simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Rangers and Sheffield Wednesday have agreed an undisclosed settlement and financial arrangements for the move of Rhys McCabe to Hillsborough. Charles Green, Chief Executive of Rangers, said: "Rangers and Sheffield Wednesday have agreed terms over Rhys McCabe. "Sheffield Wednesday have acted in good faith and recognised our rights as a club during the process. We wish them every success this season and beyond and while we were disappointed Rhys decided his future lies away from Rangers we wish him well for the future." Scotland Under-21 international McCabe joined the Owls over the summer and has since made nine Championship appearances under Dave Jones. http://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/2400-mccabe-agreement-reached So that's two clubs decided to agree terms then. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 more than two. fleck Davis McCabe. I think we may get money for others as it seems a precedent is being set. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 more than two. fleck Davis McCabe. I think we may get money for others as it seems a precedent is being set. I think Fleck was a sell on clause. Tribunal for Naismith as well, then there's Whittaker, McGregor, Aluko and Ness. Charlie clearly wasn't blowing hot air on this one. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuznetsov 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I think Fleck was a sell on clause. Tribunal for Naismith as well, then there's Whittaker, McGregor, Aluko and Ness. Charlie clearly wasn't blowing hot air on this one. aluko was a free agent was he not? what sell on clause for fleck? i thought he has been our player since a kid. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 aluko was a free agent was he not? what sell on clause for fleck? i thought he has been our player since a kid. We had a two year option on Aluko's contract so he rejected TUPE as well. I mean I think the agreement with Coventry was a percentage of any future fee they get for him, like we had with Charlie Adam. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuznetsov 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 We had a two year option on Aluko's contract so he rejected TUPE as well. I mean I think the agreement with Coventry was a percentage of any future fee they get for him, like we had with Charlie Adam. ah ok, got you now mate, cheers stb. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I think Fleck was a sell on clause. Tribunal for Naismith as well, then there's Whittaker, McGregor, Aluko and Ness. Charlie clearly wasn't blowing hot air on this one. broken clocks and all that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 We had a two year option on Aluko's contract so he rejected TUPE as well. I mean I think the agreement with Coventry was a percentage of any future fee they get for him, like we had with Charlie Adam. Who does he expect to get a fee from for Aluko from Hull or from Aluko himself ?.... We're entitled to development fees for McCabe, Ness and Fleck anyway, do you know if the cut of a future fee in respect of Fleck was in lieu of a development fee or in addition too? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 Who does he expect to get a fee from for Aluko from Hull or from Aluko himself ?.... We're entitled to development fees for McCabe, Ness and Fleck anyway, do you know if the cut of a future fee in respect of Fleck was in lieu of a development fee or in addition too? Pretty sure it was instead of, I mean we've had nothing from Stoke for Ness yet as far as I know so even the development fee issue doesn't seem clear cut. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Who does he expect to get a fee from for Aluko from Hull or from Aluko himself ?.... We're entitled to development fees for McCabe, Ness and Fleck anyway, do you know if the cut of a future fee in respect of Fleck was in lieu of a development fee or in addition too? Forlan I don't really think your avatar of someone in a wheelchair with First team squad above it is is in very good taste to be honest. It may be a hero cartoon figure I have no idea, and I do realise you did not put in the first team squad above but it stinks of someone trying to be smart to be honest. Maybe it is me. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.