Jump to content

Gary Warren told he can leave


Glover

Recommended Posts

Every thread I seem to read has two individuals locked into a battle of one-up-manship with each other. They attack each other, and others,who dare to speak out against their view points and comments. Attacks come in the form of carefully cloaked and worded exchanges - with neither actually coming out of things particularly well. If said individuals put as much effort into supporting the club, not attacking each other, the board, the club, the players, other members etc then I would imagine that the club would be much better for it, and this forum would be much more bearable for all who wish to catch up on the latest coming and goings. Gents, may I suggest you meet up behind the bike sheds to resolve your petty squabbles and perhaps leave the forum to postive exchanges based around the good of the club and not the good of yourselves.

  • Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jockdoonsouth said:

Every thread I seem to read has two individuals locked into a battle of one-up-manship with each other. They attack each other, and others,who dare to speak out against their view points and comments. Attacks come in the form of carefully cloaked and worded exchanges - with neither actually coming out of things particularly well. If said individuals put as much effort into supporting the club, not attacking each other, the board, the club, the players, other members etc then I would imagine that the club would be much better for it, and this forum would be much more bearable for all who wish to catch up on the latest coming and goings. Gents, may I suggest you meet up behind the bike sheds to resolve your petty squabbles and perhaps leave the forum to postive exchanges based around the good of the club and not the good of yourselves.

More of this please. 

Let's be as  positive as we can to the team and each other. 

And if I can talk an angry spittle spouting EDL guy down it should be easy for two guys on the same team to find common ground. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

What seems to be going largely unremarked here is that many of the posts I am highlighting appear themselves to be personal in nature, in that they are consistently critical of just about every conceivable aspect of how the club is being run.

I therefore feel obliged to respond to this constant undermining of the club’s governance - which was quite sudden in onset - by placing it in context.

three things charles

1 - like it or not, CaleyD's criticism is of the club as a whole not individuals. There are individuals running the club, but he has not named any of them specifically and the club itself is not a person therefore criticism of it cannot be personal. Yours on the other hand is entirely personal in nature and in several cases crosses the lines we have in our rules. it cannot continue. Debate the topic, agree, disagree, but when it gets personal its done. You want to counter any claim that he makes about how badly he thinks things are running ... then do so with the other side of the coin if you see it that way .... 

2 - Also from our rules ... you seem to be getting offended on behalf of someone else? Posters here are a fairly intelligent bunch and will decide if they agree or disagree with CaleyD's posts. Some will agree with your oft-posted point of view and will dismiss his posts as those of a bitter ex-employee (a point he has corrected in response), whereas others with different experiences may agree with him. Thats for them to decide.  However it appears that it is only you who are getting personal about this. Others are debating the topic. 

3 - All of this is completely and utterly off topic and it is not the first thread where this has happened between you and CD. It is however the last one. 

 

5 hours ago, Charles Bannerman said:

You know, I've taken half an hour to reflect - by no means for the first time in recent months, but today through the medium of this individual thread - on where CTO seems to be going, in particular since relegation. The unfortunate conclusion is that it simply isn't the same vibrant and constructive medium that it was when I first joined in the early 2000s, and in particular the feeling that everybody was in this journey together seems to have gone. This isn't a sudden observation on my part, but more a "next step" in an ongoing process. Consequently, and this is a conclusion come to at considerable length, not just this morning, I think I'm going to give contributing to CTO a miss from now on. Quite frankly, it's lost its allure for me and I'm sure I can find some other means of engaging with ICTFC.

CTO goes wherever the opinions of the members take it. We dont sail a particular direction. Its not rocket science to think that after the pain of relegation that direction would be somewhat negative. If you do decide to give things a miss then that is up to you. I will miss the contributions, but i will not miss your significant role in the current lack of vibrance and constructive mindset that you talk about. 

 

4 hours ago, Downinthedumps said:

I don’t blame you for getting pi##ed of Charles. A lot of posters just want to sling mud at each other or slag of ITFC . Come back soon we need positive posting and less pessimism .

its the silly season. thats how it always goes. 3 months with nothing to talk about on-field and plenty of conspiracies and overly personal digs. >Look back to June/July of almost any season and you will see this kind of thing. then look at other teams' fora and you will see the same there too.    

 

4 hours ago, ferben1994 said:

That was emotional. 

See the funny thing about it is after reading a lot of football forums mainly of whoever we playing match day and also pie and bovril, this 1 is by far the tamest in regards to personal abuse. Obviously we don't want people personally insulting people with swear words and stuff but that is something that never happens here. 

