They weren't made redundant. They had a new company take over the football operations of Rangers before the liquidation process was completed. If your company sells it's operations to another and they choose not to have you on the payroll you don't end up with no redundancy. How is it drivel and tosh? Just because it's a ****ing stupid way of doing things doesn't mean that's not the way FIFA works. The fact the previous batch of players had to wait up to over 3 weeks to get their clearance which was then granted in one go points to FIFA having people meet to decide these disputed matters every so often rather than having people working all the time. Where is the evidence of a more sensible working practice?
I don't actually think that's correct, from the time of the liquidation, this is what was being reported... Under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006, all employees have the legal right to transfer to the new employer on their existing terms and conditions of employment and with all their existing employment rights and liabilities intact. It could prove problematic for the newco to maintain the level of wages currently being paid to players if the club's income is reduced. Similarly, employees are under no obligation to accept the terms of the transfer to the new company and can terminate their employment contracts. Effectively, this means that when Rangers is liquidated, all current players would be free to seek new clubs and there would be no transfer fees due to the newco.
Does anyone know why Rangers have not been liquidated yet? I see that there is still some wrangling about Rangers allegedly owing money to Dundee Utd, and the SFA may owe them some money, but I can't see why that would hold up liquidating them
Humberside have just tweeted: Still no @sonealuko for Brighton game, not received int'l clearance. Jakupovic has got his but now injured (hand). More at 1625. #hcafc
They've been doing the selling off, but they can't do the paying out yet. If you owe OLM and DMD £10 each and you've got £10 to pay it with, you'd be thinking £5 each and they lose the other £5, but if there's also me on the side saying you owe me £10 as well it needs resolving so that if I am owed it we all get £3.33. If you've already paid the money out then I'm left more out of pocket than I should be. In Rangers case it's further complicated by the player contract issues. When Green bought the club's assets the players' contracts and registrations made up part of the money he paid. If it gets ruled that the players don't have to transfer to the new club then he'll be entitled to part of his purchase price back and the creditors will get less, because the administrators never had the right to sell them in the first place. If it gets ruled they do have to transfer then it'll be the players and the new club that have to settle the matter. It's ultimately going to come to a legal decision, because whichever way the footballing authorities rule there's going to be somebody out of pocket who challenges the decision.
Ricardo, I do understand how administrations and liquidations work, but I'm not sure what you say is entirely correct. As part of the decision to let new Rangers into the SFL they had to agree to pay all clubs who were owed money by old Rangers. Green alleges that new Rangers have done that, but Dundee Utd say that they haven't had £31k that they are owed. That should have no bearing on when old Rangers is liquidated. As regards the players contracts I doubt that that would prevent the liquidation taking place either. When old Rangers are liquidated every creditor will submit a claim to the liquidator stating what they are owed. The liquidator ordinarily will take the assets and realise them to pay themselves and any creditors. As I understand it, the only asset that there will be is the money (£5m?) that newco paid for the assets (possibly including players' contracts). When old Rangers is liquidated it is likely that there will be an investigation of its directors to see if they should be held culpable and liable for any debts of old Rangers, which will take time. Therefore, even if Green is wrong and the players don't have to transfer to new Rangers then, depending on the terms of the sale agreement, he may be able to recover some of the money. It shouldn't hold up putting old Rangers into liquidation. I personally think Green is going to be in difficulty proving that the players must sign for new Rangers.
New rangers paid 5 million for the assets??? Surely the players alone are worth 3,4,5 times that and the stadium at least 5 times that on its own!!! Not to mention training grounds and academies etc! How on earth did they get such a good deal on it all when if they'd paid up to all te assets full value there's a good chance all creditors may have been able to be paid in full! Daylight robbery there... Wouldn't it have been funny if someone had outbid them for all the land rangers owed and trned it into housing, that would be a proper lesson and message to send out to all the clubs/crooks who run beyond their means, coin it in and buy success all at others expense, and IMO they'd deserve it as would pompy if theyend up going down the same route.
It may not have been £5m but I do have that figure in my head for some reason. Edit, I've just searched on the web and I appear to have mis-lead you. The reported price paid was £5.5m. I think it may have been what is known as a pre-pack administration, which is a complete rip off for creditors
Not a prepack, that's where the company is taken into admin to get the debts reduced, but the administrators have already got a buyer lined up and agreed a CVA with them. Green put in two offers. One was to buy the club from administration with a CVA which is the normal way as it avoids having to reapply for league membership etc. The other was to buy the assets of the club from the business and set up again. The creditors rejected the CVA approach, so the administrators looked for offers for the assets individually. Green's was the best they received so they got it. What has to be remembered is that when liquidating a business an asset is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it.
When all this first blew up FIFA and Septic Bladder stated that they would grant "Temporary" International Clearance to all involved until the matter was finally sorted out. So where is it then ?
They didn't say to all involved, they said for the players who already had. Our deal (along with a few others) was done after and we're still waiting for the much exhalted keeper of the giant rubber stamp to deem fit to grace the office with his presence.
Alukos just been telling McLean to sort out the play list for the changing room tomorrow, must think he's in the squad?
I am incredibly frustrated by this. It's not Hull City's fault, yet we are suffering for it. Bloody, bloody hell.
If this is a silly question excuse my ignorance, this is my first post. If Sone Aluko's sister is playing for England why does he need Internatinal clearance?
Because his registration is in another country We needed international clearance to sign Darius Vassell from a Turkish club the other year It has nothing to do with their nationality just where their registration is currently held
I think if a player is registered in either a Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish team, then to sign for an English, there shouldn't be clearance needed since as in it's bloody Great Britain...
But different FA's so in order for that to happen our leagues would have to merge and have a great British fa, I prefer it this way, sod long away trips to northern Scotland or overseas to ni.
Sone Aluko ‏@sonealuko The frustration is over!! Let's go! thank u Lord!! SAY SOMETHING! I've put it on the other thread as well, but Aluko just tweeted this 30 mins ago. So it looks like it's sorted hopefully. Although I doubt he can play today still.
Actually even better news hcfc official tweet: We can now confirm that Sone Aluko is available for selection for today's npower Championship opener against Brighton & Hove Albion #hcafc
