mortonjag Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Courage and determination should not be confused with pig headedness. Sheep Lips - have you noticed our goal difference? It's the only league we're topping! For 2 - against 14 and you 'ain't quitting' Will you be for quitting when its for 4 - against 28? You are incompetent-you couldn't manage a 'piss up in a brewery'. Incompetence is a LEGITIMATE reason for firing an employee. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then they pretend to befriend you, then you win! YER BARD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJCTON Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Courage and determination should not be confused with pig headedness. Sheep Lips have you noticed our goal difference? It's the only league we're topping! For 2 - against 14 and you 'ain't quitting' Will you be for quitting when its for 4 - against 28? You are incompetent-you couldn't manage a 'piss up in a brewery'. Incompetence is a LEGITIMATE reason for firing an employee. "I'm not a quitter" is that code for give me the dough and i shall go. GTF IRONS I have no compunction in saying that if some chap starts throwing grenades or starts using pistols, we shall kill him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemmington Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Looks as though he is not gonna quit coz of the money he would loss....Get him out now,give him his money,he aint gonna turn us around....In fact tell him too turn himself around and get tae f*ck. Let's get it right 1st time in League 1.No excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colkitto Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Irons also said "It's the same old story. Ultimately I'll take all the stick but the players have to take some responsibility."They aren't doing that but I'll keep trying to make this work. "It's easy to quit but I'll stand up and take the flak." He is right in saying he will have to take the stick, if we get beat next week I can see it turning nasty and venemous. It creates a horrible atmosphere at Cappielow. Many fans will stay away rather than witness a hate filled atmosphere. One thing Irons is right on is his comments regarding the players. They do have to take responsibilty for performances on the park. You can argue about tactics and formations, but ultimitely players peformances are down to the players themselves. We have too many under-achievers on big wages here at Cappielow. There are no excuses for some of the performances we have had to endure this season. Irons has made mistakes this season in tactics and formations. His close season has also been a disaster. I know his hands are tied to a big extent, but some of his signings have been baffling. Why was McGregor signed when we really didn't need another defender ? Why did he sign Monti ? Why did he bring in another midfielder when we are crying out for a wide man ? Why did he resign Grady when he failed to impress towards the end of last season ? Why with the depleted squad that we currently have, has he allowed Russell to go out on loan ? Irons won't turn it around this time, that's total fantasy. If he hasn't gone this week then he surely is one defeat away from the sack. And if that's not the case then someone really needs to take Dougie aside and have a quiet word. Don't blame me I voted Yes!!!! - We tried to tell you !!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Why with the depleted squad that we currently have, has he allowed Russell to go out on loan ? Agree with that point entirely. Russell may not be the best finisher but he can beat a man and is IMHO a decent winger. Yesterday we could have done with him. Although with Peter missing, it maybe wouldn't have made much difference. If Airdrie win at Cappielow next week, I can see there being a lynch mob in Sinclair Street at quarter to five. I hope it doesn't come to that because I reckon that the large number of managers we have had over the last 10 years suggests that the core problems may lie elsewhere. I think the fact that funds were not made available to sign a top notch striker indicates that there is a financila squeeze on at Morton for some reason. Too much wasted on duds in the past and now the cupboard is bare. "Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 sport section in news o the screws " we need to work hard to improve things, but nothing seems to be going our way." hopefully they'll be one thing going his way and thats a bus to the dumfries dole office. Remember The Alamo --- MORTON 5 THE MIDDEN BUT 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewTon Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/sport-news/sco...78057-21687266/ It's now seven defeats in eight games for Morton and boss Davie Irons said: "It's the same old story. Ultimately I'll take all the stick but the players have to take some responsibility. "They aren't doing that but I'll keep trying to make this work. "It's easy to quit but I'll stand up and take the flak." If it's that easy, bloody well do it, mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malkyb Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Agree with that point entirely. Russell may not be the best finisher but he can beat a man and is IMHO a decent winger. Yesterday we could have done with him. Although with Peter missing, it maybe wouldn't have made much