Administrators say Green purchased Rangers players' contracts

Daily Echo: Steven Davis Steven Davis

Charles Green's purchase of Rangers' assets included a payment to buy the contracts and registrations of the club's players, including that of new Saints signing Steven Davis, according to a report by the Glasgow side's administrators.

Duff and Phelps, appointed by the Court of Session on February 14, have broken down all the "asset realisations", the majority of which relate to their sale of the Ibrox club to Sevco Scotland Limited.

Green's consortium paid for the club's employees to transfer to his company under TUPE regulations, which protects employees' terms and conditions of employment when a business is transferred from one owner to another.

However, on the advice of their union, PFA Scotland, numerous players have rejected the opportunity to transfer their contracts from Rangers to Sevco.

That includes 27-year-old Davis, who last week agreed a three-year contract at St Mary's.

Green rejects the claim that Davis and the rest of the players are free agents and the former Sheffield United chief executive sent letters to clubs across the UK warning them that the players who objected to the switch to his new company were in breach of contract.

International clearance for the transfers of Davis, Kyle Lafferty, Jamie Ness, Steven Whittaker and Steven Naismith has been put on hold as Green continues to dispute the players' status.

Naismith has moved to Everton, Whittaker has signed for Norwich and Ness has joined Stoke.

While Davis is at Southampton, Lafferty is now with Swiss side Sion, and goalkeeper Allan McGregor is in talks with Turkish club Besiktas.

FIFA are likely to grant temporary registrations, while the wider issue is sorted out. The application for Davis was expected to be submitted to the world governing body yesterday, although there has been no official confirmation on that yet.

Comments (42)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:23pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Santo Levante says...

Errr, I'm none the wiser! So the new owner can sue the players for breach of contract or sit on some worthless assets who won't play in the Scottish second division. Hasn't slavery been abolished in Scotland?
Errr, I'm none the wiser! So the new owner can sue the players for breach of contract or sit on some worthless assets who won't play in the Scottish second division. Hasn't slavery been abolished in Scotland? Santo Levante
  • Score: 0

3:39pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Robbie From Fareham says...

Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery......
Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery...... Robbie From Fareham
  • Score: 0

3:39pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Bigrich1980 says...

it is a shame McGregor is going to Turkey - could have done with him too. At the end of the day what are rangers going to do if davis and all that go back they get the 75% pay increase back that they took in Feb and then Rangers are left with players who dont want to be playing for the club in the scottish 3rd division earning a fortune. it wont be long until Rangers are in admin again at that rate.
it is a shame McGregor is going to Turkey - could have done with him too. At the end of the day what are rangers going to do if davis and all that go back they get the 75% pay increase back that they took in Feb and then Rangers are left with players who dont want to be playing for the club in the scottish 3rd division earning a fortune. it wont be long until Rangers are in admin again at that rate. Bigrich1980
  • Score: 0

3:50pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Santo Levante says...

Robbie From Fareham wrote:
Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery......
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the new company actually wants to honour the contracts and pay the players, just profit from selling the "assets". How many of the players are being paid at present do you reckon?
[quote][p][bold]Robbie From Fareham[/bold] wrote: Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery......[/p][/quote]Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the new company actually wants to honour the contracts and pay the players, just profit from selling the "assets". How many of the players are being paid at present do you reckon? Santo Levante
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Wed 11 Jul 12

saint4ever says...

"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll look exactly the same afterwards."
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll look exactly the same afterwards." saint4ever
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Ih8sk8s says...

Santo Levante wrote:
Robbie From Fareham wrote:
Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery......
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the new company actually wants to honour the contracts and pay the players, just profit from selling the "assets". How many of the players are being paid at present do you reckon?
About none of them i reckon, they dont want those high earners anyway there trying to blag some compo
[quote][p][bold]Santo Levante[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Robbie From Fareham[/bold] wrote: Based on the wages that the Rangers players will be drawing in, even in the Scottish 3rd (Because that's what the contract agrees they'll be paid) I hardly think you could compare their situation to slavery......[/p][/quote]Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think the new company actually wants to honour the contracts and pay the players, just profit from selling the "assets". How many of the players are being paid at present do you reckon?[/p][/quote]About none of them i reckon, they dont want those high earners anyway there trying to blag some compo Ih8sk8s
  • Score: 0

4:08pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Bods says...

