Jump to content

2013 - 2014 Ins & Outs


Mad Dog
 Share

Recommended Posts

I would imagine that what has happened is Trevor Steven (agent) and Mark have had offers for Tom.

 

However unless it contained the word Rangers in it, they have put them into File 13 for later consideration.

 

Now that Rangers haven't been in touch, they've went back to File 13 and found that someone has emptied the bin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really feel sorry for Tom Hateley he must cringe so many times and think shut up dad just bugger off and don't speak to anyone

 

I'd like to see him stay he's still young enough to develop as a player and move to a higher level in a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To tell you the truth under the new rules of the SPFL I am surprised that haven't lifted the transfer embargo.

 

After all they've lifted everything else for them.

 

They are now a full member can vote, despite not having filed a tax return in 3 years.

 

Apparently the SPFL have changed their own rule that those outside the top division can play trialists. Even though originally it was to be a no no.

 

 

Even the play-offs that Doncaster has proposed are a con.

 

4th place in the 1st Division will play 3rd over two legs.

 

The winner will then play 2nd place over two legs.

 

The Winner will then play 11th in the SPL over two legs.

 

 

So one team could have a further 6 games to get promoted while 11th only plays 2 games to stay up.

 

What's wrong with 11th vs 3rd and 2nd vs 4th with the winners meeting for a one off game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone said before that Rangers have their full quota of players and can't sign anyone else unless they get rid of someone.

 

That doesn't apply under SPFL it was an SFL rule.

 

"We can't cherry pick" I believe was the quote!

:lol:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What i got from the long haired bawbags interview was that Tom Hateley will only sign for a club if he's guaranteed a place in midfield. If we haven't offered him a contract that could be why.

Also seen Craig Gordon says he's nearing full fitness again. I would be happy to have him as back up to Hollis until he reaches fitness then we have ourselves a top quality keeper again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would take a leap of faith for a manager to guarantee hateley a midfield job, especially when there are plenty of out of contract midfielders who have actually played the position more than a handful of times in the last few years. Multiple managers have seen him as a right back, and we've signed other midfielders rather than play him there, so maybe right back is where he belongs. My guess is the same as those above, he probably hasn't had the offers he expected. Hibs or Aberdeen is my guess if he doesn't end up at newco. His dad is also a wank.

 

if Gordon is fit there is no way he will be a back up, and if he's not fit there is no way anyone is signing him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all seriousness though i'm surprised the Tom Hateley to Rangers move hasn't actually came about yet. I thought that would have been one of their first signings.

 

 

Under their transfer embargo, are Rangers allowed to sign a free agent if compensation is due?

 

 

Someone said before that Rangers have their full quota of players and can't sign anyone else unless they get rid of someone.

 

i mentioned this ages ago as i thought he was a stick on to go to Ibrox - mixture of not being good enough to play at a higher level and them being able to pay big bucks

 

a while back on sportsound, it was mentioned that Rangers could not sign him as they would need to pay a fee - therefore, need to wait until at least January before they can try and sign him - i havent heard or seen it mentioned anywhere other than this, but it is interesting as to whether or not we would be entitled to compensation

 

thats the other thing about Hateley's interview - if it is indeed true, and we havent offered a contract - then we aren't entitled to compensation - why would we do that?

 

and to the last point - they need to sell or release players over the age of 22 before they can sign any more

 

I'd still like him to stay on - i like him as a RB and he's been very good for us - you dont play that many games under several managers and be shit!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the SPFL goes through rangers can sign more players, as the 22 over - 21 player rule will be scrapped.

 

 

Has anyone seen a draft of these rules (outwith the media)? Not that I don't trust the press (ahem) but I wouldn't mind reading them myself.

 

On topic though, I'd really like to see the Higdon, Hateley, Faddy situations resolved by the end of this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I heard something a while back about the level of compensation paid for a player being based on the contract that his existing club offer him. Maybe we are trying to be cute here, waiting to see what contract he is offered elsewhere and then offer him slightly less, thus losing the player for the maximum fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I heard something a while back about the level of compensation paid for a player being based on the contract that his existing club offer him. Maybe we are trying to be cute here, waiting to see what contract he is offered elsewhere and then offer him slightly less, thus losing the player for the maximum fee.

 

To get compensation you must either offer a player the same amount or more than he is currently on. There is nothing to state how much compensation will be regarding which you offer.

 

That would be a stupid thing to do anyway, imagine Rangers offer him £8K - what, we gonna offer him £7K but he decides to stay as he knows he is certain to get in our side - that is fucking madness, so very doubtful

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...