bigy 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Why wouldn't they want to move their contracts to still play for Rangers? No European football next season, and possibly for 2 seasons beyond that. A team that's at the mercy of the SPL regarding any punishment, and that would probably be uncompetitive in the league. A lot of them may be Rangers fans, but the likes of Davis, Naismith, McGregor, etc could easily find a mid-table Premiership team down south wanting to take them and give them a big pay rise into the bargain. Why would they stay? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Why wouldn't they want to move their contracts to still play for Rangers? For one.... Some of the players joined the club to play in European football competitions (Champions League or Europa League). If they agreed for their contracts to be transferred to a Rangers "newco", they wouldn't be playing in European competitions for a period that's in most cases running for the length of their current contracts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,084 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Why wouldn't they want to move their contracts to still play for Rangers? There has to be a cut of at least £10m in running expenses, they've just been playing for 25-50% per cent of their wages you think Miller will reimburse them for that, do you think they'll change employer and take a permanent wage cut or do you think they'll invoke their right to a free transfer. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I know it's bizarre that those championing the newco scenario don't realise that the players are employed by Rangers Football Club plc and cannot be transferred to another employer without their explicit consent and I very much doubt if any of them would actually want to do that and I for one couldn't blame them. What I was really suggesting (passing on) though forlan, is that McConville's wee slight-of-hand fantasy doesn't take into account that player transfers would need to be dealt with before "newco" fields a team, so there wouldn't be any trickery involved at all. His concept doesn't stand up. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,084 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 What I was really suggesting (passing on) though forlan, is that McConville's wee slight-of-hand fantasy doesn't take into account that player transfers would need to be dealt with before "newco" fields a team, so there wouldn't be any trickery involved at all. His concept doesn't stand up. It relies on a bluff and the SPLs' lack of balls. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I think TBKs' have fucked about too much,as have the admin,but if they are serious why piddle about with paltry bids at this stage of the game?,I mean they could and most probably would raise a lot of cash through share issues so why not just lump in with a higher cash offer?,or am I being way too simplistic?. Ian, I don't think it's anything to do with the amount of the bid. It's to do with Craig Whyte's shares and D&P's inability to deliver them. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 (edited) It relies on a bluff and the SPLs' lack of balls. I've read it, but I think it's a total fantasy that doesn't stand up. His scenario would be relying on far more than the SPL's lack of balls, it would be relying on the SFA turning a blind eye to a "newco" fielding players in an SPL game that aren't registered with the SFA to play for said "newco" because if the players are properly registered, then it's all known about beforehand and there's ultimately no slight-of-hand, bluff or trickery. Edited May 1, 2012 by Zappa typo! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Ian, I don't think it's anything to do with the amount of the bid. It's to do with Craig Whyte's shares and D&P's inability to deliver them. Is it inability or is it unwillingness though? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
capstans 0 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Whytes shares will be delivered by only one party if at all. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 No European football next season, and possibly for 2 seasons beyond that. A team that's at the mercy of the SPL regarding any punishment, and that would probably be uncompetitive in the league. A lot of them may be Rangers fans, but the likes of Davis, Naismith, McGregor, etc could easily find a mid-table Premiership team down south wanting to take them and give them a big pay rise into the bargain. Why would they stay? What you're saying is all these players will go, regardless of a newco or not. Because if we survive this and get a new owner, we have no Europe next season anyway, we have a transfer embargo, and we've been fined more money that we don't have. What all of you seem to be saying, even if you don't realise it, is that newco or not, we're going to lose a lot of players and be at the mercy of the SPL/SFA. So, given the above, frankly a newco is a no-brainer, and as I've been witteringly endlessly, let's do it in England. 0 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.