It seems we have become a little over sensitive on here because most of it you will debate the same way with friends but you won't just say that's it am no your mate anymore cos you disagree. As far as the forum starting as a journey and has lost its allure were still going on a journey which has a very important phase coming up with 25 years to celebrate along with hopefully a promotion .

Yup. I have been on loads of football forums, including P&B, and we are most definitely the most polite. I make no apologies for that.  I do however get pissed off myself when some get oversensitive and pissed off on behalf of others ... that does rankle!

25 years of the club ... and 25 years of CTO - definitely something to celebrate next season.  

 

think I will leave the last word to Jockdoonsouth ......

1 hour ago, Jockdoonsouth said:

Every thread I seem to read has two individuals locked into a battle of one-up-manship with each other. They attack each other, and others,who dare to speak out against their view points and comments. Attacks come in the form of carefully cloaked and worded exchanges - with neither actually coming out of things particularly well. If said individuals put as much effort into supporting the club, not attacking each other, the board, the club, the players, other members etc then I would imagine that the club would be much better for it, and this forum would be much more bearable for all who wish to catch up on the latest coming and goings. Gents, may I suggest you meet up behind the bike sheds to resolve your petty squabbles and perhaps leave the forum to postive exchanges based around the good of the club and not the good of yourselves.

 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jockdoonsouth said:

Every thread I seem to read has two individuals locked into a battle of one-up-manship with each other. They attack each other, and others,who dare to speak out against their view points and comments. Attacks come in the form of carefully cloaked and worded exchanges - with neither actually coming out of things particularly well. If said individuals put as much effort into supporting the club, not attacking each other, the board, the club, the players, other members etc then I would imagine that the club would be much better for it, and this forum would be much more bearable for all who wish to catch up on the latest coming and goings. Gents, may I suggest you meet up behind the bike sheds to resolve your petty squabbles and perhaps leave the forum to postive exchanges based around the good of the club and not the good of yourselves.

Well said... It's true were all here for the good of our club and we all have one common aim, to see our team do well. As much as we all have differing opinions on certain aspects of the club we need to stick together and fight together not against each other otherwise what are we fighting for 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to get back on topic, Gary has been a great player for the club over six seasons. He was unlucky to miss two finals, but always a great inspiration, even when just a sub.

As I said before, I'm not surprised the club has made this proposal, but I think they are trying to treat him right: stating he remains captain whilst he is here is a big statement.

On the argument about the leadership off the park, I am not well placed to comment. 

The previous regime got us to two finals, win the Scottish Cup which will never be forgotten, achieved several top six finishes, got us into Europe, , appointed a rookie Manager, paid wages that were not sustainable if we got relegated and....we got relegated.

The current regime has to steady the ship and balance the books, to give a foundation for growth. Yes, it means tough decisions, some we will agree with and some we won't, but it I see too early to pass judgement. This is a key season for us and we will understand the ambitions of the Board better, 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Robert said:

Trying to get back on topic, Gary has been a great player for the club over six seasons. He was unlucky to miss two finals, but always a great inspiration, even when just a sub.

As I said before, I'm not surprised the club has made this proposal, but I think they are trying to treat him right: stating he remains captain whilst he is here is a big statement.

On the argument about the leadership off the park, I am not well placed to comment. 

The previous regime got us to two finals, win the Scottish Cup which will never be forgotten, achieved several top six finishes, got us into Europe, , appointed a rookie Manager, paid wages that were not sustainable if we got relegated and....we got relegated.

The current regime has to steady the ship and balance the books, to give a foundation for growth. Yes, it means tough decisions, some we will agree with and some we won't, but it I see too early to pass judgement. This is a key season for us and we will understand the ambitions of the Board better, 

Sounds about correct in pointing out where we are as a club.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that’s a fair summary Robert, it is a tough decision.

Carl was given a 3 year contract at the start of this year under this board which will take him to 35 and 2020.  It was pointed out at the time he is doing his coaching badges and does community work etc.  I wouldn’t expect in 2019 then for the same to happen to Carl.  

You mentioned the board Robert and that was something in other posts too.  Being negative about the club as a whole is definitely not a good thing.  Being critical of the board, any board, in so far as adopting a questioning approach to hold them accountable is not so unusual.  Others take this approach with players and perhaps it is a different style but questioning decisions shouldn’t be regarded as negative, nor should be the discussion of them.  I am very pro-player and perhaps more skeptical about boards, and that extends outwith the microcosm of football.

