markybear 136 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 A number of Rangers players will be allowed to leave the club on a free transfer in the summer if owner Craig Whyte regains control at Ibrox, administrator Paul Clark has confirmed.Last week Duff and Phelps announced the players had agreed to changes in their contracts, including wage cuts of between 25% and 75%, until the end of the season.Clark said the decisions meant the administrators could meet their target of saving £1m a month without the need for redundancies.However speaking to the Scotsman, he admitted several members of the squad had made it clear they wouldn’t want to stay with the Glasgow side should Whyte return.“I didn’t make it clear on Friday about this Craig Whyte clause,” said Clark.“I should make it clear now. It’s not in everybody’s contract but there are a number of players who did want a clause that said something like, should Craig Whyte either retain or regain control of the club then they would be entitled to a free transfer.“That’s in there for a number of them. More than a handful have that in their contracts, the ones who have most likely got value.” Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimfanciesthedude 24,358 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 to be expected, and wont ever be implemented as whyte will not be back no matter what Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian 4,281 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Another non-story.Whyte won't be back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather 70,782 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Good job Whyte will not be comming back then. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Whyte's still here....and could well still be here in the summer. Retain. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4MenHadADream 122 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Good move by the players, but as others have said, in reality it is probably irrelevant as I can't see how Whyte could make a comeback from this anyway. I suppose in a way though, this clause meant that there are no other transfer clauses, meaning big players leaving for reduced fees in the summer? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamFyfe 1,438 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Whyte won't be back I hoep, and thank fuck Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 These administrators, who are on whytes side according to some, are sure doing at good job in marginalising him.These guys seem to be playing a fairly media savvy game on a few fronts. Wonder who is advising them.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimfanciesthedude 24,358 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 These administrators, who are on whytes side according to some, are sure doing at good job in marginalising him.These guys seem to be playing a fairly media savvy game on a few fronts. Wonder who is advising them.... the troll in me would say SDM Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Whyte's still here....and could well still be here in the summer. Retain.It's funny how people think that Whyte has "gone" just because he's keeping a low profile while the administrators are doing the dirty work,doesn't mean to say he has gone anywhere. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Godfather 70,782 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 It's funny how people think that Whyte has "gone" just because he's keeping a low profile while the administrators are doing the dirty work,doesn't mean to say he has gone anywhere. It’s what the administrators are saying which leads people to believe that Whyte coming back would seem highly unlikely. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,331 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 It's what the administrators are saying which leads people to believe that Whyte coming back would seem highly unlikely.The administrators are saying all the right things at the moment,but what they say and what actually happens further down the track is perhaps not what will happen.I'm not saying that Whyte will still be our chairman come Summer,and I'm not saying that the final outcome will still see him as the owner of Rangers...What i'm saying is that we haven't seen the last of Craig Whyte in the Rangers story of 2012, because when he said "We don't do walking away", I'm not certain that he said it in the same context as what Ally McCoist said it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 It’s what the administrators are saying which leads people to believe that Whyte coming back would seem highly unlikely........should Craig Whyte either retain or regain control of the club then they would be entitled to a free transfer.He doesn't have to 'come back' if he's 'still here'. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian 4,281 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 The only way Whyte will come back openly to these parts is in a box.He can huff and puff, and threaten, but he's so cluelessly inept, he will be swept aside.I can't see any way this googly eyed clown will retain any power at Rangers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginjan 1 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Really cannot fault the players for getting this written into their contract. Hopefully will never come to pass though and new owners will be installed before the end of the season. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prytz tick 2 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 If we go into liquidation, Craig Whyte will definitely be out of the picture. If we go down the CVA route, Craig Whyte will have to be involved in the agreement because nothing can happen if he refuses to sell his shares. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralCartmanLee 313 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 If we go into liquidation, Craig Whyte will definitely be out of the picture. If we go down the CVA route, Craig Whyte will have to be involved in the agreement because nothing can happen if he refuses to sell his shares.Amazing that you know more than the administartors.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 If we go into liquidation, Craig Whyte will definitely be out of the picture. If we go down the CVA route, Craig Whyte will have to be involved in the agreement because nothing can happen if he refuses to sell his shares.whyte doesn't get a vote on the cva. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Bear 72 363 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 If we go into liquidation, Craig Whyte will definitely be out of the picture. If we go down the CVA route, Craig Whyte will have to be involved in the agreement because nothing can happen if he refuses to sell his shares.The administrators don't see him as a secured creditor which means a CVA can be agreed without him. They are also trying to get control of his shares in order to remove him from the takeover process.Add this to the SFA's belated judgement on him and the contract clauses, it seems to me there is no chance of him being back at Ibrox. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prytz tick 2 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 The CVA would be voted on by all the creditors. Whyte claims to be a creditor but I hope the administrators are right when they say that he is not. However, the CVA would be based on a proposal by the new owners, and that proposal would not even get off the ground if there is no agreement from Whyte to sell his shares to the new owners. I am sure that there is plenty of pressure being applied to him from a number of quarters to play ball and, in that regard, the SFA disrepute charges could prove very helpful. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 The CVA would be voted on by all the creditors. Whyte claims to be a creditor but I hope the administrators are right when they say that he is not. However, the CVA would be based on a proposal by the new owners, and that proposal would not even get off the ground if there is no agreement from Whyte to sell his shares to the new owners. I am sure that there is plenty of pressure being applied to him from a number of quarters to play ball and, in that regard, the SFA disrepute charges could prove very helpful.whyte claims to be a secured creditor. secured creditors don't vote on the cva. more facts you have wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prytz tick 2 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 When did I say Whyte would have a vote? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 whyte doesn't get a vote on the cva.He does if he's a creditor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbert 416 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 A would demand the same if I had to take 75% wage cut because the wee rat Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creampuff 22,628 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Whyte won't be back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.