him well in that enterprise).

As for "Mad Tommy, the taxi driver" (or whatever his name is) colluding with the Club or its Director(s) , I feel that he would have got considerably more (ahem) mileage out of exposing a conspiracy by the Club against one of its players.

Spot on with that last point mate.

These conspiracy theories redefine lame brained.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 13:01
The outcome was that he was let go, but will still act as a consultant.... but you know that already....

Yeah, it's not the best the way it's been handled, but that doesn't mean it's a fcking conspiracy featuring Mad Tommy.. :D I mean, FFS....

so we have a full time scout but we will suspend him then he will conveniently leave and work as a consultant that makes total sense.
and in no way did a say it was conspiract with the loonball over murray there was a thread on here saying stockbridge had set up sandaza and was asked about doing the same to black and he commented 'could be tempted' these allegations were put to rangers and nobody commented on it.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 13:02
not fishing in the slightest feel free to search the board ;)

Search the board for what? i don't need to search the board to know that if anyone posted a suggestion that Mad Tommy was acting on behalf of the board or any of its members it's a laughable pile of shite. :D

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 13:05
He got caught, and that is the base line. I don't think that the prankster's actions were, strictly speaking, "illegal", although Sandaza may have recourse to civil law (and I wish him well in that enterprise).

As for "Mad Tommy, the taxi driver" (or whatever his name is) colluding with the Club or its Director(s) , I feel that he would have got considerably more (ahem) mileage out of exposing a conspiracy by the Club against one of its players.

it is illegal to record a conversation then put it in the public domain

craigie
04-04-2013, 13:06
well if stories are true that he was setup by someone within our group of directors that to me is absolutely disgusting and in no way to treat someone.
would you be happy if someone done that to you in your line of work?

How quiet would this board be without two little letters.


I've heard a lot of outlandish theories on this board but this could be the cherry on the icing.



25/10

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 13:07
Search the board for what? i don't need to search the board to know that if anyone posted a suggestion that Mad Tommy was acting on behalf of the board or any of its members it's a laughable pile of shite. :D

well hope it is but whole thing stinks to high heavens.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 13:09
so we have a full time scout but we will suspend him then he will conveniently leave and work as a consultant that makes total sense.
and in no way did a say it was conspiract with the loonball over murray there was a thread on here saying stockbridge had set up sandaza and was asked about doing the same to black and he commented 'could be tempted' these allegations were put to rangers and nobody commented on it.

We had a full-time scout whose conduct was called into question and his employment terminated, but with a caveat that he may provide consultancy in future. It's not that bizarre unless you pop a tin-foil hat on first...

Haha! I think whether you think he was involved with all or even part of the overall situation... you're needing to take some time away from the glue...

kirdy
04-04-2013, 13:13
if Sandaza whored himself to someone pretending to be an agent, he will have broke his contract, therefore deserves everything coming his way.

Think if that was a real agent and agent was offering x more than his deal with is he would have slapped in a transfer request instantly and we rejected his request, in my view he would have downed tools to get his move, he does seem the sort after all

Bestie-Bear
04-04-2013, 13:37
When was Sandaza put on the transfer list?

Who says we wanted rid anyway?

Sandaza was in clear breach of contract and he got the heave-ho. Green is innocent in this. Sandaza was a traitor.



Correct. The thread should be ended.

In relation to past players having done much worse and got away with it?? If you did similar at your own work would it be tolerated? No it certainly wouldn't and it shouldn't at Rangers either. well done Green for dealing with this situation in this way.

WBB, nothing at you btw saved putting up another post.;)

marlborough1650
04-04-2013, 13:40
it is illegal to record a conversation then put it in the public domain

Not necessarily, if you have the other party's consent, or, say, if it can be held to be in the public interest......It is a bit of a grey area, it seems.

Ultimately I have little sympathy for Sandaza:
-he was stupid to reveal and discuss such matters in a telephone conversation with somebody whom he clearly did not know;
-he asked the prankster to keep matters on the qt, indicating that he knew he was acting with, at best, impropriety.

bearmind
04-04-2013, 15:04
All this still doesn't address the problem that as a consequence of the Sandaza affair we have given every rabid Celtic supporting sociopath with a mobile phone and some credit carte-blanche to harass and deceive our players. It seems highly possible that someone, somewhere has access to private phone numbers and is willing to pass them on. It may not be the last.

I would have thought by now that CG or the club would have issued a statement to the effect that the Sandaza investigation would be extended to investigate how Rangers player(s) private number(s) found their way into the public domain.

Sandyhills Blue
04-04-2013, 15:06
Green has seen an open goal for getting rid of a player who nobody would take off our hands. We would need to do a Bain special and give him a big pay off to get rid. As for Alexander we have a younger replacement on less money to come in of course we aren't going to give him the same deal that was in offer last year.

And yet people would mump and moan about Bain giving duds huge pay-offs at a time when we were hardly spending a penny on transfer fees. I think Green has used this situation to Rangers advantage and played a blinder here.

thanks sdow
04-04-2013, 15:10
All this still doesn't address the problem that as a consequence of the Sandaza affair we have given every rabid Celtic supporting sociopath with a mobile phone and some credit carte-blanche to harass and deceive our players. It seems highly possible that someone, somewhere has access to private phone numbers and is willing to pass them on. It may not be the last.


I would have thought by now that CG or the club would have issued a statement to the effect that the Sandaza investigation would be extended to investigate how Rangers player(s) private number(s) found their way into the public domain.

exactly mate this is what is worrying, charles green is not scared of a statement and with accusations being made against directors and seemingly club being asked about them and not commenting this doesnt add up.

Draag
04-04-2013, 15:18
How would CG investigate the leaking of players' phone numbers? It is not a criminal offence.

I am sure all the players would now realise the consequences if they talk to people they do not know on the phone.

Business is business - we are rid of a dud by his own doing.

bluenose1979
04-04-2013, 15:24
All this still doesn't address the problem that as a consequence of the Sandaza affair we have given every rabid Celtic supporting sociopath with a mobile phone and some credit carte-blanche to harass and deceive our players. It seems highly possible that someone, somewhere has access to private phone numbers and is willing to pass them on. It may not be the last.

I would have thought by now that CG or the club would have issued a statement to the effect that the Sandaza investigation would be extended to investigate how Rangers player(s) private number(s) found their way into the public domain.

What has Sandaza or any other player's phone numbers and their availability got to do with Green?

Its the player's own personal number - if he wants it investigated, it's not our CEO's job to do so.

davidab157
04-04-2013, 15:46
The way some are acting on this forum today, you'd think we don't need to cut costs.

scopo
04-04-2013, 16:01
Sandaza sacked, really? Now think what you want of his ability as a centre forward or the service he has or hasn't given but did he really deserve to have his contract terminated? Did he hell, players have done far worse things and been fined etc so if its cost cutting then say so. Alexander clearly wants to stay although some debate about money and contract length plus Bell coming in so don't treat us like kids, give us the facts about why and if its financial savings then tells us as its our club and don't ever forget it Mr Green.:mad:

You jest surely??? He was sacked because he insisted on going behind the board's backs trying to manoeuvre a move away which is against the rules.....break the rules your arse is oot the door.......simples.