The McCulloch Clause: has it been removed?

14
78

Stuart McCall has warned Lee
McCulloch he is no longer untouchable. Following his poor red card on Sunday,
pressure has mounted on Rangers’ captain, given his perceived immunity to being
dropped.
As broken here, it is understood
from a source close to Ibrox that McCulloch has a clause in his contract
guaranteeing selection if available, injury or suspension permitting.

However it was also understood
that some contracts drafted up by previous board incumbents are not being
viewed with the gravitas they previously held, and that one of the many actions
of the new board is to alter stipulations and redraft certain aspects of those
contracts. Or at least, ‘bend the rules’ a little for the good of the Club.
And one such stipulation is the
aforementioned ‘McCulloch Clause’, and McCall may just have let it slip that
the clause has now been renegotiated by the board and Rangers’ skipper is now as
vulnerable to being ditched as anyone.
McCall said:
“He has got to take his punishment and
move on now. He has got a two-game ban – whether he gets back in the team
thereafter we will see. Since I’ve been at the club he has done fine. He’s been
good in the dressing room and his performances have been good. If whoever comes
in over the next two games does really well, then he might not get back in. He’s
not undroppable, no, but at this moment in time with the games we have played
he has done nothing to merit being dropped.”
Admittedly the final part could
equally imply the clause remains intact, but a great deal of the rest suggests
the opposite.
McCall was very vague the first
time the question of a clause was asked, and rather than state McCulloch did not
have a clause, instead he generally espoused the importance of ‘the team
captain’ in football as a whole as opposed to Rangers’ captain Lee McCulloch.
This time is more explicit and
direct.
We will see in three matches’
time whether the ‘McCulloch Clause’ really does still exist.

14 COMMENTS

  1. I think its a lot of Mince !……no player is ever immune too being dropped ? no body would or could include that in a contract and you would have to have been pretty gullible too believe it in the first place .==========SH+T .

  2. What are you talking about??? If it still exists? Theres no proof it ever existed in the first place.

  3. I don't believe for a second that such a clause existed.

    Pure speculation, supposition & hypothesis of the highest order. Something I've been shooting Tim's down for over the past 3 years.

    • Skansky, you are awesome but you know fine well that the source of thos fact has been 95% right on everything over the past three years and if he'd been listened to we woul be in much better shape than we are. In other words its you and your type who are most to blame and if you never learn we are just heading in a straight line from where we've come. Loyalty is great. Pigheadedness is stupid.

    • Skansky? Righto. Get a name up Timmy anonymous ya shitebag keyboard warrior.
      Bigot…..my type? Pigheadedness !

      Couldn't be further from the truth.

      Wooooooooooosssssshhhhhh….. Obsessed Timmy…..rumbled.

  4. If he plays again in 3 games time it still doesn't prove the clause exists, McCall says his performances have been good and that he is a good captain. Don't believe for a minute that there was such a clause anyway.

  5. Mcculloch should not play again for rangers ..I've said here on many occasions that he's finished ..thanks for staying jig and we won't forget your contributions to the club ….Time to move on to coaching now and always welcome back to ibrox for all you have done ….but not as a player your days are up……all the best jig

  6. put all this shit talk away for good and let get the club up where we should be, then the changes will happen watp.

  7. I am a Celtic supporter married to a Rangers-supporting lady. We have lived in Switzerland since 1979 and have two grown up daughters one of whom supports Celtic, the other Rangers. Up until Rangers' problems we had sometimes heated, but usually good natured banter. All that has changed now and no one says anything. This is the first time I've ever sent anything to a blog and I'm only doing so because of the anonymity. I don't know why I'm sending this. I know Rangers is a really proud organisation but I hope you publish this little effort just to show there are people on both sides of the unbridgeable chasm who regret greatly where you are and have best wishes that you can emerge successfully as soon as possible. Please don't think I'm a softy. I can assure you I'm not and will always shout my head off for my team especially when playing against you guys. Pax Vobiscum.

    • it will take time to fix this mess out,but we will be back very soon stronger and wiser,,all the best to you and your family.

    • PAX, so refreshing 2 hear my sentiment would be the same if the shoe was on the other foot, as I was in the same position when mc'cann saved Celtic.

  8. I came across your BLOGG couple of weeks ago and found a s lot of you writings very interesting reads..
    I own a RANGERS F/BOOK page and I also ADMIN one and try to source news for our beloved club from places I find are telling truths n not, shall we say " fabricate " a story just to sell more papers, magazines, more people on their webpage, blog etc etc etc…
    Anyway wen I read this story today, (Av now read it 3times..lol., and believe any such "CLAUSE" is there, (onv my opinion) but I shared the link to your story today on the page I own, and people that have commented so far are of the same mind…
    As I say, only came across your BLOGG couple of weeks ago and find some of your story's very interesting and I now check in to IBROX NOISE daily,..
    But todays story about this so called "CLAUSE" I had to share the link to your page about onto my facebook page to see the reaction it received…
    As I say I am not slating you, you have good story's n I find your BLOGG good n interesting, thanks…..

Comments are closed.