Administrators say Green purchased Rangers players' contracts (From Daily Echo)
WTF - Why were the Echo selling players contracts
Administrators say Green purchased Rangers players' contracts (From Daily Echo) WTF - Why were the Echo selling players contracts Bods
  • Score: 0

4:36pm Wed 11 Jul 12

St Retford says...

Does anyone here know loads about contract law and feel they can enlighten us on the situation?
Does anyone here know loads about contract law and feel they can enlighten us on the situation? St Retford
  • Score: 0

4:49pm Wed 11 Jul 12

franiow says...

If Green had bought Rangers he would have bought the assets including players. However, Rangers doesn't exist any more and the question is whether the players are assets that can legally sell once the club folded. The Scottish PFA have told the players that their contracts ended when Rangers dissolved. Green is after their selling on price as he will want cheape players in the lower leagues.
If he loses in this claim, he will surey have a claim for misrepresentation against the administrators.
If Green had bought Rangers he would have bought the assets including players. However, Rangers doesn't exist any more and the question is whether the players are assets that can legally sell once the club folded. The Scottish PFA have told the players that their contracts ended when Rangers dissolved. Green is after their selling on price as he will want cheape players in the lower leagues. If he loses in this claim, he will surey have a claim for misrepresentation against the administrators. franiow
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Folkestone Saint says...

All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here Folkestone Saint
  • Score: 0

5:52pm Wed 11 Jul 12

saintsupnorth says...

Do they really expect to get 100% out of players when they are forced to play for them?, this green sounds like a spoilt kid not getting what he wants, so he is gonna ruin players careers because of it. Surely the decent thing to do is allow players to get on with there careers, and not cling onto them. Feal sorry for Davis and other players involved, cause not only is it impacting them personally but also there famillies.
Do they really expect to get 100% out of players when they are forced to play for them?, this green sounds like a spoilt kid not getting what he wants, so he is gonna ruin players careers because of it. Surely the decent thing to do is allow players to get on with there careers, and not cling onto them. Feal sorry for Davis and other players involved, cause not only is it impacting them personally but also there famillies. saintsupnorth
  • Score: 0

6:19pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

All a bunch of crooks. For years they listed their assets as worth over £100 MILLION.

Along comes Admin & sells it for £1.5m according to this same report. Green's new Director has just been quoted that the club is worth "£50m on a bad day". Not a very clever thing to do.

The Liquidator will shortly be all over that bunch of clowns....
All a bunch of crooks. For years they listed their assets as worth over £100 MILLION. Along comes Admin & sells it for £1.5m according to this same report. Green's new Director has just been quoted that the club is worth "£50m on a bad day". Not a very clever thing to do. The Liquidator will shortly be all over that bunch of clowns.... Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

6:49pm Wed 11 Jul 12

circa 66 saint says...

Folkestone Saint wrote:
All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void.
tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets
[quote][p][bold]Folkestone Saint[/bold] wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here[/p][/quote]the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void. tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets circa 66 saint
  • Score: 0

7:11pm Wed 11 Jul 12

GX Saint says...

circa 66 saint wrote:
Folkestone Saint wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void. tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets
And he's ending up with a bunch of fixtures he didn't bargain for ... Elgin, Annan, Peterhead
[quote][p][bold]circa 66 saint[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Folkestone Saint[/bold] wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here[/p][/quote]the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void. tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets[/p][/quote]And he's ending up with a bunch of fixtures he didn't bargain for ... Elgin, Annan, Peterhead GX Saint
  • Score: 0

7:20pm Wed 11 Jul 12

circa 66 saint says...

GX Saint wrote:
circa 66 saint wrote:
Folkestone Saint wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void. tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets
And he's ending up with a bunch of fixtures he didn't bargain for ... Elgin, Annan, Peterhead
anyway we are doing him a favour by taking davis he can't afford him as his new co are not guaranteed football next season
[quote][p][bold]GX Saint[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]circa 66 saint[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Folkestone Saint[/bold] wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here[/p][/quote]the problem for green is he bought the assets of a liquidated company e.g. the fixtures and fittings and the like.at the point of liquidation the players contracts become null and void. tupe only comes into force when a business takes over another business green did not take over rangers only it's fixed assets[/p][/quote]And he's ending up with a bunch of fixtures he didn't bargain for ... Elgin, Annan, Peterhead[/p][/quote]anyway we are doing him a favour by taking davis he can't afford him as his new co are not guaranteed football next season circa 66 saint
  • Score: 0

7:42pm Wed 11 Jul 12

business-guru says...

idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football... business-guru
  • Score: 0

7:52pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Jesus_02 says...

