Clubs hold crisis talks in bid to secure survival Print

[BulmersKid]

Not really, I didn't realise that Shelbourne made the rules.:rolleyes:

What?????:confused::confused:

[micls]

Licencing isn't a punishment though. It is deciding what licence a club warrants. Given the circumstances, I find it difficult to believe Cork are deserving a Premier licence.

There are set guidelines in place as to what makes you qualify for a license.

if we fail to meet one of them i.e. having back pay paid then I would fully agree with our demotion

However, paying creditors 100% is NOT a licensing requirement and therefore should not lead to demotion(as Higgins suggests).

[brianw82]

Shels fans are just ****ed off (and they have a point) that they've had to pay back every cent of what they owe, while City enter the seemingly 'convenient' examinership process and come out of it with the creditors/Revenue getting screwed over.
Shelbourne have at least 'done the daycent thing' since they went bust, something which Cork (and possibly Drogs) are looking to avoid.

[Buile Shuibhne]

There was no dispute in the Cawley case. It was decided in court that Shels were wrong. They still refused to pay the fee, so the FAI paid instead. I'm not sure how that constitutes "the FAI didn't offer any aid".



Of course there was a dispute in the Cawley case.

How else did it end up in court as you refer to?

The FAI paying UCD was more to do with them appeasing UCD rather than helping out Shels

[HarpoJoyce]

Thankfully Derry City adhering to the FAI Tribunal decision and paying/agreeing to pay Galway Utd. (30,000) for Murphy strenghtened UCD's negotiation for money (20,000 Tribunal decision). I was suprised as any when I heard Derry City paid the agreed to pay the asking price.
The Tribunal's decision was based on age and achievement and potential. Shels refused to pay initially Pat Fenlon and Ollie Byrne. This FAI Tribunal is still around and meets when there is a dispute regarding a player of a certain age transferring between LoI clubs.


Re; Cork City and rules.
There are many rules organisational, civil, criminal etc. You brought a case against your creditors to default on payment. There's still the organisational rules to overcome. yes, Cork City can return to the High Court as much as they like. They may even win. It has already been shown that Cork City go to the Civil Courts to renege on promises, renege on debts.

When Cork City fans quite blatantly defend the actions of their club in refusing to pay the full debt. You club may be associated with both shamrock rovers and drogheda utd.

[BulmersKid]

Re; Cork City and rules.
There are many rules organisational, civil, criminal etc. You brought a case against your creditors to default on payment. There's still the organisational rules to overcome. yes, Cork City can return to the High Court as much as they like. They may even win. It has already been shown that Cork City go to the Civil Courts to renege on promises, renege on debts.

When Cork City fans quite blatantly defend the actions of their club in refusing to pay the full debt. You club may be associated with both shamrock rovers and drogheda utd.

What are you on about???

[higgins]

Your opinion is irrelevant.


Well excuse me for posting my opinion on a public message board!!

You didn't answer the last part of my question either but I'm used to that around here...

[ndrog]

:confused:
Thankfully Derry City adhering to the FAI Tribunal decision and paying/agreeing to pay Galway Utd. (30,000) for Murphy strenghtened UCD's negotiation for money (20,000 Tribunal decision). I was suprised as any when I heard Derry City paid the agreed to pay the asking price.
The Tribunal's decision was based on age and achievement and potential. Shels refused to pay initially Pat Fenlon and Ollie Byrne. This FAI Tribunal is still around and meets when there is a dispute regarding a player of a certain age transferring between LoI clubs.


Re; Cork City and rules.
There are many rules organisational, civil, criminal etc. You brought a case against your creditors to default on payment. There's still the organisational rules to overcome. yes, Cork City can return to the High Court as much as they like. They may even win. It has already been shown that Cork City go to the Civil Courts to renege on promises, renege on debts.

When Cork City fans quite blatantly defend the actions of their club in refusing to pay the full debt. You club may be associated with both shamrock rovers and drogheda utd.

Dude have you been smoking weed or what :confused:

[pineapple stu]

Of course there was a dispute in the Cawley case.

How else did it end up in court as you refer to?

The FAI paying UCD was more to do with them appeasing UCD rather than helping out Shels
It ended up in court because Shels were desperately trying to squirm out of paying a few quid.

The court case was unequivocally in our favour (as it was blatantly clear-cut in our favour), but Shels - despite the fact that there could be no further cause for dispute - still refused to pay the fee and so the FAI stepped in and paid to avoid a very embarrassing situation for both Shels and the FAI.

[Buile Shuibhne]

I can assure you Shels suffered no embarrassment over the Cawley dispute.

[pineapple stu]

Silly me.

I naturally assumed that signing a player, refusing to pay the transfer fee, causing the player to sit out a month of the season because of your petulance, then refusing to pay the fee even after the court had ordered it to be paid, and finally having the FAI to step in to clear your debts would have been a cause of embarrassment.

Thanks for that valuable insight into the mindset in Tolka Park.

[micls]

Re; Cork City and rules.
There are many rules organisational, civil, criminal etc. You brought a case against your creditors to default on payment. There's still the organisational rules to overcome. yes, Cork City can return to the High Court as much as they like. They may even win. It has already been shown that Cork City go to the Civil Courts to renege on promises, renege on debts.

When Cork City fans quite blatantly defend the actions of their club in refusing to pay the full debt. You club may be associated with both shamrock rovers and drogheda utd.

Sorry but you've lost me


Well excuse me for posting my opinion on a public message board!!

You quite entitled to post it...that doesnt make it relevant or the case or the punishment though. If it makes you feel better my opinion is also irrelevant


You didn't answer the last part of my question either but I'm used to that around here...

I did, read the second line of my post....its ok though I'm used to people not reading posts around here too....

[Sam_Heggy]

Silly me.

I naturally assumed that signing a player, refusing to pay the transfer fee, causing the player to sit out a month of the season because of your petulance, then refusing to pay the fee even after the court had ordered it to be paid, and finally having the FAI to step in to clear your debts would have been a cause of embarrassment.

Thanks for that valuable insight into the mindset in Tolka Park.

Blah, Petit facts.

Damn students :mad: