Jump to content

McCabe and Rangers


Recommended Posts

I said no such thing! Reynolds however is still a good central defender who has been treated appallingly at this club.

Crap.

Reynolds may have had limited chances but when he did he was appalling most of the time. Birmingham & Dagenham away spring to mind straight away. When he came in he had a chance to show his ability and cement himself in the side because at the time we were woeful. But he didn't, he just added to the problems. Two different managers, who have completely different personalities didn't fancy him and wanted him gone. They see him in action on the training pitch day by day. I think that says it all.

He wasn't treated badly, he just wasn't good enough for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right: Having thought about it more, the issue is that there are two separate issues. The contract, and the registration.

The contract issue is cut and dried - EU backed employment law covers it and the players are free to decline the moving of their contracts hence why Rangers arent suing then for breach of contract.

The registration is is a different matter. For one, it wont be directly referred to in any non football legislation, and can therefore be viewed as a grey area.

Second, when we talk about a transfer of a player we are talking about the player moving teams, but in reality we are trading the players registration with the FA (and ultimately FIFA) to another team under agreed terms - mainly a transfer fee.

Newcos stance is that as the registration of a player is transferrable, they believe that they players registrations were transferred when Charles Green purchased all Rangers heritable (legal word for transferable) assets.

So the issue of the transferrence of the contracts is now immaterial - The SFA is not going to agree to the transferrence of the registrations as things stand, hence the players appeals to FIFA who adjudicate these kinds if disputes.

So, where does this end? FIFA will ultimately have to rule in favour of the players that their registrations with Rangers were cancelled when the contract transfer was rejected (ie they became free agents) as we are dealing with employment law within a country that is part of the EU.

Its just a question of how long it takes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right: Having thought about it more, the issue is that there are two separate issues. The contract, and the registration.

The contract issue is cut and dried - EU backed employment law covers it and the players are free to decline the moving of their contracts hence why Rangers arent suing then for breach of contract.

The registration is is a different matter. For one, it wont be directly referred to in any non football legislation, and can therefore be viewed as a grey area.

Second, when we talk about a transfer of a player we are talking about the player moving teams, but in reality we are trading the players registration with the FA (and ultimately FIFA) to another team under agreed terms - mainly a transfer fee.

Newcos stance is that as the registration of a player is transferrable, they believe that they players registrations were transferred when Charles Green purchased all Rangers heritable (legal word for transferable) assets.

So the issue of the transferrence of the contracts is now immaterial - The SFA is not going to agree to the transferrence of the registrations as things stand, hence the players appeals to FIFA who adjudicate these kinds if disputes.

So, where does this end? FIFA will ultimately have to rule in favour of the players that their registrations with Rangers were cancelled when the contract transfer was rejected (ie they became free agents) as we are dealing with employment law within a country that is part of the EU.

Its just a question of how long it takes.

I think that is a fair summary.

I actually think the Bosman case remains the precedent. What we have to establish is that the termination of a contract is the same as the expiry.

The fear for Football might be that if this gets tested at law, the current rules on young players registrations won't stand up and so clubs will once again be faced with losing their best youngsters for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is covered more than adequately in UK employment law - and Rangers or any football authority don't have a case - it will come under restraint of trade.

If the current guise of Rangers is a different company to the company which the players signed then they are under no obligation to switch their contracts across - its very clear in employment law and any test case would show that quickly and easily

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given
Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given

Text from a Glasgow Rangers fan I know, after asking him his opionion on McCabe ..........

" aye he's good but could'nt get a game in the Scottish 3rd, so had to go down a leauge" ! :rolleyes:

These jockonese lobbers are lucky to be playing in any league........................... even the Disney Division in a Mickey Mouse league

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given
Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given

These jockonese lobbers are lucky to be playing in any league........................... even the Disney Division in a Mickey Mouse league

have a lovely day.................................... :ph34r:

Link to comment
Posted · Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given
Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given

Jesus wept.

he wasn't English....................so we'd be waiting for international clearence on those tears!!!

Scotland.....the reason it exists is the stop Cumbria flooding

good for you, im happy for ya einstein....................... :biggrin:

am amazed a tw@t like you can spell Einstein

Link to comment

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

So how does TUPE fit into this business point of view?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given
Hidden by edinburghowl, August 12, 2012 - No reason given

he wasn't English....................so we'd be waiting for international clearence on those tears!!!

Scotland.....the reason it exists is the stop Cumbria flooding

am amazed a tw@t like you can spell Einstein

okay like i said im happy for you, now move along,nothing to see here........................

Link to comment
Guest Bozman

Isn't the bloke at Rangers him that was at the pigs cos wouldn't surprise me if he is only doing this cos it's the MASSIVE and bitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...