WadeWilson 4,670 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Breaking news that there are 18 current players, including Lee McCulloch, who will refuse to take part in the SpFA's action against the club. They are 'embarrassed' be linked with the move.I would leave a link but we are boycotting most papers so you will have to take my word for it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanFerguson2012 123 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 So it is the union who are doing this on behalf of players whether they iike it or not. There's no mystery it's in the daily rebel http://www.<No links to this website>/sport/football/football-news/rebel-group-tell-rangers-they-dont-1484085 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,332 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Breaking news that there are 18 current players, including Lee McCulloch, who will refuse to take part in the SpFA's action against the club. They are 'embarrassed' be linked with the move.I would leave a link but we are boycotting most papers so you will have to take my word for it.No wonder they are embarrassed to be linked to such a charade as that...fucking unbelievable. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guardian 4,281 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Have they named the players who ARE taking part in this ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Why the fuck are the loyal people that don't want to sue the club, being branded as rebels in the paper. That's fucking shocking. It's those other bastards that are the rebel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Union bosses reckon all affected players could win back most if not all of the money they sacrificed to keep the club afloat after Whyte tipped it under on February 14.Also calling bullshit on this. The players ALL agreed to take the wage cut, so I believe that's a non-starter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,332 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Also calling bullshit on this. The players ALL agreed to take the wage cut, so I believe that's a non-starter.Wait until the old "Aye! but we only did it to save the club,but Whyte failed in that respect, so therefor the wage cut was actually costing us money in the end" bullshit comes into play, gogzy.Is this Mr Wishart trying to make a reputation for him moving on to better things, perhaps?Rhegan out-Wishart in Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
govanblue 16,847 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 So in a nutshell.67 players have not raised a claim - in fact the Union has raised what amounts to a 'class action' case for every player who had a contract at the time, regardless of whether that player wants to raise a claim or not. We know that 18 of the 67 are currently still with the club, and so we can assume that they probably don't want to claim (Jig for sure). We also know that at least 3 (Aluko, Lafferty, Ness) have raised their own independent claim, so probably support the SPFA claim too.So the big questions are: How many players were consulted by SPFA. How many said they WANTED to claim. How many said they did NOT want to claimThen we'll have a better understanding of how many good guys there are, and how many w**ks.However, I think before we jump to condemn the SPFA, we need to hear a bit more of their reason for bringing this claim.It's a union, bound by the same rules and guidance as any other union, and so it may be that they have a legal obligation to raise a claim? Maybe, maybe not, I just think we should know a bit more before jumping to conclusions?But if I had to play my hand right now, then I'd go with blaming the SPFA, and not (all) the players. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 The daily rebel strikes again what a shower of no mark clutching at strwas wankers they are. The story should be laughed at especially when the players say they don't want to sue, and they never even knew anything about this. So why is the "unbiased" rebel not asking questions of PFA Scotland? Why are they going ahead with this if the players don't want to. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Wait until the old "Aye! but we only did it to save the club,but Whyte failed in that respect, so therefor the wage cut was actually costing us money in the end" bullshit comes into play, gogzy.Is this Mr Wishart trying to make a reputation for him moving on to better things, perhaps?Rhegan out-Wishart in Something is not right about this while situation IMO, I am guessing that after duncaster takes the fall for everything and is made the sacraficial lamb, someone like Wishart will come in and take his place.he should be taken to task for raising legal action on behalf of players who know NOTHING about said legal action. It's beyond scandalous, and TBH is just another example of the biggotry and hatred that Green aluded to when he first took over. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Robot 21,513 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Someone needs to instruct the union they just don't take it upon themselves so at least one player has done it but its a bad show to raise a class action and not inform the other members. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchieshearercaldow 22,450 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 The unions don't need to consult any of their members.They take action on their members behalf whether they know about it or not.I would think the union is shit scared they will foot the bill if the players are found to have breached their contracts so they put in a counter claim. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bombaybadboy08 15,660 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Fraser Wishart is a bellend.Embarrassed that he has worn our jersey. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozblue 4,332 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Something is not right about this while situation IMO, I am guessing that after duncaster takes the fall for everything and is made the sacraficial lamb, someone like Wishart will come in and take his place.he should be taken to task for raising legal action on behalf of players who know NOTHING about said legal action. It's beyond scandalous, and TBH is just another example of the biggotry and hatred that Green aluded to when he first took over.There is certainly something rotten in Denmark about this,and it ain't fucking fish.This episode is what is totally wrong with the PFAS and their way of being representative of footballers. This "One for all and all for one" stuff might be ok in a coal mine or a dockyard, but not for cases such as this.The thing that sticks in my craw (apart from the non-knowledge of some of the players mentioned) is that Fraser Wishart used to be on our books and should know better than to harm our club.The only reason I can think of is that he wants to be a bigger shaker and mover than what he is at present,unless he has never forgiven Walter for signing him and only playing him nine times in two years. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
weshallnotbemoved! 714 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Breaking news that there are 18 current players, including Lee McCulloch, who will refuse to take part in the SpFA's action against the club. They are 'embarrassed' be linked with the move.I would leave a link but we are boycotting most papers so you will have to take my word for it.strange for a union to take unilateral action without seeking a vote or mandate from its members...Something wrong in the state of Denmark methinks.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelsonRFC82 305 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Right so the union have raised a claim against us on the basis that their members were not consulted over the TUPE to newco...and have done so without first consulting said members. Some fucking irony that! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana 28,894 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 i'll reserve judgemnet on any of this until the club release a statement on their understanding of it.from what i can see this is a counter against Greens claims for compensation when the players walked.think both cases will be dropped. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WadeWilson 4,670 Posted December 11, 2012 Author Share Posted December 11, 2012 A few players (ex and current) are denying any knowledge of this whole fiasco. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaddistonKnight 1,577 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Will be interesting to see the list of "Feck all to do with me's" over the next few days. Might be one or two who were interested in a wee pay day properly evacuate their bowels now its out in the open.Notice it wasn't the club flashing it about. A share offer and all the scumbags can talk about is one part. Gets you wondering just how much the press do not report, not just about the filth, but everything that goes on around us! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I am now stating to see that players in the unfair dismisal case, Aluko in particular, claim they know nothing about this either!?Strange! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutchy 1,200 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Also calling bullshit on this. The players ALL agreed to take the wage cut, so I believe that's a non-starter.They certainly did agree and part of that agreement was they could go for a knock down traansfer fee. A knock down fee, not no fee at all.Even radio Ireland reported that the union didn't expect much for this action during the news tonight, it was done on a matter of 'principle', although they didn't clrify that principle. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanther22 528 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 daily rebel was the source for this was it? 67 players mentioned too - wonder where they got that number from..... this has a taigs stinky fingerprints all over it. bullshit nonstory blown out of all proportion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooblue 105 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 The unions don't need to consult any of their members.They take action on their members behalf whether they know about it or not.Not how my union works - not saying you're wrong and must say I have no idea how different unions work in different areas of employment but from my experience action is only ever taken upon instruction from the member that they wish to proceed. They are employee representatives after all so how can they take action (on the employee's behalf) that the employee disagrees with? 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.