Play for FREE before you get sacked!

[ian1964 10,626]

RANGERS players face the axe this morning after being asked to play for FREE on Saturday.

3 comments

Related Stories

What Iâ??d give for an Ibrox BUNNET

THOSE storm clouds that once gathered over Celtic were nearly as black as those at Ibrox

 

Forget about beating Hearts

McCoist: We will be back

Rangers starâ??s agony

Black gets jag before Gers game

SunSport can reveal administrator Paul Clark wants Ibrox stars to give up wages they are entitled to for facing Hearts.

 

But it's understood up to SEVEN top-team stars â?? including top earner Allan McGregor â?? have already refused to take cuts.

 

It's also believed as many as five first-team players have told boss Ally McCoist they are ready to walk away if it helps save cash. Administrators Duff and Phelps will arrive at Murray Park today to give players a last chance to sort things themselves.

 

With that highly unlikely, they will then reveal plans to sack around ten players in a bid to minimise costs.

 

Gers need to save £1million a month. And bean-counter Clark hopes the desperate plight will see first-team stars agree to forego their March money.

 

McCoist delivered the news right after Gers' 2-1 defeat to Jambos.

 

Tensions spilled over in the dressing room as skipper Steve Davis demanded answers before issuing a rallying call to the players.

 

McCoist will train his squad one last time before axeman Clark reveals how many players must go.

 

It's sure to be an horrific day behind the scenes, with players and staff set to find out if they have a future at the club.

 

There is already anger that the news has been delayed, with everyone expecting to be told their fate last week. They hoped they could strike a deal which would see them have 75 per cent of their wages deferred, but Clark rejected that proposal.

 

PFA Scotland chief Fraser Wishart plans to meet with players today to advise them on their options, but firings are now inevitable.

 

Clark insists huge cuts must be made in a bid to save the 140-year-old club. There has also been a March 16 deadline set for potential buyers to come forward and lodge their bids to buy control.

 

With the verdict of the big tax case still to be heard, it seems almost impossible that deadline will be met. But Clark says there ARE people who can save the club.

 

He said: "We're content there are parties who could proceed to be the new owners of Rangers.

 

"It's time to end the uncertainty. We have to do something.

 

"If Ally and the players are able to come up with an appropriate solution we'll go with that.

 

"If not we will have to make redundancies."

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4172677/Play-for-FREE-before-you-get-sacked.html#ixzz1oCi7jtVW

[Gribz 745]

I guess the cream will rise to top here and those who want to play for Rangers will show. Lee McCulloch already deserves a pat on the back as does the manager for saying they will work for free.

 

Of course players are entitled to decline what is asked of them but considering the money they earn you'd think quite a few names in the dressing room would be willing to strike a deal for the club, even if it means deferring some wages until a new owner is in place and the club is up and running again.

[chilledbear 16]

I don't think deferring wages is on the cards.

 

Less chance of selling the Club, at least that is what I took from the statements over the weekend.

 

New owners are going to want to start from scratch, not having to fill a £1m hole every month.

 

Trying to look on the brightest side I can find.

 

We have for a long time lived above our means [a long way ], this is a chance to cut the flab, and although it may take a few years to recover, with the right people both on the board and the playing side, it can be a new start for Rangers.

[Gribz 745]

Just wondering, if anyone does get sacked would they have a claim for unfair dismissal??? I know Steven Whittaker wouldnt but perhaps some others would.

[Stefanovitch 0]

Deffering wages isn't the point and we, the media and the players have to accept that. Costs are too high to substain, deffering the wages just saves the problem until a date in the future when costs will rise again.

 

A new owner is less likely to accept a club on a substainable financial footing only to see costs rocket again once they are in control.

 

There may be real Rangers men waiting in the wings but they aren't going to want to be faced with backdated wages.

[der Berliner 3,568]

First, I'd like to point out that this is just a recap of the story broken about 5 times last week. Each day we heard that xyz players were in for the chop ... until the admins actually told us that talks were ongoing. They also told us yesterday - this reporter must have missd it though - that while players could agree to play for free, someone still needs to pay their insurance stuff and all, which might (!) be contractually difficult to do. Not saying that is impossible, but we'll have to keep that in mind. On the same note however, those willing to make a bid soon may (!) tell those players to stay about, take a break from it all and be ready once they come in. Just as food for thought. As opposed to some other poster, my glass is still half full rather than half empty, so I think about positives here, as minimal as they might appear right now.

 

I would assume if players e.g. agree for a wage cap of 2k a week, we would save a lot while those who get less now remain untouched. Whether that makes up a million per month remains to be seen, but I would be surprised if the admins go for broke here and try to reach that within the first month of administration. Cutting the squad down even more would seriously hamper the attractivity of the club for potential buyers too, since they would have to invest pretty soon after coming in.

 

On a sidenote, one may ask the admins whether fan money from e.g. "save Rangers" can't solely be used to sustain the staff (wage cap included) to stave off redundancies. Something, I think, every creditor will agree to?

[Gers4Life 0]

Just wondering, if anyone does get sacked would they have a claim for unfair dismissal??? I know Steven Whittaker wouldnt but perhaps some others would.

 

Thats a tough question mate but like most that have been at the club for years they have been handsomely paid and they know it for other that are just in the door that's another scenario

[Zappa 0]

Just wondering, if anyone does get sacked would they have a claim for unfair dismissal???

 

It wouldn't be an unfair dismissal claim as such Gribz. I'm led to believe that administrators sacking anyone under contract would mean they'd have a claim on the remaining value of their contract which would make them a creditor amongst all the others. If a contracts remaining value is £3m then the person would only get a small percentage of it; whatever % the administrators offer all the creditors in a CVA proposal.

[Guest Dutchy]

It's hardly surprising that players don't want to take a pay cut when the only person, as they may see it, to benefit is the guy that put them in this situation in the first place. Namely, Craig Whyte!!!

[calscot 0]

Nobody wants to take a cut but if it's a choice of taking a cut or getting nothing as your club goes out of business then the choice is a different one.

 

Many will just be filling their time till the end of the season before looking for a new club.