However, with a  settled team, a forward / attacking team of Austin and MacKay assisted by  Polworth and a lot of upheaval at 4 or 5 other clubs, I think we will be in playoff positions all season and a real shot at the title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few thoughts after reading this thread.

Firstly, it should be acknowledged that none of this is the fault of Gary Warren, a club stalwart for six years and club captain for the last three. In January 2016 (when Yogi was manager, in fact) he was offered a three and a half year contract on (presumably) very good terms, which apparently also contains an appearance fee. He is of course completely within his rights to stand his ground and demand the club honour it. None of us would do anything different in our own walks of life.

Even if Warren was willing to leave - because he wants to play regularly, for example - his options are limited somewhat. There is only one other full-time club within 100 miles, so if they aren't interested he either has to move elsewhere (either separating himself from his family or uprooting them) or go part-time (not that his options there are good either unless Elgin fancied him, especially since Brora aren't paying crazy money anymore).

And whilst he is a qualified teacher, i imagine he cannot just step back into that role overnight. He may be one of our highest paid players, but a lot of folk don't seem to realize that the wages of SPFL Premiership players (outside the top 5 clubs are so) are not exactly extortionate, especially given that anyone on much more than £1k/week then ends up on a higher tax band. His football career will not have set him up for life, and the contract he is currently on will be his last one of any significance as a professional footballer.

I also wonder whether, given he has passed his UEFA A licence, whether his intention was to follow Foran into the coaching setup and that was a reason behind being given such a contract. If that was the case, clearly that door is not open under Robbo.

That being said, he is on an onerous contract. Out of those left over from relegation, only he and Polworth (and Fon Williams of course) are still on a contract signed before the drop (Tremarco and McKay have signed new contracts since). And unfortunately his play has declined sharply in the last two seasons; he struggled badly in our relegation season and in the first half of 2017/18, though his form certainly improved in the run-in. McKay and Donaldson are ahead of him in the pecking order though, which means that if he is one of the highest paid players at the club he is not good value for money at all. Worse, his 'appearance fee' means that he costs us less if he sits on the bench or in the stand.

If it is true that we could get in three players for his wage - and it may well be - then it is a no-brainer for Robbo to try and punt him, because in such a tight league having those players could make a very significant difference to our promotion prospects. If even one of those three proves more of an asset than Warren is then it will have been worth it.

I do sympathise with the manager here - neither he nor the current board were involved with what looks with hindsight to be a terrible contract to give to a player who was already 31; you don't see teams like St. Johnstone offering more than two years at a time to their senior players, and for good reason. 

His comments to the press appear to be a crass attempt into shaming Warren into leaving by giving people the impression that he is a burden, and I am very uncomfortable with them; they are reminiscent of the way we treated David Raven a year ago. But clearly Robbo had already had the conversation privately with Warren at the end of the season and feels that Warren is not making sufficient effort to find a new club, so he has decided to force the issue.

What happens next? I have no idea. The nuclear option would be to freeze him out in preseason, but it would be a shame if it came to that. As stated above, Warren doesn't really have much in the way of alternatives other than standing his ground. It's difficult to see how this plays out in a way that suits everyone.

But it does appear that we will be weaker if Warren stays than if he goes.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very interesting and informative post hislopsoffsideagain.  Both Gary and Carl signed their contracts at 31, the former for 3 years and the latter for two.  They will both be 34 when they finish their contracts.  

Regardless of what wage it is, there is no chance he will get a two year deal, or a one year deal on noticeably better terms thus there is no rational reason to leave so he will stay, under a cloud, and reminisce during his seventh and last season for the club on the 220-odd appearances he made and maybe rue that he won't be able to move up from 6th to 4th in all-time appearances for the club because they wanted three new players or a CEO or whatever else the money was earmarked for.  

We should, by rights, be seeing Gary off at the end of the season, even as a sub in the final home game, or at the end of the game if it's close in a meaningful way.  Not sure how much feels that will have.  I disagree with the 'too sentimental/it's business' line.  Football is complete sentiment - emotion - as anyone in the ground can see (to varying degrees, granted).  If it's a business, our ROI is not in money, but emotion.  

Gary is no volunteer, he was paid for the work he did.  He still had work to do.  The only players above him in terms of appearances were which 5?  I cannot readily support the board and the manager over their issue with Gary.  Gary's wage, whatever we assume it is, was ok last season and thus not a major issue, else it would have been dealt with sooner.  It is a ruthless opportunistic gamble to cut costs based on a surplus of stock and short dates akin to a toffee yoghurt in the co-op.  

