That's a bit harsh, it was up to them if they wanted to transfer their contract to the new club or not.

Stevie 'There's no history there' Naismith was a top player for you.

Yep as I said all along the football authorities have jurisdiction over these contracts. Players can't just walk away from a contract.

I can't see any result other than the clubs being forced to pay whatever the release clauses were.

The clubs that settled with rangers didn't do that out of the kindness of their hearts.

The thing I ain't sure about is the players breach of contract and whether they owe money.

"comment by GazF1888 *Zombie Nation* (U1012)
posted 1 minute ago
That's a bit harsh, it was up to them if they wanted to transfer their contract to the new club or not."

==================================

yea, but they had to make their minds up before or just after the transfer happened, not a week or 2 down the line.

I doubt release clauses will be used mate.

When these kind of disputes happen, they go to tribunal, and the tribunal makes the call with regards compo and that kind of thing.

Even then mitre rangers would still have been able to hold their football registrations.

They could walk away from the club if they notified in time and get a job but not as a footballer.

That would probably be significantly higher than the release clauses would it not?

If you read the story its highlighted that "We have this slight anomaly where for a period newco were not members of the SFA from June 14 until being granted membership on August 3."

This is clearly why Green is pushin the point of newco being oldco....this is where this whole thing will stand up or fall down I feel.

If it stands up, then it stands to reason that the SFA have the jurisdiction, and then from that point of view, I'd imagine everything, whether it be the compo the club gets, what players have to pay up or whatever....all of that would then likely be decided at an SFA tribunal

Charlie's the man 👍

yep if the sfa have jurisdiction then (which seems to have been agreed at this meeting) then it will be sfa tribunal. Based on the players market value at the time that could be a very tidy sum.

"comment by super phoenix rangers - EBT user - Dont strip my CV (U14864)
posted 2 minutes ago
Even then mitre rangers would still have been able to hold their football registrations.

They could walk away from the club if they notified in time and get a job but not as a footballer."

=================================

Doubt it mate. Employment tribunals tend to tell Football authorities to get in line when all of these things go to court.

There is no specific law for football, they just like to pretend they are special.

The issue will be decided on if they left it too late to object.

The latest i could find in case law that someone has left an objection was the day after the transfer, and this was only allowed as they did not know the identity of the new employer until after the fact.

The Rangers players knew, and still left it 2 weeks. Dont think they have a hope.

The release fee is the maximum we can get back. Might be less though.

To be honest, the clubs will settle out of court before the next stage I would guess.

Which was my point at the start FIFA do not want this settled by employment law as it would mean that players can simply walk away to new clubs whenever they want by giving a reasonable notice period. Just like you or I can.

Would be bigger than bosman.

Personally I think it will be settled before tribunal with the minimum fee release clause or else these guys will be in and out of tribunals and appeals for years.

You saw the impact that had on webstters career, do they really want that?