MORE pish from the SFA

[bluesbro1976 162]

Ok transfer and protection of employees basically protects employees who have been taken over by another company, or business entity, ie glasgow city council housing to glasgow housing association. All employees were transfered over on the same terms nd conditions and its only when a business is unable to operate on the same level etc they can change the goalposts., we wre told back then, as i am now that if u transfer to a company taking over ur old company, ie employer, then they need to look after you until it becomes an unviable and unfinancially burden of the employer. This usually occurs within 12 months., the company offers u a new contract basis on an 'undetermined' downturn is trade and offer u lower wages, poorer conditions of employment etc. What some people fail to recall is naismith etall took a wage from 'newco' for two weeks, which in effect made thewm employees of the new owners/company. Therefore if u werew working for a wee joinery or heating compamny and they went tits up, and a consurtium bought them and you took a wage for two weeks, does that not, either make you thief or an employee of that new company, who has paid for ur kids private education or half your monthly mortgage?????

You decide

[Bad Robot 21,150]

Starting to wonder when all of this shite is gonna end....

this, it's fucking annoying as we just can't to go forward without things getting thrown at us.

[bilko89 507]

Its all about the timing, this barrage has started while the reconstruction talks are going on, its deflectors at full, while the cartel twist arms to get the result they want.

Have to agree with this. Taking all the attention away from their pathetic attempt at reconstructing Scottish football to force it through the back door. Pathetic.

[Ger_onimo 20,488]

We need to get a hidden microphone into these "how shall we try and fuck Rangers today" meetings, sharpish.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Ok transfer and protection of employees basically protects employees who have been taken over by another company, or business entity, ie glasgow city council housing to glasgow housing association. All employees were transfered over on the same terms nd conditions and its only when a business is unable to operate on the same level etc they can change the goalposts., we wre told back then, as i am now that if u transfer to a company taking over ur old company, ie employer, then they need to look after you until it becomes an unviable and unfinancially burden of the employer. This usually occurs within 12 months., the company offers u a new contract basis on an 'undetermined' downturn is trade and offer u lower wages, poorer conditions of employment etc. What some people fail to recall is naismith etall took a wage from 'newco' for two weeks, which in effect made thewm employees of the new owners/company. Therefore if u werew working for a wee joinery or heating compamny and they went tits up, and a consurtium bought them and you took a wage for two weeks, does that not, either make you thief or an employee of that new company, who has paid for ur kids private education or half your monthly mortgage?????

You decide

I partially agree with you mate.

The players left it 2 weeks too late to object in my eyes. The longest tupe transfer objection which has been approved once in court is 1 day as far as I can see. They left it 2 weeks, so far too long, although they could argue they were on holiday so unaware of events. Doubt that would wash given the coverage though.

What I seriously don't think happened though is that the players kept any money from the NewCo. They will have returned the payment as a show of objection to TUPE. They would require the worlds worst legal rep to advise them to take wages then try to claim you did not transfer.

[gogzy 31,195]

500k check be ok?

I am sure CG will get right on that.

[daviecooper01 826]

SFA cannot have it both ways. In January they said Rangers had no right to continue the arbitration as that right lay with Oldco.

So now they try to hit the club with the bill.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21268775

"Rangers newco has been refused permission to continue an arbitration process established by the oldco over players who left Ibrox when the club filed for insolvency.

The club was informed on Wednesday that it did not inherit the right to continue the arbitration process from the former parent company."

So if the club had no right to the arbitration, they cannot be held liable for any bills.

Pretty simple really - over the BDO.

I wonder if the LNS fine, plus the £1.2m costs, plus these legal fees will strangely add up to approx the amount the SPL & SFA hve with held from Rangers......

Nah, something like that would NEVER happen.....

[Gillete 1,338]

Another reason why I'll never support Scotland while these people are in charge and trying to kill the club I love , how many blows are they going to give us

Also another reason for us to never ever forget that rats that jumped ship and are still taking money out the club when we need it most

[BlueAvenger 10,240]

I hate to admit it but perhaps the SFA bhastards have a case and we might have to pay whereas the SPL bill is laughable.

The timing of these bills are suspect.....

Do the SFA and SPL have any money belonging to Rangers or the creditors? This is something that the SFA/SPL never answer and should be investigated

In any event the SFA / SPL cabal are corrupt to the core and determined to pursue Gers, the fans and club must continue to fight back.

[Creampuff 22,628]

They can take it from the huge pot of cash they still owe us.

[BlueAvenger 10,240]

Another reason why I'll never support Scotland while these people are in charge and trying to kill the club I love , how many blows are they going to give us

Also another reason for us to never ever forget that rats that jumped ship and are still taking money out the club when we need it most

Well said mate.

[better than all the rest 153]

So the sfa still have the 750K the got from Southampton for davis, give us that and we can talk about your other bill.

[Nikica Jelavic 41]

Not a chance in hell will we pay this.As others have said, how could any Rangers fan ever support Scotland or the sfa again?

[Every Other Saturday 128]

Right, I'm gonna get savaged here but feck it.............

I think the SFA are right here, well to an extent. The verdict from the SFA hearing came back in the favour of the players, in this case I would expect the losing party to pick up the legal expenses.

I don't agree with the outcome reached though. I think the players were still contracted to the club. They left it too late after the TUPE to object in my opinion.

I think we would win if we took it to court, but I don't think it's worth the hassle to be honest.

Remember the SFA are asking for money to go to the players here, not for it to go to the SFA.

I'm sure the club said they weren't suprised that the 'independent panel of experts' sitting at hampden ruled in favour of the players. However, the club also said after the verdict that 'nothing was won or lost and the club would continue its action against the players', I'm assuming this is in a court of law. The figures mentioned are something like £6m in transfer fees lost to the club so I think it is worthwhile proceeding with the case if our lawyers think we have a decent chance in a proper court of law.

What really sticks in the craw is that the SFA want us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (the case is not finished yet - see above) and the SPL expect us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (no sporting adavantage) all in the fricking same week. The same week that Longmuir's impartiality is slurred and the SFA and SPL trying ever so hard to bully their way through this reconstruction/sponsorship/tv rights/self-preservation bollocks. Coincidence??

O aye, same week that Whyte also tried to raise his googly-eyed napper above the parapet to discredit the club - It has been all to fricking evident!!

Time for the club to make a very public annoucement on this charade.

[bluenosebrad 452]

Was just thinking if they did not transfer their contracts over to the new company why would the new company pay their wages??? as the company that ran Rangers is in Liquidation so at the end of the day the player beef is with the old company for wages.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

I'm sure the club said they weren't suprised that the 'independent panel of experts' sitting at hampden ruled in favour of the players. However, the club also said after the verdict that 'nothing was won or lost and the club would continue its action against the players', I'm assuming this is in a court of law. The figures mentioned are something like £6m in transfer fees lost to the club so I think it is worthwhile proceeding with the case if our lawyers think we have a decent chance in a proper court of law.

What really sticks in the craw is that the SFA want us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (the case is not finished yet - see above) and the SPL expect us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (no sporting adavantage) all in the fricking same week. The same week that Longmuir's impartiality is slurred and the SFA and SPL trying ever so hard to bully their way through this reconstruction/sponsorship/tv rights/self-preservation bollocks. Coincidence??

O aye, same week that Whyte also tried to raise his googly-eyed napper above the parapet to discredit the club - It has been all to fricking evident!!

Time for the club to make a very public annoucement on this charade.

To be fair, it's not the SFA who have asked us to pay, it s the independent panel.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Was just thinking if they did not transfer their contracts over to the new company why would the new company pay their wages??? as the company that ran Rangers is in Liquidation so at the end of the day the player beef is with the old company for wages.

The players are not claiming for wages though, the players were just defending (rightly or wrongly) their right to object to the TUPE and move for free.

[Blumhoilann 6,712]

Any claim from the players should come from the PFA,not the SFA surely.

A Club statement is needed on this as soon as.

Draw a line in the sand CG,here and no further.WATP.

[Every Other Saturday 128]

To be fair, it's not the SFA who have asked us to pay, it s the independent panel.

Fair dos - if the Club take the players to court and win can we reclaim the fees from the 'independent panel of experts'?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Fair dos - if the Club take the players to court and win can we reclaim the fees from the 'independent panel of experts'?

Hopefully we would get the same as what happened to Mutu and claim damages directly from the player.

[JohnHardie 1,405]

Starting to wonder when all of this shite is gonna end....

Me too. I though it ended when the title stripping saga ended. How silly am I?

[mason boyne 40]

I'm sure the club said they weren't suprised that the 'independent panel of experts' sitting at hampden ruled in favour of the players. However, the club also said after the verdict that 'nothing was won or lost and the club would continue its action against the players', I'm assuming this is in a court of law. The figures mentioned are something like £6m in transfer fees lost to the club so I think it is worthwhile proceeding with the case if our lawyers think we have a decent chance in a proper court of law.

What really sticks in the craw is that the SFA want us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (the case is not finished yet - see above) and the SPL expect us to pay for their 'independent panel of experts' (no sporting adavantage) all in the fricking same week. The same week that Longmuir's impartiality is slurred and the SFA and SPL trying ever so hard to bully their way through this reconstruction/sponsorship/tv rights/self-preservation bollocks. Coincidence??

O aye, same week that Whyte also tried to raise his googly-eyed napper above the parapet to discredit the club - It has been all to fricking evident!!

Time for the club to make a very public annoucement on this charade.

you missed the O' aye factor in all of this tarrier excrement

[Rangers Lady 2,380]

Was just thinking if they did not transfer their contracts over to the new company why would the new company pay their wages??? as the company that ran Rangers is in Liquidation so at the end of the day the player beef is with the old company for wages.

Deserters got paid from the new company CG said so on Talk Sport.

75% pay cut !! Compared to the huge signing on fee's they got, plus Naismith was on full wages for a couple of years without kicking a ball..

How much did Whittaker lose the club with stupid red cards..

Pay their legal fee's

Fuck that

[The Educator 1,572]

To be honest I'm a bit puzzled by this one. Did Rangers request an independent panel, did the players request an independent panel, or did the SFA just go set this up themselves. One thing that the SFA cannot do is to stop the club from going after the players for breaking their contracts through the courts. I seem to remember the players union going on about 25 or so players asking for damages or something from the club only for the players to come out in the press and deny any involvement. One thing I do smell here is a rat, 31st March ASA investigation,1st April SPL claim £500.000, 4th April Whyte threatens to sue and now 5th April SFA claim costs for an independent panel. Two might be coincidence, but all four a coincidence I don't think so. Somebody is trying to drain the club of funds or are trying to put a possible new investor off. What's the chances that if we don't pay the money they'll announce that they are withholding this years Div3 prize money and TV cash?

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

To be fair, it's not the SFA who have asked us to pay, it s the independent panel.

The SFA insists Rangers should pay all legal bills relating to the dispute.

Hope thats clear enough