Tribunal to determine Everton fee for ex-Rangers striker Naismith

[Del]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...ibunal-1225660

EVERTON are heading for a tribunal to determine the fee they could be due for Scotland striker Steven Naismith – as Rangers chase five clubs for cash for their contract rebels.

[tommye]

how can they demand a fee for a player who was technically a free agent? The club he had a contract with no longer exist. Koff rangers.

[Bluerover]

While reading that I spotted this ... interesting from January 2009:



WALTER SMITH may be enduring his toughest-ever period as Rangers manager but the former Everton boss reckons the financial meltdown he faced at Goodison was worse.

Gers have to raise £3million in this transfer window and need to flog a first-team star to do so.

However, at Everton, Smith was forced to punt the likes of Duncan Ferguson to Newcastle for £7m and Michael Ball to Rangers for £5.5m to avert a cash crisis.

Walter said: "What's happening at Rangers is nothing compared to the events at Everton. The consequences at Goodison were far greater than we have here.

"The club was put up for sale by Peter Johnson and I had to help run the place with the chairman.

"We brought in players and then three months later found we just couldn't honour the commitment.

"Payments couldn't be made. We were fire-fighting.

"I brought in youngsters such as Olivier Dacourt and Marco Materazzi. But they had to be sold and went on to do well in their careers.

"I had to bring in Paul Gascoigne and Richard Gough for a spell to help patch us up. Overall I had 86 transfers in and out."

Sir David Murray now wants to see Rangers run itself without any input from his personal finances, much like Roman Abramovich has told Chelsea he wants it done.

After 20 years at the helm and with the credit crunch taking its toll on all businessmen, Smith totally understands where the owner is coming from.

He said: "We need to adjust and that's exactly what we're trying to do.

"But I expect we'll be fine come the summer, back to a level playing field, and we'll be looking to bring in one or two new faces at that time.

"Players will also leave at the end of the season as contracts expire. A few of the younger lads will then come in to fill the spaces."

[Nails]

So, it's not a tribunal to determine a fee, it's a tribunal to determine if a fee should be payed or not? There was a key word in the article describing Rangers actions:

"desperately".

So if Rangers win and EFC don't want to pay the fee, Naismith will go back to them and he won't want to play. He will claim he isn't contracted to this new entity and will become a free agent again.

Rangers, give up. SFA, pull ya heads in!

[Mety]

While reading that I spotted this ... interesting from January 2009:



WALTER SMITH may be enduring his toughest-ever period as Rangers manager but the former Everton boss reckons the financial meltdown he faced at Goodison was worse.

Gers have to raise £3million in this transfer window and need to flog a first-team star to do so.

However, at Everton, Smith was forced to punt the likes of Duncan Ferguson to Newcastle for £7m and Michael Ball to Rangers for £5.5m to avert a cash crisis.

Walter said: "What's happening at Rangers is nothing compared to the events at Everton. The consequences at Goodison were far greater than we have here.

"The club was put up for sale by Peter Johnson and I had to help run the place with the chairman.

"We brought in players and then three months later found we just couldn't honour the commitment.

"Payments couldn't be made. We were fire-fighting.

"I brought in youngsters such as Olivier Dacourt and Marco Materazzi. But they had to be sold and went on to do well in their careers.

"I had to bring in Paul Gascoigne and Richard Gough for a spell to help patch us up. Overall I had 86 transfers in and out."

Sir David Murray now wants to see Rangers run itself without any input from his personal finances, much like Roman Abramovich has told Chelsea he wants it done.

After 20 years at the helm and with the credit crunch taking its toll on all businessmen, Smith totally understands where the owner is coming from.

He said: "We need to adjust and that's exactly what we're trying to do.

"But I expect we'll be fine come the summer, back to a level playing field, and we'll be looking to bring in one or two new faces at that time.

"Players will also leave at the end of the season as contracts expire. A few of the younger lads will then come in to fill the spaces."

Easy to forget those dark days while Bill bashing

[sheeds]

There will be legal arguments over this and that Southampton had a panic and paid a settlement probably hasn't helped. The reality is that employment law seems to be fairly clear and supporting our position and I know that's the advice that at least one club involved has received. I've said before I believe or rather the clubs seem to believe the worst case scenario (as being football with player registration system is always slightly different to other occupations) is a Webster type ruling , namely a relatively minor financial compensation

[McBain]

Easy to forget those dark days while Bill bashing

We have it much worse according to some.

[ScouseBlueBoy]

They shafted us over Trevor Steven - going to a tribunal and getting him at a bargain price. Did they ever fully pay for Michael Ball?

[davek]

While reading that I spotted this ... interesting from January 2009:



WALTER SMITH may be enduring his toughest-ever period as Rangers manager but the former Everton boss reckons the financial meltdown he faced at Goodison was worse.

Gers have to raise £3million in this transfer window and need to flog a first-team star to do so.

However, at Everton, Smith was forced to punt the likes of Duncan Ferguson to Newcastle for £7m and Michael Ball to Rangers for £5.5m to avert a cash crisis.

Walter said: "What's happening at Rangers is nothing compared to the events at Everton. The consequences at Goodison were far greater than we have here.

"The club was put up for sale by Peter Johnson and I had to help run the place with the chairman.

"We brought in players and then three months later found we just couldn't honour the commitment.

"Payments couldn't be made. We were fire-fighting.

"I brought in youngsters such as Olivier Dacourt and Marco Materazzi. But they had to be sold and went on to do well in their careers.

"I had to bring in Paul Gascoigne and Richard Gough for a spell to help patch us up. Overall I had 86 transfers in and out."

Sir David Murray now wants to see Rangers run itself without any input from his personal finances, much like Roman Abramovich has told Chelsea he wants it done.

After 20 years at the helm and with the credit crunch taking its toll on all businessmen, Smith totally understands where the owner is coming from.

He said: "We need to adjust and that's exactly what we're trying to do.

"But I expect we'll be fine come the summer, back to a level playing field, and we'll be looking to bring in one or two new faces at that time.

"Players will also leave at the end of the season as contracts expire. A few of the younger lads will then come in to fill the spaces."

Yeah, and he made a few quid off it all too. He had a % of the book price of players getting shifted out and he and his preferred scum agent, Dennis Roach, made a killing selling players on. ****ing joke the way that feller is still trying to position himself as a trojan labouring under the weight of it all, when he was just another trough snuffler squeezing a few quid out of EFC and serving up the worst nightmarish football seen at GP in the club's history.

[davek]

There will be legal arguments over this and that Southampton had a panic and paid a settlement probably hasn't helped. The reality is that employment law seems to be fairly clear and supporting our position and I know that's the advice that at least one club involved has received. I've said before I believe or rather the clubs seem to believe the worst case scenario (as being football with player registration system is always slightly different to other occupations) is a Webster type ruling , namely a relatively minor financial compensation

I said at the time of this transfer it would be contested. I was told by someone (not you) it couldn't be.

Ho hum.

[They Think It's All Over]

They shafted us over Trevor Steven - going to a tribunal and getting him at a bargain price. Did they ever fully pay for Michael Ball?

When we bought Jelavic we paid them less than the ~£5.5m fee (we actually paid about £3m I think) and the discount was to settle what they still owed us for Ball.

[davek]

Easy to forget those dark days while Bill bashing

Erm...Bill was there backing Johnson up.

[sheeds]

I said at the time of this transfer it would be contested. I was told by someone (not you) it couldn't be.

Ho hum.

I think it had to be contested mate , anyone thinking it wouldn't has to have been wrong given the 'controversy' around the whole issue and frankly it's something that haven't really come up before so they'd be mad not to challenge it the question is where it ends. Like I've said I imagine a couple of hundred grand may eventually change hands as everyone moves on. I'd be interested to know what Naismiths release clause was because I think it was pennies (relatively ) and that certainly wouldn't be exceeded you'd think ? However I suspect most clubs will see how it's progressing then maybe look to settle. It might be found against rangers , it might be settled but I just can't see a 'major ruling ' in their favour . All about opinion though.

In relation to your previous post Dennis roach hey , up there with the wille McKay's of this world.

[Neiler]

Hmm how does the SFA have any jurisdiction over a PL club.

[davek]

I think it had to be contested mate , anyone thinking it wouldn't has to have been wrong given the 'controversy' around the whole issue and frankly it's something that haven't really come up before so they'd be mad not to challenge it the question is where it ends. Like I've said I imagine a couple of hundred grand may eventually change hands as everyone moves on. I'd be interested to know what Naismiths release clause was because I think it was pennies (relatively ) and that certainly wouldn't be exceeded you'd think ? However I suspect most clubs will see how it's progressing then maybe look to settle. It might be found against rangers , it might be settled but I just can't see a 'major ruling ' in their favour . All about opinion though.

Yep. From what i gathered reading their forums this lad's release clause was just a nominal amount, because that's the deal the players struck when they chose to cut their own wages in the run up to liquidation. Total madness: he could have come for less and he'd have retained a decent name with his old club. It dodn't work out that way because EFC (and others) thought they could mug a club on its arse in the gutter. Pretty dire and unscrupulous stuff. That was the point I was making at the time, but the hang em and flog em brigade only know one way: "back der klub lid, yer must be a Kopite, lad".

In relation to your previous post Dennis roach hey , up there with the wille McKay's of this world.

It's why that failure will always be persona non grata for me. Cash from chaos was his motto while he was down here. He made himself a fortune and nearly sunk us at the same time. How even a minority of blues still have any time for that corrupt old **** I dont know.

[gheesom]

Contested or not, I'm pretty sure that players are free to walk away.
Based upon contract law, they company they were contracted to ceased to exist, would no longer honour the contract by paying wages, etc. Therefore the contract is nil and void.
When the new co. forms, they can transfer contracts over - BUT this must be to the agreement of both parties. It could quite easily happen the other way round, and usually does in the real world.

[intmstan]

Personally don't see on what legal standing they can think about trying to go to a tribunal. TUPE laws are pretty clear, and they are there to protect the employee not the employer. He essentially has taken voluntary redundancy from one company and moved to another. Nowt wrong with that.

[sheeds]

The legislation seems fairly clear in our favour but the fly in the ointment is player registration it's a slightly different case. I think things will almost certainly be on our favour but the confusion of registration issues means we might just make a token payment, like I've said and others have here tupe seems fairly straightforward

[edge]

deal

Erm...Bill was there backing Johnson up.

Bill was chaiman when Ball was sold i think? sure we lost a few about the same time Barmby/jeffers due to the NTL deal going bad and us already spending the money, we didnt have, cant blame johnson for that one.

[dixie7]

southampton paid 800k to rangers for davis and that was our of court after talking to lawyers,