difference. If Airdrie win at Cappielow next week, I can see there being a lynch mob in Sinclair Street at quarter to five. I hope it doesn't come to that because I reckon that the large number of managers we have had over the last 10 years suggests that the core problems may lie elsewhere. I think the fact that funds were not made available to sign a top notch striker indicates that there is a financila squeeze on at Morton for some reason. Too much wasted on duds in the past and now the cupboard is bare. An excellent post! Douglas Rae will, hopefully, be making enquiries to appoint his 6th managerial appointment since acquiring ownership of Greenock Morton Football Club. However, the lack of stability at Morton is disturbing with manager after manager being sacrificed and deemed a failure for the same mistakes and concerns. But, if we look to the hierarchy at Cappielow the common denominator is Douglas Rae who must accept responsibility for poor managerial appointments and the costs attached with removing them from their position. Add to that the money ‘misspent’ and ‘mismanagement’ of ‘talent’ including Chris Templeman, Bobby Linn, Ian Russell, Kieran McAnespie and Jamie Stevenson to name but a few. It would appear plausible to assume that a combination of poor managerial appointments, and the payoffs attached, in addition to money spend on average players with to financial return if now coming back to haunt us! Wonder what ever happened to that £150,000 for Paul McGowan…could be doing with that now!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Aitken's Love Child Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 It's not a question of Irons quitting, it's a matter of admitting that he can't take us any further, and we're only going to go backwards with him in charge. I still think that we're in a better position now than we were when he took over, and by that I don't mean league position. We would be a decent proposition for another manager to take over, and I think we have the players to turn it around, but it appears to everyone that those players have just stopped playing for Irons, and when that happens, there is only going to be one winner I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie McArthur Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 An excellent post! Douglas Rae will, hopefully, be making enquiries to appoint his 6th managerial appointment since acquiring ownership of Greenock Morton Football Club. However, the lack of stability at Morton is disturbing with manager after manager being sacrificed and deemed a failure for the same mistakes and concerns. But, if we look to the hierarchy at Cappielow the common denominator is Douglas Rae who must accept responsibility for poor managerial appointments and the costs attached with removing them from their position. Add to that the money ‘misspent’ and ‘mismanagement’ of ‘talent’ including Chris Templeman, Bobby Linn, Ian Russell, Kieran McAnespie and Jamie Stevenson to name but a few. It would appear plausible to assume that a combination of poor managerial appointments, and the payoffs attached, in addition to money spend on average players with to financial return if now coming back to haunt us! Wonder what ever happened to that £150,000 for Paul McGowan…could be doing with that now!!! I've said it loads of times and I'll say it again. I do not like Rae. I've met him a few times and didn't like him at all. So what? He'd probably have as low an opinion of me if he knew who I was. The point is Rae is bankrolling Morton and without him Morton would not exist. I keep reading on here about how Rae should sack Irons and we should have signed this player or that player and I wonder which planet people are on. There is NO MONEY people and you'd better get used to it. If Rae sacks The Snake he's using his own cash and that's not good. MARTY OUT!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRVMP Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Look. Irons would be a fool to quit. He would be surrendering nine months or so of income that he has coming to him. Probably 80% of us would do the same as him in this situation, rising to 99% of those who have mortgages and families. So he's under no obligation to quit at all. There is one man who can make the difference here, and that's the chairman. Let's hope that by this time tomorrow he's done the right thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie Aitken's Love Child Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Look. Irons would be a fool to quit. He would be surrendering nine months or so of income that he has coming to him. Probably 80% of us would do the same as him in this situation, rising to 99% of those who have mortgages and families. So he's under no obligation to quit at all. There is one man who can make the difference here, and that's the chairman. Let's hope that by this time tomorrow he's done the right thing. When McInally 'resigned' he still got a pay-off, and I remember reading Dougie's programme notes afterwards and he said that it's like that at all clubs. I don't think we're going to get off with paying nothing regardless of him being sacked or walking out, so why wait. If it's going to cost the club 1,000 or so fans at a home game then surely that's worth sacking him now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortonjag Posted September 20, 2009 Author Share Posted September 20, 2009 Look. Irons would be a fool to quit. He would be surrendering nine months or so of income that he has coming to him. Probably 80% of us would do the same as him in this situation, rising to 99% of those who have mortgages and families. So he's under no obligation to quit at all. There is one man who can make the difference here, and that's the chairman. Let's hope that by this time tomorrow he's done the right thing. You've seen the contract? First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then they pretend to befriend you, then you win! YER BARD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Naitch Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 You've seen the contract? Have you? "To be the man, you gotta beat the man" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puggsy_ton Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Have you? He has...it expired about 4 months ago according to the one he checked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRVMP Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 You've seen the contract? Sorry, my mistake - he was sacked in June and he's working pro bono now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spencey Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 At the risk of teaching my granny how to suck eggs.....when an employer wants rid of an employee and knows that just sacking him/her could lead to a claim to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal and/or a claim to a court for damages for breach of contract/wrongful dismissal, it's common practice to have a Compromise Agreement, by which a settlement figure is agreed and paid to compensate for the loss of employment. The Agreement is drawn up by the employer's lawyer and revised by the employee's lawyer and carries, amongst all the other clauses, a clause to protect the Agreement from future challenge, stating that before signing it, the employee has had advice from (name of lawyer) who is a qualified lawyer in (in this case Scotland) In exchange, the former employee signs away his/her right to make claims against the former emplyer for almost everything and anything under the sun. The figure paid is arrived at after each side have examined the terms of the particular contract,weighed up their risks and done their sums and a bit of haggling. As the sum is usually a lump sum paid within one financial year, it would therefore not be untrue to say "We did not pay (pick any former employee) up to (pick any date in the next or subsequent financial year)" even if the compensation figure were so big as to reflect what that person would have earned if they had remained in the job another year or more. I'm a newbie on this board, so apologies if I'm stating the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puggsy_ton Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 I'm a newbie on this board, so apologies if I'm stating the obvious. It shows...you are talking: 1 - With well-informed knowledge 2 - With no real 'agenda' behind what you are saying 3 - Sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie McArthur Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 At the risk of teaching my granny how to suck eggs.....when an employer wants rid of an employee and knows that just sacking him/her could lead to a claim to an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal and/or a claim to a court for damages for breach of contract/wrongful dismissal, it's common practice to have a Compromise Agreement, by which a settlement figure is agreed and paid to compensate for the loss of employment. The Agreement is drawn up by the employer's lawyer and revised by the employee's lawyer and carries, amongst all the other clauses, a clause to protect the Agreement from future challenge, stating that before signing it, the employee has had advice from (name of lawyer) who is a qualified lawyer in (in this case Scotland) In exchange, the former employee signs away his/her right to make claims against the former emplyer for almost everything and anything under the sun. The figure paid is arrived at after each side have examined the terms of the particular contract,weighed up their risks and done their sums and a bit of haggling. As the sum is usually a lump sum paid within one financial year, it would therefore not be untrue to say "We did not pay (pick any former employee) up to (pick any date in the next or subsequent financial year)" even if the compensation figure were so big as to reflect what that person would have earned if they had remained in the job another year or more. I'm a newbie on this board, so apologies if I'm stating the obvious. Good post. You're not stating the obvious as most of the muppets on here can barely read never mind grasp employment law. A quick swatch at the gov.uk site will tell you under what circumstances you can be sacked and as far as I know The Snake doesn't tick any of the boxes. MARTY OUT!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainMorton Posted September 20, 2009 Share Posted September 20, 2009 Surely though if Dougie were to sack DI and DC, they can't take him to a tribunal for unfair dismissal cos they aren't doing what they are being paid to do to the best of their abilities?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.bf8ff4187ec871eb7009922bdb6487f6.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.