Folkestone Saint wrote:
All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
it doesn't really, toupe laws mean that employees are not made redundant if they have a role to go to. They are designed to protect employee rights as there terms and conditions are transferred too.

Having said that i'm sure that players contracts are unlike anyone we know.
[quote][p][bold]Folkestone Saint[/bold] wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here[/p][/quote]it doesn't really, toupe laws mean that employees are not made redundant if they have a role to go to. They are designed to protect employee rights as there terms and conditions are transferred too. Having said that i'm sure that players contracts are unlike anyone we know. Jesus_02
  • Score: 0

8:09pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Fatty x Ford Worker says...

Told you lot on a previous post Slim Jim would of sorted this minor matter out!
Told you lot on a previous post Slim Jim would of sorted this minor matter out! Fatty x Ford Worker
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Wed 11 Jul 12

userds5050 says...

This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade."
This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade." userds5050
  • Score: 0

10:01pm Wed 11 Jul 12

userds5050 says...

BTW this Echo report is just a copy and paste job of a story that's been floating around today on tinternet. "Green purchased Rangers players' contracts." Yes and he would still own them if he hadn't liquidated the club. It doesn't matter what Duff & Phelp claim they sold him. Did Green seriously think he was going to get all the clubs assets, players' contracts, not pay a penny towards a CVA and get re admitted to the SPL for £5.5 million? Really?
BTW this Echo report is just a copy and paste job of a story that's been floating around today on tinternet. "Green purchased Rangers players' contracts." Yes and he would still own them if he hadn't liquidated the club. It doesn't matter what Duff & Phelp claim they sold him. Did Green seriously think he was going to get all the clubs assets, players' contracts, not pay a penny towards a CVA and get re admitted to the SPL for £5.5 million? Really? userds5050
  • Score: 0

11:26pm Wed 11 Jul 12

wsxsaint says...

It is a matter of fact under employment law (TUPE) that an employee cannot be forced to have his contract of employment transferred to another company. He must agree to any such transfer. If the players have not agreed then it is irrelevant whether or not the players contracts have been sold to Newco.
It is a matter of fact under employment law (TUPE) that an employee cannot be forced to have his contract of employment transferred to another company. He must agree to any such transfer. If the players have not agreed then it is irrelevant whether or not the players contracts have been sold to Newco. wsxsaint
  • Score: 0

11:43pm Wed 11 Jul 12

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

userds5050 wrote:
This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade."
CVA's and Liquidations are different things. A company enters into a CVA (which is an agreement with creditors) in order to avoid Liquidation (which would mean all the assets being realised/converted into cash in a forced sale).

AS for TUPE, this stands for the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations. It is a nifty bit of legislation designed to protect employees when a business is sold/transferred to a new owner. All contracts of employment automatically transfer to the new owner and the employees cannot be sacked for reasons connected with the transfer. Any dismissal for a reason connected with the transfer is automatically unfair and the sacked employee can claim compensation. However, the employees have a right to be informed and consulted about the transfer and they can choose not to accept the transfer in which case their contracts end but they can't claim compensation. Also, if the new employer changes the terms of employment the employee doesn't have to accept the new terms if they are worse in which case he can leave and claim compensation for unfair dismissal. It seems that what has happened here is that the players have just decided they don't wan to work for the new outfit and have rejected the transfer of their contract. This is something they are quite entitled to to.
[quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade."[/p][/quote]CVA's and Liquidations are different things. A company enters into a CVA (which is an agreement with creditors) in order to avoid Liquidation (which would mean all the assets being realised/converted into cash in a forced sale). AS for TUPE, this stands for the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations. It is a nifty bit of legislation designed to protect employees when a business is sold/transferred to a new owner. All contracts of employment automatically transfer to the new owner and the employees cannot be sacked for reasons connected with the transfer. Any dismissal for a reason connected with the transfer is automatically unfair and the sacked employee can claim compensation. However, the employees have a right to be informed and consulted about the transfer and they can choose not to accept the transfer in which case their contracts end but they can't claim compensation. Also, if the new employer changes the terms of employment the employee doesn't have to accept the new terms if they are worse in which case he can leave and claim compensation for unfair dismissal. It seems that what has happened here is that the players have just decided they don't wan to work for the new outfit and have rejected the transfer of their contract. This is something they are quite entitled to to. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child
  • Score: 0

12:56am Thu 12 Jul 12

userds5050 says...