I can see why people support it, we have become content with austerity and conditioned to such practices, to see a service in pounds and pence saved, and believe that if we keep cutting costs we'll become successful, as if more negativity will turn into happiness.  As with the Council, as with schools, as with healthcare, the cuts are made on frontline services, but you'll always see funding for back-end positions.  Football at this level is much less a business and much more a public service.  Like schools, like hospitals, it's raison d'être is not to make money for shareholders but to provide a service.  I'm stretching now to compare Gary to a nurse, but better that than regard him as disposable, like the toffee yoghurt at 10pm.

  • Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but to me this IS a footballing decision and a very decent offer (given our current plight) which Gary can accept or otherwise. Potentially for Gary it could be an opportunity to earn more than he could in Sneck OR another consideration would be to stay and look at his future career options - What did he do at University ?

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A footballing decision, a decision based on maximising advantage in the game of football, it could be argued, would value and utilise Gary, our most experienced, longest serving player, captain and qualified coach to lead what is a very young team.  He is already quite the future coach apparently - UEFA A licence and qualified PE teacher ( knows something about educating young players).  A footballing decision would look at the dressing room, morale, harmony, stability, and leadership from having Gary there. How many times are we told about unity in football teams?  Unless Gary is a deeply dislikeable person and disruptive, in which case...

Not to mention he played more than 25 times last season and is also still a player in his own right, and the duo preferred are no less susceptible to injury or loss of form because of last season’s late run.

I would call it a business decision. A bird in the hand is worth three in the bush.  This is like the NHS bus - we dont know how the money saved will be actually used and whether it would even be a saving in a cost-benefit analysis.  

All the speculation of Gary leaving is moot anyway.  What  club is willing to give an ‘unwanted’ 34-year-old Scottish Championship defender a one year contract, a contract that would entice him away from his home for the last 7 years, a contract that would need to be significantly better than what he already possesses?  What would it take for any of us to leave our jobs, or earlier than our existing contract, and also move home too?  

There is no land of milk and honey for Gary except at ICT for the next year and it was wishful thinking on the club’s behalf to think so - I can see why these mystical ‘three young dynamic players’ would be a result, absolutely, but it was a business decision to forego inspiration, harmony, leadership and a player on the very, very remote chance a club will come in and take Gary and it was that trade-off I have issue with.  Had there been a club like Gretna trying to steamroll through the lower divisions - potentially, but there’s not.

 I think Carl should be worried if a young player in his position pops up soon.  Perhaps ‘legends’ will become a hushed word at ICT - don’t deserve legends if the end is to try and shaft them.  I don’t want a club fashioned in the Mr Burns mould, perhaps I’m just sentimental.

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Sorry but to me this IS a footballing decision and a very decent offer (given our current plight) which Gary can accept or otherwise. Potentially for Gary it could be an opportunity to earn more than he could in Sneck OR another consideration would be to stay and look at his future career options - What did he do at University ?

He is well within his rights to sit and see out his contract which is legally binding and was agreed by the club. He has no obligation to look for another club or walk away. This is going to be another embarrassment same as Raven last season who was cast out then brought back and OFW who was in and out like the hokey-cokey. For a club that is known to struggle with recruitment of established players or those experienced from elsewhere in Scotland doing such business in public will not go un-noticed.

Refresh is acceptable, as is removing  'deadwoood' and under-achievers but it all has to be done the right way. If the club want GW out then pay off his contract or reach a settlement mutually agreeable, otherwise have the discussions behind closed doors and keep it that way - with those who are brave enough to make these calls need to be aware that if GW stays they need to get back to the table and maximise what he can bring to the club in whatever capacity can be accommodated and agreed.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Glover said:

A footballing decision, a decision based on maximising advantage in the game of football, it could be argued, would value and utilise Gary, our most experienced, longest serving player, captain and qualified coach to lead what is a very young team.  He is already quite the future coach apparently - UEFA A licence and qualified PE teacher ( knows something about educating young players).  A footballing decision would look at the dressing room, morale, harmony, stability, and leadership from having Gary there. How many times are we told about unity in football teams?  Unless Gary is a deeply dislikeable person and disruptive, in which case...

Not to mention he played more than 25 times last season and is also still a player in his own right, and the duo preferred are no less susceptible to injury or loss of form because of last season’s late run.

I would call it a business decision. A bird in the hand is worth three in the bush.  This is like the NHS bus - we dont know how the money saved will be actually used and whether it would even be a saving in a cost-benefit analysis.  

All the speculation of Gary leaving is moot anyway.  What  club is willing to give an ‘unwanted’ 34-year-old Scottish Championship defender a one year contract, a contract that would entice him away from his home for the last 7 years, a contract that would need to be significantly better than what he already possesses?  What would it take for any of us to leave our jobs, or earlier than our existing contract, and also move home too?  

There is no land of milk and honey for Gary except at ICT for the next year and it was wishful thinking on the club’s behalf to think so - I can see why these mystical ‘three young dynamic players’ would be a result, absolutely, but it was a business decision to forego inspiration, harmony, leadership and a player on the very, very remote chance a club will come in and take Gary and it was that trade-off I have issue with.  Had there been a club like Gretna trying to steamroll through the lower divisions - potentially, but there’s not.

 I think Carl should be worried if a young player in his position pops up soon.  Perhaps ‘legends’ will become a hushed word at ICT - don’t deserve legends if the end is to try and shaft them.  I don’t want a club fashioned in the Mr Burns mould, perhaps I’m just sentimental.

Glover can I just say that these posts are exactly how I feel. You are not alone and that last paragraph esp sums up how it seems to be these days. We seem to have lost our soul and eithos as a club sadly 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Glover said:

 I think Carl should be worried if a young player in his position pops up soon.  Perhaps ‘legends’ will become a hushed word at ICT - don’t deserve legends if the end is to try and shaft them.  I don’t want a club fashioned in the Mr Burns mould, perhaps I’m just sentimental.

Sadly this is the price of relegation. Costs get cut dramatically and if we can find a player for any position than will command a lower wage than the player we already have playing there he will be quite an attractive proposition to ICT. Look at Raven last season.

I agree with most of what @bdu98196 says in the post above. This should have been kept behind closed doors. By putting it out in the public domain it's almost as if they are trying to shame Warren into leaving the club which is exceptionally poor.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RiG said:

Sadly this is the price of relegation. Costs get cut dramatically and if we can find a player for any position than will command a lower wage than the player we already have playing there he will be quite an attractive proposition to ICT. Look at Raven last season.

I agree with most of what @bdu98196 says in the post above. This should have been kept behind closed doors. By putting it out in the public domain it's almost as if they are trying to shame Warren into leaving the club which is exceptionally poor.

And if it came out - as it undoubtedly would - then many would be complaining that it had been kept quiet !!!

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Football is a feckin business you soft bestards. The previous soft bestards where the ones who almost fecked up the club in the first place and agreed these over the top deals. lets all feel sorry for OFW and Foran eh ?

These deals were only OTT following relegation. We could afford a lot of these contracts when we were in the top flight.

22 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

And if it came out - as it undoubtedly would - then many would be complaining that it had been kept quiet !!!

Highly unlikely. Whilst fans clamour for more openness from the club this kind of dirty laundry can do without public airings. Much like the Hughes and Cameron budget battles of a few years ago.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Football is a feckin business you soft bestards. The previous soft bestards where the ones who almost fecked up the club in the first place and agreed these over the top deals. lets all feel sorry for OFW and Foran eh ?

Not suggesting anyone feels 'sorry' for OFW or Foran or any others. But the club were only too happy to offer these guys the contracts they did - why should these guys now be berated for seeing out their contracts? These guys are not 'staff' as such at the club like regular employees in corporations - they are given a contract for X wks/months/years with specific terms and conditions most including penalties if they break these but also include the right of the club to sell these assets on the market. If the player has to abide and see the T&C's of the contract out so should the club - in both the cases mentioned if the club do want rid then pay up the cash to an agreeable amount between both parties - otherwise find a way to utilise the assets in an effective manner and stop trying to 'force' players (OFW/Raven/Draper/Warren) out the door in the manner they have.

When we have a scenario where the player wants to leave - such as Tansey and the club block this or cant negotiate a deal we blame the player and say its their fault not wanting be at the club. When the club decide to get rid of a player we say its the player that's greedy not walking away. Whether this or the previous regime neither board seem to be covering themselves in glory with the way business is conducted.

37 minutes ago, IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER said:

Would Gary be the captain next season ? Would Gary be a first eleven choice ? Would it be better to give a younger player the opportunity to be the squad cover ? Yes finances evidently play a part but this is also a footballing decision. 

If that's the case, then pay out his contract and release him - don't go to the media trying to force him. If he can get regular football for the same or better money I'm sure he will go but if he cant then he has every right to sit out the next 12 months and take every penny his contract allows.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by bdu98196
  • Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy