We assume that BDO will claim the money on behalf of RFC, since Davis didn't transfer his contract to Sevco.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
Printable View
We assume that BDO will claim the money on behalf of RFC, since Davis didn't transfer his contract to Sevco.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
Neither would I - But to repeat myself that would require the members to agree....once Ranger FC (IA) are liquidated then they can no longer vote and so the 11v1 can be tabled to ensure that 'cartels' within the membership are harderQuote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
The alternative is to impose the embargo now, which would mean (according to Green et al) Sevco don't have enough players to field a squad and after injuries and suspensions kick in they might not even have eleven starters. That would render the membership transfer pointless and potentially reckless since Sevco may not be able to fulfil their fixtures.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
The SFA can't and shouldn't legislate for spending power or the ability to attract players so if Sevco can attract a higher quality of player than other Div 3 clubs then that's life. It means they have to spend it all now though and I don't see that they have a huge amount of cash to spare.
I think down-the-slope says it pretty well up there anyway.
Asides from the 10 points (a joke) they have not been punished. That said, I'm of a mind to let them get on with it - transfer embargo and all - and wait for the SPL investigation into double contracts. If they (the Oldco) are found guilty of this then any Titles and/or Trophies for this period should be stripped from them. Apart from that though, let's just leave Newco to get on with it. If creditors are then able to sue them for whatever they can get, fair play to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Yeah but on this occasion I think the members would all agree. We have all been looking for this larger league for years now, and given some time would have elapsed, I think the SPL chairmen would see it as an easier deal to push through. To be honest, I don't think it'd be a bad idea. It would mean that NewHuns would have to sign players now for a potential "Championship" assault next season though.Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
This is nonsense. They can sign as many under-18 players as they wish. They still have healthy numbers on the books and could be more than competitive in SFL3 as things stand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
But that means a signing embargo is pointless anyway, even if it started now. Indeed starting it now means it would end in time for them to make signings for the start of the 2013-14 season when they would expect to be in the second division. Instead if what you say is true they are going to be wasting money signing players they don't need now.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Indeed. You could argue that it is to the advantage of Green as it will placate the support who would otherwise be critical of failure to sign name players. This will help Rangers meet FFP targets for when they are eligible for Europan Football in three years tie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
They have agreed the fee with Charles Green, so one would assume it's NewHun that'll be claiming the money. As per http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18937843Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Hmmmm.
Makes you wonder why Southampton are paying a fee though?
Davis is a free agent under employment law. You would think that a club - especially one like Soton, who almost when to the wall themselves not so long ago - would know the rules?
:cb
The suggestion is that they didn't want any delay in his registration. I'm not sure that's worth the alleged £800k, mind :hmmm:Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
So do I - its what we mostly all want - but the structure would be agreed with time and a position of relative strength in terms of financial splits / TV / etc etc..Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
I would hope that once we get playing football then the conversations and engagement with our club can move on to getting feedback on what we as a support want in terms of league reconstruction, and lobbying
for that opinion to be heard in a manner that is more constructive than what we have had to do in this unwanted situation
I'm not saying they've been punished enough though, I'm saying they should be punished for what they've done and been found guilty of rather than for being able to sign better players than every one else. The original punishment imposed by an independent tribunal was a year-long signing embargo (along with a fine) and that was considered sufficient at the time. That embargo now stands subject to a six-week window which, if my debate with jgl07 is anything to go by, is pointless. They have not been found guilty of anything else yet for them to be punished more than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Agreed. We no longer have to pander to any 11-1 voting nonsense so let's do it right, and if it means that the avenue for a NewHun re-entry into the SPL potentially moves ahead by a year, so what.Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
So Newco receive nearly a million quid for a player they do not actually own? Another million quid that will not go anywhere near any oldco creditor.
Surely this is a straightforward employment law issue, yet the SFA/EUFA/ FIFA cannot resolve this without weeks of deliberation?
Brian Rix would have been proud to have written such a farce.
:rolleyes:
But Green/Newco don't accept that Davis' objection to TUPE had any legal validity. So Green's view is that Davis' contract did transfer to Newco...and therefore he pockets the Southampton dosh. Still find it utterly bizarre why Southampton would hand over reported £800k when Green clearly is wrong however.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Can only assume that in spite of what has been previously written, he did agree to transfer his contract - possibly on the understanding that Newco would agree to sell him (probably with the fee to Southampton having already been agreed in principle).Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
I agree - I don't understand the delay with the SFA's Arbitration Panel being convened to look at this. More fundamentally, I don't quite follow how/why this Arbitration Panel is the decision making body here, ie:Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
- At the risk of sounding like Fat Sally, who will be on this SFA convened Panel....and are they qualified to correctly opine on employment contract law and TUPE regulations?
- Where does this Arbitration Panel sit in Employment Law. Why is the dispute resolution process here not like any other employment relationship, ie through an Employment Tribunal? If I was the PFA, that's where I would be going now because it is a slam dunk that the contracts did not transfer. Newco didn't consult properly per TUPE regs and the ET chair would 100% rule in the objecting players' favour and against Green.
McCoist u can gFT
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18938991
Think he is forgetting the difference between oldco n newco
"And the manager added: "It is important to remember we have already had a 10 point deduction from the SPL, lost our Champions League place for finishing second last season, had a £160,000 fine, been refused entry to the SPL, been relegated to Division Three and lost the majority of our first-team squad - yet still the governing body has chosen to impose further sanctions. "
Sorry but i see it as the following
10 Point decuction - OLDCO (for going into administration)
lost our Champions League place - OLDCO (for going into liquidation)
had a £160,000 fine - OLDCO (for going into administration)
been refused entry to the SPL - NEWCO (Cause you cant just start a new team in the big league)
been relegated to Division Three (OLDCO (kicked out league for going into liquidation so u were not relegated you were granted access to play football as NEWCO where every club should start)
lost the majority of our first-team squad - OLDCO (for going into liquidation)
I'm happy the way everything has turned out but the title stripping would be the icing on the cake for me
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
With oldco\newco out of the picture for now at least we can discuss a new set up that approaches what WE want rather than one all but imposed on us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs
Rangers costs, excluding wages, were over £23m per season (on average). Bearing in mind that Lloyds bank had a huge say for about three seasons one could surmise that a lot of the waste had aleady been expunged.
That said should they manage to even half those costs they would still require a greater income than any SPL club bar Celtic. Only time will tell if it can be done or not but I suspect that they will struggle a bit unless someone is prepared to throw money at them in teh short term.
Since February 14th we have all been told that Rangers would not go bust, the CVA would be accepted, they would not get kicked out the SPL, they would go straight into div 1, no way would they get busted all the way to div 3 and they would get off with everything. At times, reading Hibs Net, you might have thought that Rod Petrie was a bigger villain in all this than Rangers themselves.
All that can be said is that as this process has run it's course Rangers have been clattered every step of the way, in fact I struggle to think of an instance when things have gone IN their favour. And rightly so IMO.
We still have the outcome of the BTC to be announced and also the matter of double contracts to be resolved. I for one would not stop laughing, ever, if both these decisions went in their favour and there had been no need to enter administration in the first place.
Whatever the outcome, Rangers or not Rangers, this still has a bit of a way to go.
Rangers manager Ally McCoist defiant over title losses
Full article : http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18938991
If you dont want the punishments that go with the old membership Ally, then toddle off and play in the juniors until you can meet the league requirements. :bye:Quote:
Ally McCoist
has sent a defiant message to the Scottish Premier League, saying Rangers will
"never accept" being stripped of any of their titles.
The SPL is pressing for more sanctions to be handed out to the new Rangers
before they are allowed to play in Division Three this season.
Rangers are being investigated for alleged undisclosed payments to players
between 2001 and 2010.
"I will not be accepting any talk of stripping titles," said McCoist.
"That is something we will never accept and everyone at the club shares this
view."
Really - I mean really - how thick would you have to be to think, at this stage, after all that's gone on, that you can still dictate what's acceptable and what's not acceptable as your punishment?Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
#Rangers want #SPL to drop their investigation into dual contracts as part of 5 way agreement on #SFA membership #BBCSport
Dear Oh Dear. :rolleyes:
:giruy::giruy::giruy::giruy::giruy::giruy::giruy:: giruy::giruy:
Never thought that was enough :giruy: that could be used to describe my feelings towards those lot, but every time they surprise me.
They don't have a say in it, if they are stripped of titles there's not a thing they can do about it. Mere sabre rattling.Quote:
Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee
How the hell can they be allowed to use this as a chip in any way.
You're not stripping out titles or, erm, our newly set up club won't play in your set up. Erm, okay then.
The investigation should not be dropped.
In what other form of business would the wrongdoers dictate their own punishment. Tell them you accept what we give you or **** off. No negotiations. These Neanderthals don't deserve a licence anyway.
The more you think about it, the more outrageous the mere suggestion becomes. Muppets of the highest water. :crazy:Quote:
Originally Posted by VickMackie
he's going to end up with a few more charges against him at this rate.
I wouldnt be surprised if they ended up suspended for a year, then back in to a restructured top division.
One things for sure - we wouldnt be in the place we are now without the fans having their say - clubs and the SFA/SPL/SFL would have done as they'd wanted.