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
userds5050 wrote:
This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade."
CVA's and Liquidations are different things. A company enters into a CVA (which is an agreement with creditors) in order to avoid Liquidation (which would mean all the assets being realised/converted into cash in a forced sale).

AS for TUPE, this stands for the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations. It is a nifty bit of legislation designed to protect employees when a business is sold/transferred to a new owner. All contracts of employment automatically transfer to the new owner and the employees cannot be sacked for reasons connected with the transfer. Any dismissal for a reason connected with the transfer is automatically unfair and the sacked employee can claim compensation. However, the employees have a right to be informed and consulted about the transfer and they can choose not to accept the transfer in which case their contracts end but they can't claim compensation. Also, if the new employer changes the terms of employment the employee doesn't have to accept the new terms if they are worse in which case he can leave and claim compensation for unfair dismissal. It seems that what has happened here is that the players have just decided they don't wan to work for the new outfit and have rejected the transfer of their contract. This is something they are quite entitled to to.
Oh I completely agree. It was just the line: "Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value." In their original CVA proposal that caught my eye. Something they now seem to be disagreeing with now they have gone down the liquidation scenario route. Personally I don't think they've got a leg to stand on.
[quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]userds5050[/bold] wrote: This is from Rangers own CVA proposal: "The sale consideration under the New Company scenario has not been apportioned. Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value. There is assumed to be no residual value in any Intellectual Property or Goodwill as the club has ceased to trade."[/p][/quote]CVA's and Liquidations are different things. A company enters into a CVA (which is an agreement with creditors) in order to avoid Liquidation (which would mean all the assets being realised/converted into cash in a forced sale). AS for TUPE, this stands for the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations. It is a nifty bit of legislation designed to protect employees when a business is sold/transferred to a new owner. All contracts of employment automatically transfer to the new owner and the employees cannot be sacked for reasons connected with the transfer. Any dismissal for a reason connected with the transfer is automatically unfair and the sacked employee can claim compensation. However, the employees have a right to be informed and consulted about the transfer and they can choose not to accept the transfer in which case their contracts end but they can't claim compensation. Also, if the new employer changes the terms of employment the employee doesn't have to accept the new terms if they are worse in which case he can leave and claim compensation for unfair dismissal. It seems that what has happened here is that the players have just decided they don't wan to work for the new outfit and have rejected the transfer of their contract. This is something they are quite entitled to to.[/p][/quote]Oh I completely agree. It was just the line: "Under the Liquidation scenario, the club ceases to trade and therefore the player contracts terminate and registrations revert to the SFA and therefore may have no value." In their original CVA proposal that caught my eye. Something they now seem to be disagreeing with now they have gone down the liquidation scenario route. Personally I don't think they've got a leg to stand on. userds5050
  • Score: 0

11:15am Thu 12 Jul 12

GX Saint says...

Jesus_02 wrote:
Folkestone Saint wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here
it doesn't really, toupe laws mean that employees are not made redundant if they have a role to go to. They are designed to protect employee rights as there terms and conditions are transferred too. Having said that i'm sure that players contracts are unlike anyone we know.
toupe laws? Hair-raising stuff
[quote][p][bold]Jesus_02[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Folkestone Saint[/bold] wrote: All staff at old rangers should be getting redundancy pay, then they would have to re-apply or their job's when advertised, well that's how it's works down here[/p][/quote]it doesn't really, toupe laws mean that employees are not made redundant if they have a role to go to. They are designed to protect employee rights as there terms and conditions are transferred too. Having said that i'm sure that players contracts are unlike anyone we know.[/p][/quote]toupe laws? Hair-raising stuff GX Saint
  • Score: 0

2:02pm Thu 12 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

business-guru wrote:
idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
[quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ! Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

2:12pm Thu 12 Jul 12

Mush On The Beach says...

Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote:
idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
Get over yourself Timmy Bhoy. You’re next on the road to Jock bankruptcy and oblivion, Death by lack of interest now the Gers are gone
[quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]Get over yourself Timmy Bhoy. You’re next on the road to Jock bankruptcy and oblivion, Death by lack of interest now the Gers are gone Mush On The Beach
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Thu 12 Jul 12

Plastic Saint says...

