theowlsman Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 (edited) Isn't it because the new Rangers chairman stated he would bare his ar5e on Glagow Town Hall's steps before McCabe signed for Sheffield Wednesday? He still hasn't done so so far as I am aware. Same reason we're still waiting to sign that Vesuvius, or Protarius, or whatever he's called fella. Edited August 12, 2012 by theowlsman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgmetcalf Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Here's what that great anti-pig newspaper The Sheffield Star is saying. Sorry if already posted. http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/football/sheffield-wednesday/sheffield-wednesday-row-delays-rhys-mccabe-debut-1-4811712 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Be interesting to see how FIFA rules on this as it could bring them in direct conflict with EC law. Don't forget that in EC terms, this is not an international or cross border move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumboldowl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 The national anthem of Britain is "God save the Queen" ....... i 'don;t like it (as a song, that is) but there you go, the Scottish & Welsh anthems (imo are more soul stirring) - wish we had a more of a traditional song ........and there's plenty of them -and not about one person ...... but about England. Note; Did'nt see Giggs and Bellamy singing it in the Olympics........ ? *lights touchpaper* Can't see what your point is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aj_owl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Wylde went to Bolton a couple of weeks ago too Seems very selective Thought Wylde left Rangers by mutual in March/April before any punishment was handed down? If so he probably isn't subject to this waiting game. We have got the player just seems we will have to be patient and see how this pans out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 It's sad to say it, but one probably couldnt point out that FIFA is a crooked and corrupt organisation on a forum such as this for fear of being sued (though a well pleaded defence of fair comment would make for an interesting few days in Court). In this light, I guess it is not surprising that nobody has speculated that were the scots to make this into an 'anit-imperilist London/England/FA issue of "the poor wee Scots being taken advantage of by their nasty English overlords" then Sepptic and his cronies would leap at the opportunity to bash the English FA with with the same scant regard for rules and laws as they show in so many of their dealings. On balance I think it best that nobody has speculated as such because it would be grossly unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurujuan Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Not so sure the Scottish FA are flavour of the month with FIFA at the moment. They are furious with the way the Rangers debacle has been handled and seem to think the SFA have always been trying find a punishment that suits Rangers themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamnedOwl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Not so sure the Scottish FA are flavour of the month with FIFA at the moment. They are furious with the way the Rangers debacle has been handled and seem to think the SFA have always been trying find a punishment that suits Rangers themselves. I'm surprised - I thought the SFA were being reasonably hard-assed with Rangers over the whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurujuan Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 They only stepped things up when FIFA threatened them themselves with sanctions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurujuan Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Back to McCabe, this situation is really unfortunate for him ( and us ) as with Lines missing, he could of had a decent run of games and an opportunity to establish himself in the side. If it drags on, we will undoubtably bring someone in sooner rather than later and his early opportunity will be gone. Having said that, he's one for the future anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Im only guessing but from a business point of view - Wolfmanjacks point about them going into liquidation and therefore not liable to any funds is about as arse over *** as it is possible to be. If the previous company was due to any compensation for the contract - then there is even MORE chance of it being upheld - as the administrators will be trying to secure every penny they can to compensate the creditors of the company which ceased to trade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edinburghowl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Newco Rangers don't have a leg to stand on. They shouldn't get a penny for a player that was contracted to the old business. Wasnt mccabe valued at 10 million by rangers? They may not like the fact that somone else has him now and they wont see any of his future fee not even a % of the sale What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Edinburgh - your view on Scottish players will be forever tainted by your assertions that Reynolds was the next Franz Beckenbauer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manchester_Owl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 One things for certain... Your don't spend this much money on legal fees time and effort if the player is not worth it. So, it looks like we have a good player on our books. For any Rangers fans reading this.... Another thing I am dead certain about is that Milan wont pay you a penny regardless and will wait a whole season and beyond to battle this out if he has too. Not worth it; focus on getting your club back up the leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfmanjack Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Im only guessing but from a business point of view - Wolfmanjacks point about them going into liquidation and therefore not liable to any funds is about as arse over *** as it is possible to be. If the previous company was due to any compensation for the contract - then there is even MORE chance of it being upheld - as the administrators will be trying to secure every penny they can to compensate the creditors of the company which ceased to trade It's pointless even attmemting to get into a discussion with someone who is the guru of all things football AND business related. I'd argue with every contrubutor to this thread, other than you Grandad. Your superior knowledge is a thing to behold, and I salute you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Your superior knowledge is a thing to behold, and I salute you. I'm glad we finally got that one sorted out xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
since59owe Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Be interesting to see how FIFA rules on this as it could bring them in direct conflict with EC law. They act like a law unto themselves FIFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edinburghowl Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 Edinburgh - your view on Scottish players will be forever tainted by your assertions that Reynolds was the next Franz Beckenbauer I said no such thing! Reynolds however is still a good central defender who has been treated appallingly at this club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taximark Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 It's pointless even attmemting to get into a discussion with someone who is the guru of all things football AND business related. I'd argue with every contrubutor to this thread, other than you Grandad. Your superior knowledge is a thing to behold, and I salute you. Said George Galloway to Saddam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror8 Posted August 12, 2012 Share Posted August 12, 2012 (edited) Im only guessing but from a business point of view - Wolfmanjacks point about them going into liquidation and therefore not liable to any funds is about as arse over *** as it is possible to be. If the previous company was due to any compensation for the contract - then there is even MORE chance of it being upheld - as the administrators will be trying to secure every penny they can to compensate the creditors of the company which ceased to trade I'm only guessing but I think Wolfmanjack is closer than you are. Firstly, administrators aren't involved in liquidations. Secondly, you're looking at the old company (and the related insolvency practitioners) being the obstacle. The players aren't assets in a legal sense, they are employees. And thus on liquidation, aren't an asset that can be collected and then sold off to pay back creditors. The obstacle is the new company, the newco. Who seem to still be arguing that the players should have transferred under TUPE, even though, almost all employment solicitors are in agreement that this isn't the case, as they lodged objections to the transfer, and thus didn't transfer. I think they are basing any case that they may have, on that the objection should have been made within 48hrs but wasn't, and so the players did in fact transfer. As said, experts (I am definitely not one) have stated that regardless, the players still did transfer. However, this technicality may mean that Rangers have a case/cause of action, even if they don't have a winnable case. So, as has been suggested earlier, they can bluff/hardball. I'm sure all the clubs have legal advisors who can see through this, but due to the number of parties involved, and layers of bureaucracy, it at least slows down the transfers. And increases the chances of 'buying' clubs just thinking, f*ck it, we'll pay a small sum to be done with it. Edited August 12, 2012 by Juror8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now