Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Sone Aluko
Comments
-
Only passing through on his way to The Valley.0
-
Superb skills and undoubtedly an exciting player to watch. It would be nice to see a series of clips of him passing to team mates, just to see if he knows how to do it.0
-
Sone would be available on a free transfer. Rhys McCabe has rejected the TUPE transfer to the newco and is now available on a free. Rumours are that another has also officially rejected the transfer, many more to come. What a mess.0
-
Confirmed on ssn that sone aluko has also rejected.0
-
to the newco that is.0
-
Hopefully Valley Bound0
-
Hell have his pick of decent Champinship clubs, maybe even lower prem level. He's got talent, very exciting & direct player but consistency is an issue and this would be a great source of frustration. I could see him becoming next seasons scape goat (Danny green would be relieved) should he come here.
Either way Powell will need to come up with something a bit more creative than "we're based in London" to sell us this time !0 -
Based in London?....what?0
-
Snap him up now!0
-
Based in London?....what?
Sorry, an allusion to the lure of Charlton thread0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Ill be so dissapointed if this guy ends up signing somewhere else.0
-
Now getting abuse from Celtic fans on twitter - bet he can't wait to leave the fishbowl
"@nickycochrane85 @sonealuko haahha have you walked away aswell you fucking immigrant?"0 -
Confirmed on ssn that sone aluko has also rejected.
Super Ally says different
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/football-news/article/2820089Now getting abuse from Celtic fans on twitter - bet he can't wait to leave the fishbowl
Good to see Celtic fans showing the normal standard of class you would expect, for a lot of them Pot Kettle black come to mind
"@nickycochrane85 @sonealuko haahha have you walked away aswell you fucking immigrant?"
0 -
The bit at the end of McCoists statement from the Green is worrying. I have to do a bit of TUPE related stuff for work and was forced to study employment law at uni and I'm fairly certain that in any transfer of undertakings (which Rangers are relying on to move the squad from the oldco to the newco) the employee has the right to reject the transfer. The only way the players could be deemed to have accepted a contract with the newco would be of they had created a contractual relationship, but as I dont think they have been paid yet no contract could exist for lack of consideration.
This is just my understanding of the rules and I'm sure Rangers have far more intelligent people than me looking into it but I'm just a bit worried, hope this doesn't end up in employment tribunals etc.0 -
Doesnt matter what rangers say, alukos out of contract so if his contracts been transferred it stills runs out 30th june0
-
The bit at the end of McCoists statement from the Green is worrying. I have to do a bit of TUPE related stuff for work and was forced to study employment law at uni and I'm fairly certain that in any transfer of undertakings (which Rangers are relying on to move the squad from the oldco to the newco) the employee has the right to reject the transfer. The only way the players could be deemed to have accepted a contract with the newco would be of they had created a contractual relationship, but as I dont think they have been paid yet no contract could exist for lack of consideration.
Cawley's article in the SLP stated the problem was around players contracts making them 'assets' rather than 'employees' .
This is just my understanding of the rules and I'm sure Rangers have far more intelligent people than me looking into it but I'm just a bit worried, hope this doesn't end up in employment tribunals etc.
Could they be arguing a legal definition between those on fixed term contracts and full time employees ?
So a footballer could be seen as a fixed term contractor rather than full time employee because a date is set for the end of their employment ,for example Gary Doherty is still a Charlton player for another week and after that he needs to find another club .
That said my view is that a player would be seen as an employee rather than an asset.
0 -
Yep Richard J, in no way should Gary Doherty be described as an asset.0
-
An interesting point, but I believe after a certain period of time even contractors gain employment protection rights. If a player has been at Rangers for, say, three years it would be quite difficult to argue that he is an asset rather than an employee and I think a tribunal would probably take that view. In all honesty I don't think Rangers have any intention of starting the season with these players if in division three, their contractual status however is the difference between obtaining a transfer fee for them and not.The bit at the end of McCoists statement from the Green is worrying. I have to do a bit of TUPE related stuff for work and was forced to study employment law at uni and I'm fairly certain that in any transfer of undertakings (which Rangers are relying on to move the squad from the oldco to the newco) the employee has the right to reject the transfer. The only way the players could be deemed to have accepted a contract with the newco would be of they had created a contractual relationship, but as I dont think they have been paid yet no contract could exist for lack of consideration.
Cawley's article in the SLP stated the problem was around players contracts making them 'assets' rather than 'employees' .
This is just my understanding of the rules and I'm sure Rangers have far more intelligent people than me looking into it but I'm just a bit worried, hope this doesn't end up in employment tribunals etc.
Could they be arguing a legal definition between those on fixed term contracts and full time employees ?
So a footballer could be seen as a fixed term contractor rather than full time employee because a date is set for the end of their employment ,for example Gary Doherty is still a Charlton player for another week and after that he needs to find another club .
That said my view is that a player would be seen as an employee rather than an asset.0 -
Far from an expert but I would have thought that regardless of weather your employer thinks of you as an asset you are still undeniably an employee and as such would have the full protection of employment law.0
-
Didn't SCP mention something about a date, where he wants to have done some specific things. I think it was in relation to the pre-season camp? I might have read it somewhere a few days ago, but can't remember where
Edit: I think it had something to do with summersignings0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Didn't SCP mention something about a date, where he wants to have done some specific things. I think it was in relation to the pre-season camp? I might have read it somewhere a few days ago, but can't remember where
He wanted new signings in by Welling or when they go to Spain. So mid July, a few weeks time.
Edit: I think it had something to do with summersignings0 -
Its not so much the employment but who holds a player's registration.
It is a player's registration that is transfered when a player moves Clubs.
My guess is the dispute is about can those registrations move to the Newco.0 -
Are the Scottish laws regarding TUPE the same as those for England and Wales?0
-
Are the Scottish laws regarding TUPE the same as those for England and Wales?
Yes, Alex Salmond hasn't been crowned just yet.
0 -
Is all the hassle really worth it? I'm not sure he's all that. Antonio might be a better bet.0
-
Is all the hassle really worth it? I'm not sure he's all that. Antonio might be a better bet.
Will all be about how the finances stack up.
0 -
Its not so much the employment but who holds a player's registration.
For some reason the Scottish PFA think that upon liquidation the players registration reverts to the SFA ! The whole thing is a complete mess exacerbated by a lack of leadership from any of Scotlands three (for a population of 5m!) governing bodies.
It is a player's registration that is transfered when a player moves Clubs.
My guess is the dispute is about can those registrations move to the Newco.0 -
Thems the rules SE9. Can try and shift responsibility to the SFA, SPL and SL but its RFC who are to blame.0
-
But is he not out of contract soon so TUPE will not apply?0
-
Thems the rules SE9. Can try and shift responsibility to the SFA, SPL and SL but its RFC who are to blame.
Of course the main protagonist in this nonsense is Rangers, but surely a governing bodies role is to govern ? Not one of those three governing bodies could claim they have done so far. There needs to be clear leadership, not Rangers claiming things that appear to clearly be in contravention of employment law, not individual clubs scrambling to see who can put the boot in the hardest and certainly not the SFA trying to impose sanctions that are illegal.
Scottish football has had almost a year to prepare for this, it seems no one has.
0