From my own experience of TUPE, an employee must be offered a job with the new contract holder if the employees main duty with his existing employer is being transferred. That employee doesnt have to accept. Surely if a player was contracted to play in the SPL as his main duty that is totally different from playing in a lower league with lesser facilities certainly at away grounds. I know football is a law unto itself but surely this will never stand up in court and can Rangers afford to take it that far? I would suggest maybe the players involved counter sue for restriction of trade. I am not a lawyer so I am probably getting it all wrong. lol
From my own experience of TUPE, an employee must be offered a job with the new contract holder if the employees main duty with his existing employer is being transferred. That employee doesnt have to accept. Surely if a player was contracted to play in the SPL as his main duty that is totally different from playing in a lower league with lesser facilities certainly at away grounds. I know football is a law unto itself but surely this will never stand up in court and can Rangers afford to take it that far? I would suggest maybe the players involved counter sue for restriction of trade. I am not a lawyer so I am probably getting it all wrong. lol Plastic Saint
  • Score: 0

6:10pm Thu 12 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

Mush On The Beach wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote:
idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
Get over yourself Timmy Bhoy. You’re next on the road to Jock bankruptcy and oblivion, Death by lack of interest now the Gers are gone
Ahhh Mush. You're beloved Rangers are gone. Suicide by greed & corruption.

As a wise man once said..."they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace"

I sense your hurt. Your tide has turned. Your beach no longer a blue flag.

Take me to hospital. My sides are splitting..........
[quote][p][bold]Mush On The Beach[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]Get over yourself Timmy Bhoy. You’re next on the road to Jock bankruptcy and oblivion, Death by lack of interest now the Gers are gone[/p][/quote]Ahhh Mush. You're beloved Rangers are gone. Suicide by greed & corruption. As a wise man once said..."they are a permanent embarrassment and an occasional disgrace" I sense your hurt. Your tide has turned. Your beach no longer a blue flag. Take me to hospital. My sides are splitting.......... Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

2:23am Fri 13 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
... and you let them do it?
[quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]... and you let them do it? OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

2:24am Fri 13 Jul 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

Fatty x Ford Worker wrote:
Told you lot on a previous post Slim Jim would of sorted this minor matter out!
.. would have!
[quote][p][bold]Fatty x Ford Worker[/bold] wrote: Told you lot on a previous post Slim Jim would of sorted this minor matter out![/p][/quote].. would have! OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

7:41am Fri 13 Jul 12

peachy1 says...

The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football
The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football peachy1
  • Score: 0

10:57am Fri 13 Jul 12

userds5050 says...

peachy1 wrote:
The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football
Er, he would own the players' contracts and be able to sell them for the figures you talk about - if he hadn't liquidated the club. By doing so he has not paid a penny towards a CVA and allowed the players to leave for free if they didn't leave for free. No one wants to see clubs fold but this is all of Mr Greens own making.
[quote][p][bold]peachy1[/bold] wrote: The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football[/p][/quote]Er, he would own the players' contracts and be able to sell them for the figures you talk about - if he hadn't liquidated the club. By doing so he has not paid a penny towards a CVA and allowed the players to leave for free if they didn't leave for free. No one wants to see clubs fold but this is all of Mr Greens own making. userds5050
  • Score: 0

11:17am Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

peachy1 wrote:
The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football
So you think running up £100 million debt & then folding to start afresh with a £13m bonus, while leaving creditors with nothing, is OK ?

Are you a Banker ? ( think I've spelt correctly.....)
[quote][p][bold]peachy1[/bold] wrote: The new CEO wants transfer money for them so he can pump that into the new company I think he has a point they are all quite good players he bought the assets if the club including the layers contracts I reckon Davies is worth about 3 M Naismith about 5-7 M and the rest could raise another 5 M this would give them between 10-13M in the new company which old ensure a good start to them rising from the ashes . I don't know why people are so keen to see clubs fold I think its bad for football[/p][/quote]So you think running up £100 million debt & then folding to start afresh with a £13m bonus, while leaving creditors with nothing, is OK ? Are you a Banker ? ( think I've spelt correctly.....) Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

11:18am Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
... and you let them do it?
Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]... and you let them do it?[/p][/quote]Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........ Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

11:43am Fri 13 Jul 12

Mush On The Beach says...

Ach I The Noo wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
... and you let them do it?
Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........
So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty
[quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]... and you let them do it?[/p][/quote]Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........[/p][/quote]So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty Mush On The Beach
  • Score: 0

3:06pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

Mush On The Beach wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
... and you let them do it?
Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........
So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty
And you are just a wee hurting part time blue nose wannabee.

I see you've moved from the NATIONAL argument to a CLUB argument because you had no answer. I think about a third of the EPC managers were Scottish last year. No wonder you had to try & cheat..oops sorry...change. Your apologies accepted.

But I'm sure you will enjoy watching your team in DIVISION 3 next year. I know all the other Scottish fans will.........
[quote][p][bold]Mush On The Beach[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]... and you let them do it?[/p][/quote]Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........[/p][/quote]So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty[/p][/quote]And you are just a wee hurting part time blue nose wannabee. I see you've moved from the NATIONAL argument to a CLUB argument because you had no answer. I think about a third of the EPC managers were Scottish last year. No wonder you had to try & cheat..oops sorry...change. Your apologies accepted. But I'm sure you will enjoy watching your team in DIVISION 3 next year. I know all the other Scottish fans will......... Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

3:08pm Fri 13 Jul 12

peachy1 says...

These comments are far too personal you all haven't got scoops what your going on about
These comments are far too personal you all haven't got scoops what your going on about peachy1
  • Score: 0

3:10pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

peachy1 wrote:
These comments are far too personal you all haven't got scoops what your going on about
and in English....?
[quote][p][bold]peachy1[/bold] wrote: These comments are far too personal you all haven't got scoops what your going on about[/p][/quote]and in English....? Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

3:22pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Mush On The Beach says...

Ach I The Noo wrote:
Mush On The Beach wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
Ach I The Noo wrote:
business-guru wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...
And are mostly.......ENGLISH !
... and you let them do it?
Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........
So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty
And you are just a wee hurting part time blue nose wannabee.

I see you've moved from the NATIONAL argument to a CLUB argument because you had no answer. I think about a third of the EPC managers were Scottish last year. No wonder you had to try & cheat..oops sorry...change. Your apologies accepted.

But I'm sure you will enjoy watching your team in DIVISION 3 next year. I know all the other Scottish fans will.........
Oh ok, you’ve rumbled me I bow to your greater wisdom, shorter arms and longer pockets. Blackburn and Villa fans can’t thank you enough for the expertise you have sent down of your Scottish Nationals.
[quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mush On The Beach[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]business-guru[/bold] wrote: idiots run football... complete idiots run scottish football...[/p][/quote]And are mostly.......ENGLISH ![/p][/quote]... and you let them do it?[/p][/quote]Yeah, we were too busy managing EPL teams........[/p][/quote]So when you say we, I presume your main claim is Fergie, an ex Gers boy. You really are a fickle Sweaty[/p][/quote]And you are just a wee hurting part time blue nose wannabee. I see you've moved from the NATIONAL argument to a CLUB argument because you had no answer. I think about a third of the EPC managers were Scottish last year. No wonder you had to try & cheat..oops sorry...change. Your apologies accepted. But I'm sure you will enjoy watching your team in DIVISION 3 next year. I know all the other Scottish fans will.........[/p][/quote]Oh ok, you’ve rumbled me I bow to your greater wisdom, shorter arms and longer pockets. Blackburn and Villa fans can’t thank you enough for the expertise you have sent down of your Scottish Nationals. Mush On The Beach
  • Score: 0

3:41pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

And also Man U fans & Everton etc etc.

Which fans can thank an English manager ?

Answers on a postcard to Harry Rednapp.....?
And also Man U fans & Everton etc etc. Which fans can thank an English manager ? Answers on a postcard to Harry Rednapp.....? Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Mush On The Beach says...

Ach I The Noo wrote:
And also Man U fans & Everton etc etc.

Which fans can thank an English manager ?

Answers on a postcard to Harry Rednapp.....?
Southampton FC you numpty, keep up
[quote][p][bold]Ach I The Noo[/bold] wrote: And also Man U fans & Everton etc etc. Which fans can thank an English manager ? Answers on a postcard to Harry Rednapp.....?[/p][/quote]Southampton FC you numpty, keep up Mush On The Beach
  • Score: 0

4:12pm Fri 13 Jul 12

Ach I The Noo says...

ah right....about 36 years ago. Apologies

#livinginthepastmush
ah right....about 36 years ago. Apologies #livinginthepastmush Ach I The Noo
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree