Deal agreed with rangers for John Fleck (4 Viewers)

Sawyer · Jul 3, 2012

I am wondering what the financial complications would be, green (rangers owner) has sworn with the help of the spl to sue all rangers players who have refused the move to the newco, especially being after they didn't refuse the move in the first week...

If Fleck did sign, and Green pushed through I wonder what financial complications we could be under?

thechase · Jul 3, 2012

Seems the right move to wait until the club know where they stand legally.

mark82 · Jul 3, 2012

I thought if a company was liquidated all contracts were null and void. You cannot have it both ways and have the contracts for your debts torn up but say the players contracts are legally binding. If he wanted to keep all the existing players surely they should also have to pay their debts. You cannot be a brand new company but only for the bits that suit you. I'm pretty sure they are empty threats.

Sawyer · Jul 3, 2012

mark82 said:
I thought if a company was liquidated all contracts were null and void. You cannot have it both ways and have the contracts for your debts torn up but say the players contracts are legally binding. If he wanted to keep all the existing players surely they should also have to pay their debts. You cannot be a brand new company but only for the bits that suit you. I'm pretty sure they are empty threats.

I really hope your right, he sounds like he knows what he is talking about and from reports it sounds like he has a good case, the big thing that stands out for me is they were apparently told they have a week to decide when it switched to newco and that they never terminated until there agents informed them they wouldn't be playing in the spl, Rangers may not even be in division 1.. In fact the Scottish fa are trying to merge premiership and division 1 just to keep them in top flight!

kg82 · Jul 3, 2012

Sawyer said:
I really hope your right, he sounds like he knows what he is talking about and from reports it sounds like he has a good case, the big thing that stands out for me is they were apparently told they have a week to decide when it switched to newco and that they never terminated until there agents informed them they wouldn't be playing in the spl, Rangers may not even be in division 1.. In fact the Scottish fa are trying to merge premiership and division 1 just to keep them in top flight!

Rangers assets were transferred over to a new company so I'm not sure if it's the same as them being liquidated? BUT, as far as I understand there's a law stating that if that happens and an employee of the former company does not want to transfer their contract to the new company it is their legal right to do that. There's a few precedents so it has happened before and I can't see there being a problem with this. The law's called TUPE, or something like that, have a look. I don't think I'm wrong!

kg82 · Jul 3, 2012

kg82 said:
Rangers assets were transferred over to a new company so I'm not sure if it's the same as them being liquidated? BUT, as far as I understand there's a law stating that if that happens and an employee of the former company does not want to transfer their contract to the new company it is their legal right to do that. There's a few precedents so it has happened before and I can't see there being a problem with this. The law's called TUPE, or something like that, have a look. I don't think I'm wrong!

EDIT: Also, there's something in that law about if the situation has changed and the contract or working conditions are downgraded or worse than before then those employees are again legally ok to reject the contract transfer. So, as Rangers are not going to be in the SPL next season, this would count!

Sawyer · Jul 3, 2012

I hope you are right, I'm sure if we don't sign him Sisu will say it was to financially complicated and where afraid off the complications from the newco!

ccfc2011 · Jul 3, 2012

lets sign him

Sky Blues · Jul 3, 2012

kg82 said:
Rangers assets were transferred over to a new company so I'm not sure if it's the same as them being liquidated? BUT, as far as I understand there's a law stating that if that happens and an employee of the former company does not want to transfer their contract to the new company it is their legal right to do that. There's a few precedents so it has happened before and I can't see there being a problem with this. The law's called TUPE, or something like that, have a look. I don't think I'm wrong!

Rangers was liquidated. A new company has purchased the assets. Players can transfer across to the new company under TUPE, but under those rules they can reject the transfer if they want (as many have). I think the new company thought that transfer happened when it bought the other assets. The Beeb has a Q&A on the issue http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18569993

IrishSkyBlue · Jul 3, 2012

feels like the king saga all over again and they will drag it out to shit and us the fans wont know whats going on!

bamalamafizzfazz · Jul 3, 2012

Surely if others players have done the same the other clubs will have done their homework also. The more this drags out the less chance we have of getting him.

Glen · Jul 3, 2012

Yeah never sign will look go we wnt for a Rangers player but never going to sign him really

theprince · Jul 3, 2012

mark82 said:
I thought if a company was liquidated all contracts were null and void. You cannot have it both ways and have the contracts for your debts torn up but say the players contracts are legally binding. If he wanted to keep all the existing players surely they should also have to pay their debts. You cannot be a brand new company but only for the bits that suit you. I'm pretty sure they are empty threats.

I don't know the ins and outs like most of us, but i wouldn't be surprised if moving to another country and a different league makes things a bit different. Fleck is a free agent and entitled to look for employment within the EU like any other European. If his contract is null and void surely thats it and as the previous employer is no more how can they sue.

Sky Blues · Jul 3, 2012

Personal opinion (not qualified to judge such matters) but from what I've read of TUPE guidelines I think the players will be free to join new clubs. Even if Green were to win, the players aren't going to go back. (Would they really be in the right frame of mind to play for a company that took them to court?) Were Green to win, we might have to pay some compensation, but if we're in real schtuck I'm sure we could sell the player to raise that. After all hopefully he'd have played regularly for us and, fingers crossed, gained a few admirers! The biggest threat to a deal would probably be other clubs going in for him, I reckon.

Grendel · Jul 3, 2012

Glen said:
Yeah never sign will look go we wnt for a Rangers player but never going to sign him really

You hope they won't you mean so you can keep moaning. I assume footballers are self employed aren't they do transfer of employment rules don't count.
It is sensible to seek advice. Didn't we get stung by a tribunal when we purchased Best and the tribunal fee was high and we stalked on payments. Selling a player is not that easy and say the judgement went against us in September? We couldn't sell.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Jul 3, 2012

If we are ordered to pay a fee the owners can just refuse to pay it, worked so far withholding the rent for the stadium.

kg82 · Jul 3, 2012

Glen said:
Yeah never sign will look go we wnt for a Rangers player but never going to sign him really

Ahh, the man in the know once again.

Sky Blues · Jul 3, 2012

I agree it is sensible to seek advice. I doubt the lawyers will give a cast iron guarantee but they can say you should be fine. I was assuming we won't do a deal unless we get that much from the lawyers (and I was saying I suspect we will). If the lawyers were wrong and a tribunal went the other way then, assuming there was some liability to the club not just the player, we might have to find the money but I'm sure they could reach some kind of deal over the timing of payment, given transfer windows etc. What I'm trying to say is I think people a few people were looking for the negatives a little too quickly here. But we're Cov fans so I understand where it's coming from!

ajsccfc · Jul 3, 2012

I have absolutely no idea what Glen's post is meant to say.

Greggs · Jul 3, 2012

deal is off :jerkit:

Grendel · Jul 3, 2012

Greggs said:
deal is off :jerkit:

Is it? At least Glen will be happy.

castlevaleskyblue · Jul 3, 2012

Is it off?

SkyBlueMania · Jul 3, 2012

Was a deal ever on?! I still haven't seen s single piece of evidence that we are after him or he would ever consider coming to us.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Jul 3, 2012

Greggs said:
deal is off :jerkit:

Where have you heard this? Do you have a link?

Nonleagueherewecome · Jul 3, 2012

Is it off? Was it ever on? Has anyone got any real information?!?

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Jul 3, 2012

Nonleagueherewecome said:
Is it off? Was it ever on? Has anyone got any real information?!?

Can't find any update online since the last one today

mark82 · Jul 3, 2012

Yeah, not sure where this has come from but, let's face it, we are all expecting it to fall through at some point.

Nonleagueherewecome · Jul 3, 2012

Well I never thought it was even remotely possible, but there is an air of it seemingly being a formality in the local media. But since they didn't even know who or what Arvo are, I don't really consider them a credible source.

mark82 · Jul 3, 2012

Nonleagueherewecome said:
Well I never thought it was even remotely possible, but there is an air of it seemingly being a formality in the local media. But since they didn't even know who or what Arvo are, I don't really consider them a credible source.

Hmm. They have their failings but they are a credible source. To be honest the only way we will know is when it is officially announced.

wingy · Jul 3, 2012

Took it for a throwaway remark/ assumption ,understandable though !!

thechase · Jul 3, 2012

Greggs said:
deal is off :jerkit:

Care to back that up with evidence or is it just pretending to know something to massage your ego?

Astute · Jul 4, 2012

If he is available for free we will get him. If there is a chance of having to pay compo we won't.

Whatever happens I am more hopeful for this season than last. Seems they have learned a lesson.

torchomatic · Jul 4, 2012

The club hasn't mentioned it. The CET has.

Sub · Jul 4, 2012

on the radio this morning saying they think they the skyblues will complete the signing of fleck today

Otis · Jul 4, 2012

Nonleagueherewecome said:
Is it off? Was it ever on? Has anyone got any real information?!?

CT was saying that he was expected to sign yesterday.

'COVENTRY CITY hope to announce John Fleck as Coventry City's latest signing today (Tuesday) - but not until legal experts confirm they won't have to stump up a transfer fee to Rangers.

Although the deal for the attacking midfielderhttp://www.coventrytelegraph.net/coventry-city-fc/coventry-city-fc-news/# is all but complete, City have been consulting their lawyers to seek assurances that they won’t be liable for a transfer fee further down the line.'

Deal agreed with rangers for John Fleck (4 Viewers)

New Member

New Member

Super Moderator

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Active Member

Facebook User

New Member

Member

New Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency