“The Released Eleven”; did they deserve notice?

Former Rangers captain and
stalwart Barry Ferguson has condemned Rangers for the Club’s methods in
handling the release of the out-of-contracters.

Ferguson believes they deserved more
professional respect than to find out their fates from the back pages, but is
he right?

This debate is one which is
springing up more and more now that Ian Black has joined Richard Foster and
Kris Boyd in publicly castigating how they were released, or, more to the
point, how they learned they would not receive new deals.

So let us look at all sides of
the argument and see who is right:

First is that of the players.
These are professionals who gave up superior levels of competition to join
Rangers. Kris Boyd gave up an excellent spell at Premiership side Kilmarnock,
Richard Foster sacrificed English Championship outfit Bristol
City and Ian Black said goodbye to
Hearts in Scotland’s
top flight. While wages clearly paid a big role in persuading them to join Ally
McCoist, they still did sacrifice a higher level of competition in order to
come to Govan. In Black’s case he came to the Third Division, in Foster’s case
League 1. If we are to praise Lee Wallace (and McCulloch, Little, and Alexander
et al) for remaining at Ibrox, do these others not also deserve credit for
coming?

Consequently, while they were not
exactly ‘servants’, they would argue that they deserved some sort of formal
advance notice that they were no longer required, purely out of courtesy, to
give them time to make arrangements for departures to new clubs.

Admittedly their gabbing to the
press to complain about their ultimate treatment did not exactly endear them to
many, but then again, without them doing that, how would fans know the truth?

Many point to the fact their
performances were diabolical, and they were not ‘deserving’ of such courtesy as
to be informed in advance, and that they gave so little on a playing front that
they are lucky they were not hung, never mind given respect.

However, Rangers (and many fans) would
argue their contracts were up, and the Club owed them absolutely nothing. It
was evident in the months leading up to the playoffs that none of those out of
contract would be earning a new playing deal (McCulloch’s alleged coaching
offer notwithstanding) so the lack of offer of one should have come as no
surprise.

Indeed, it is argued strongly
that that knowledge is half the
reason the playoff performances were so poor – with players like Mohsni,
Foster, McCulloch and Boyd knowing they would not be involved next season, how
exactly could any manager have motivated them to fight tooth and nail for the
Club?

So, not getting an offer was not
a shock.

But, this is where Ferguson’s argument holds
water: we are Rangers, and we are supposed to do things the Rangers Way. If players are being
released, it is the dignified approach to tell them in advance. Or, at the very
least, swiftly following the playoff exit.

For professionals to all find out
they had lost their jobs from the media, when the employer had the power to
inform them directly first, is not good.

Do not confuse this argument with
defence of their displays and wages, or condoning of their running to the press
to whine about how they were released; it is far from that. But at a base
level, these players should have been told they were not being offered new
deals, simply because that is the courteous and respectful way to do things.

Some might construe this entry as
an attack on the board; which is ironic as when I praise them, I get criticised
for being pro-board. But it is not –
it is just an appraisal of a valid issue, and for all the things the board is getting right, such as a brilliant
managerial appointment, and getting a couple of top defenders in quickly, this
is something they got wrong.

None of these players deserved
new deals, but they did deserve to be told so.