calum_gers Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Of what? Read his original post my friend. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Nice try, thanks for playing. I'm afraid we're going to have to vote you of. Of what? "We"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 (edited) I think this goes back to the administration period where players were taking significant pay cuts. However, it turns out they were taking wage deferrals. Which as we all know isn't really a pay cut, but a way of storing up a bigger problem for later on. When Rangers died they became free agents. Sadly, I have to side with Chuckles on this for once. I don't think these players have a case here. Edited December 11, 2012 by Fotbawmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Read his original post my friend. Did you mean "off"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calum_gers Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Did you mean "off"? 'Of' was intentional. Again, read the post I quoted. It doesn't really matter, I was just being facetious. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnforever1992 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Bhairnforever has no fucking clue about anything. Everyone knows it - it's part of his posting charm and all the more enjoyable for it. Tell me who is the biggest liar in this mess at Ibrox? Jim Traynor or Charles Green. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 "Forgot"? I don't think so, Bennett. I simply pulled what I believed was relevant from the article - which was linked in the quote box in my reply. In actual fact, what you've tried to place as a "here's what he doesn't want you to know" actually follows, point by point, what I posted this morning. I'm actually quite pleased that I got the Union line so accurate. A shame you're so stupid that your attempted attack has only reinforced what I originally posited. So, given that the SPFA didn't release the "67 players" line, where did that come from? Any guesses? Who would want to take a rangers story and sensationalise/spin it? Would you or any of your thick friends like to comment on the abuse being dealt out to the players online and in the MSM, by fans and club representatives? As I pointed out earlier, this is not about these particular players - it is about the employer and the way it treats employees represented by the Union. You cherry picked the bits which showed Rangers in a poorer light. Shame on you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 'Of' was intentional. Again, read the post I quoted. It doesn't really matter, I was just being facetious. Ah right. With you now. My apologies 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 CHARLES GREEN, Chief Executive of Rangers, issued the following statement today: “In view of the extensive and somewhat sensationalised media coverage of actions allegedly being taken against the Club by players past and present, I would like to clarify the position for our fans. "There are three separate disputes or litigations ongoing. The first is the Club’s action for damages which has been lodged with an SFA Arbitration Tribunal. "A number of players, Alan McGregor, Kyle Lafferty, Rhys McCabe, Sone Aluko, Steven Davis, John Fleck, Steven Naismith, Steven Whittaker and Jamie Ness objected to their contracts of employment being transferred under TUPE regulations from the oldco Rangers to the company as it now stands. "The transfer was carried out as with every other member of staff in order to protect employees during oldco Rangers insolvency. “The Rangers Football Club believes the players’ objections were incompetent and the players unilaterally terminated their contracts in an unlawful manner and is pursuing damages through the SFA Arbitration Tribunal. “Discussions took place with representatives of some of the players and agreements were reached with Davis, Fleck and McCabe. “Representatives of the remaining players have challenged the right of the Club to be involved in the SFA process and a preliminary hearing has been fixed for January 7, 2013 to determine these jurisdictional issues. "Senior counsel has advised the Club that prospects of winning these preliminary arguments are good. If the Club is unable to pursue its rights through the SFA there are other routes available to pursue compensation from the players and their new clubs. “Separately PFA Scotland has raised an employment tribunal claim against the Club supposedly on behalf of 67 unnamed players, alleging a failure to consult on the part of oldco prior to the players’ contracts being transferred on June 14. "Senior counsel has given a robust opinion that PFA Scotland has no locus or standing to raise such a claim in the circumstances of the case. “The fact that many of the supposed 67 players are still at Ibrox and have indicated they have no part in this action begs the question why it is being raised at all. "Further, it appears that a number of players whose contracts were due to terminate at the end of last season and who were never in line to transfer under TUPE have been included in the numbers. "Also, a number of former players have already signed agreements with the Club waiving any right to participate in this claim. “In reality, we are talking about six players who have some form of dispute rather than 67. "Rangers fans will note how the Club captain Lee McCulloch and a number of other players have quickly dissociated themselves from this action. "I have also had the father of one player calling, quite furious that his young son has been attached to an action he knew nothing about. "PFA Scotland has confirmed as much in its statement earlier today. That statement confirms that the failure to consult claim apparently lodged for the benefit of 67 players will be withdrawn if the Club’s SFA damages claim against the 6 players is dropped. "The purpose of the failure to consult claim is therefore not to safeguard the rights of the 67 players but to attempt to persuade the Club to abandon its legitimate pursuit of compensation from players who in the Club’s view, walked out on their contracts of employment. “Finally three players - Aluko, Lafferty and Ness - have also raised constructive dismissal claims against the Club as it stands now. "We have challenged their right to do so and these are low value claims. It should be noted that the players were employed by new clubs almost immediately on terms we believe to be at least as beneficial as those they enjoyed at Rangers. “It is disappointing that players who have left the Club to further their own careers rather than play in Division Three should be continuing with these actions or allowing them to be progressed on their behalf. "I am in no doubt that the supporters who are showing such outstanding loyalty to Rangers will form their own views as the Club continues to rebuild.” Really what i expected the club to say, i've feeling an agreement withthe players in question will be reached. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 CHARLES GREEN, Chief Executive of Rangers, issued the following statement today: “In view of the extensive and somewhat sensationalised media coverage of actions allegedly being taken against the Club by players past and present, I would like to clarify the position for our fans. "There are three separate disputes or litigations ongoing. The first is the Club’s action for damages which has been lodged with an SFA Arbitration Tribunal. "A number of players, Alan McGregor, Kyle Lafferty, Rhys McCabe, Sone Aluko, Steven Davis, John Fleck, Steven Naismith, Steven Whittaker and Jamie Ness objected to their contracts of employment being transferred under TUPE regulations from the oldco Rangers to the company as it now stands. "The transfer was carried out as with every other member of staff in order to protect employees during oldco Rangers insolvency. “The Rangers Football Club believes the players’ objections were incompetent and the players unilaterally terminated their contracts in an unlawful manner and is pursuing damages through the SFA Arbitration Tribunal. “Discussions took place with representatives of some of the players and agreements were reached with Davis, Fleck and McCabe. “Representatives of the remaining players have challenged the right of the Club to be involved in the SFA process and a preliminary hearing has been fixed for January 7, 2013 to determine these jurisdictional issues. "Senior counsel has advised the Club that prospects of winning these preliminary arguments are good. If the Club is unable to pursue its rights through the SFA there are other routes available to pursue compensation from the players and their new clubs. “Separately PFA Scotland has raised an employment tribunal claim against the Club supposedly on behalf of 67 unnamed players, alleging a failure to consult on the part of oldco prior to the players’ contracts being transferred on June 14. "Senior counsel has given a robust opinion that PFA Scotland has no locus or standing to raise such a claim in the circumstances of the case. “The fact that many of the supposed 67 players are still at Ibrox and have indicated they have no part in this action begs the question why it is being raised at all. "Further, it appears that a number of players whose contracts were due to terminate at the end of last season and who were never in line to transfer under TUPE have been included in the numbers. "Also, a number of former players have already signed agreements with the Club waiving any right to participate in this claim. “In reality, we are talking about six players who have some form of dispute rather than 67. "Rangers fans will note how the Club captain Lee McCulloch and a number of other players have quickly dissociated themselves from this action. "I have also had the father of one player calling, quite furious that his young son has been attached to an action he knew nothing about. "PFA Scotland has confirmed as much in its statement earlier today. That statement confirms that the failure to consult claim apparently lodged for the benefit of 67 players will be withdrawn if the Club’s SFA damages claim against the 6 players is dropped. "The purpose of the failure to consult claim is therefore not to safeguard the rights of the 67 players but to attempt to persuade the Club to abandon its legitimate pursuit of compensation from players who in the Club’s view, walked out on their contracts of employment. “Finally three players - Aluko, Lafferty and Ness - have also raised constructive dismissal claims against the Club as it stands now. "We have challenged their right to do so and these are low value claims. It should be noted that the players were employed by new clubs almost immediately on terms we believe to be at least as beneficial as those they enjoyed at Rangers. “It is disappointing that players who have left the Club to further their own careers rather than play in Division Three should be continuing with these actions or allowing them to be progressed on their behalf. "I am in no doubt that the supporters who are showing such outstanding loyalty to Rangers will form their own views as the Club continues to rebuild.” Really what i expected the club to say, i've feeling an agreement withthe players in question will be reached. 10 words or less, Gordon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 10 words or less, Gordon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 You cherry picked the bits which showed Rangers in a poorer light. Shame on you. No I didn't - your insistence only lowers your perceived intelligence on here. A difficult job, but you're rising to the challenge. If this keeps up, you'll be following Bendarroch! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 CHARLES GREEN, Chief Executive of Rangers, issued the following statement today: "In view of the extensive and somewhat sensationalised media coverage of actions allegedly being taken against the Club by players past and present, I would like to clarify the position for our fans. "There are three separate disputes or litigations ongoing. The first is the Club's action for damages which has been lodged with an SFA Arbitration Tribunal. "A number of players, Alan McGregor, Kyle Lafferty, Rhys McCabe, Sone Aluko, Steven Davis, John Fleck, Steven Naismith, Steven Whittaker and Jamie Ness objected to their contracts of employment being transferred under TUPE regulations from the oldco Rangers to the company as it now stands. "The transfer was carried out as with every other member of staff in order to protect employees during oldco Rangers insolvency. "The Rangers Football Club believes the players' objections were incompetent and the players unilaterally terminated their contracts in an unlawful manner and is pursuing damages through the SFA Arbitration Tribunal. "Discussions took place with representatives of some of the players and agreements were reached with Davis, Fleck and McCabe. "Representatives of the remaining players have challenged the right of the Club to be involved in the SFA process and a preliminary hearing has been fixed for January 7, 2013 to determine these jurisdictional issues. "Senior counsel has advised the Club that prospects of winning these preliminary arguments are good. If the Club is unable to pursue its rights through the SFA there are other routes available to pursue compensation from the players and their new clubs. "Separately PFA Scotland has raised an employment tribunal claim against the Club supposedly on behalf of 67 unnamed players, alleging a failure to consult on the part of oldco prior to the players' contracts being transferred on June 14. "Senior counsel has given a robust opinion that PFA Scotland has no locus or standing to raise such a claim in the circumstances of the case. "The fact that many of the supposed 67 players are still at Ibrox and have indicated they have no part in this action begs the question why it is being raised at all. "Further, it appears that a number of players whose contracts were due to terminate at the end of last season and who were never in line to transfer under TUPE have been included in the numbers. "Also, a number of former players have already signed agreements with the Club waiving any right to participate in this claim. "In reality, we are talking about six players who have some form of dispute rather than 67. "Rangers fans will note how the Club captain Lee McCulloch and a number of other players have quickly dissociated themselves from this action. "I have also had the father of one player calling, quite furious that his young son has been attached to an action he knew nothing about. "PFA Scotland has confirmed as much in its statement earlier today. That statement confirms that the failure to consult claim apparently lodged for the benefit of 67 players will be withdrawn if the Club's SFA damages claim against the 6 players is dropped. "The purpose of the failure to consult claim is therefore not to safeguard the rights of the 67 players but to attempt to persuade the Club to abandon its legitimate pursuit of compensation from players who in the Club's view, walked out on their contracts of employment. "Finally three players - Aluko, Lafferty and Ness - have also raised constructive dismissal claims against the Club as it stands now. "We have challenged their right to do so and these are low value claims. It should be noted that the players were employed by new clubs almost immediately on terms we believe to be at least as beneficial as those they enjoyed at Rangers. "It is disappointing that players who have left the Club to further their own careers rather than play in Division Three should be continuing with these actions or allowing them to be progressed on their behalf. "I am in no doubt that the supporters who are showing such outstanding loyalty to Rangers will form their own views as the Club continues to rebuild." Really what i expected the club to say, i've feeling an agreement withthe players in question will be reached. Pffft. Another C&P from the scum apologist. Love the juxtaposition of the bolded bits at the start. Suck it up berrz, Charlie's having you lot right over... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henrik's tongue Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 "the article" for which there was a link on the post - then anyone who wanted to read it again could find it easily. Anyone with half a brain that is - oh wait..... Jeezus these fuckers are properly fucking stupid. Any day now we'll all be getting writs from Middle Earth, with Defamation proceedings against us all. Read: "When ah cherry pick it's pyoor fuckin different ya *** c**t so it is." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 To be fair it looks like a non-story. Where was the first reference to 67 players? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 No I didn't - your insistence only lowers your perceived intelligence on here. A difficult job, but you're rising to the challenge. If this keeps up, you'll be following Bendarroch! Nothing to see here, move along now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Read: "When ah cherry pick it's pyoor fuckin different ya *** c**t so it is." One of these days somebody will get a Nobel prize for cracking the genetic code that operates between the average Orc's eyes and what passes for his brain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Looks like the PFA is running scared How do you work that out, Tedi? Seriously? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Employee? I thought she was the lawyer acting on behalf of the PFA with regards to the Rangers case? FFS, are there NO lawyers that haven't got STs at celtic park? I blame the schools.... 0 Quote Link to comment 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.