Fair Play to the FAI

[Mr A]

In the past weeks the FAI have:

* Put forward a rescue package for Cobh (albeit rejected by their members)
* Helped stop the budgetary madness at Harps by vetoing a budget that could well have sunk the club unless last year's mess is cleaned up first.
* Intervened in Drogheda's negotiations with the PFAI and are to act as guarantors for repayments from DUFC.

For all people tend to blame them for what is wrong in the league at the moment they are doing a decent job of trying to save the clubs from themselves.

[LeixlipRed]

Fair play to the FAI??? Drogheda spent millions they didn't have, reneged on wages and now the FAI are going to support this type of financial mis-management by underwriting a pathetic wage settlement. This is an absolute disgrace to be honest. Where were the FAI when Shels reneged on wages? Nowhere. And we paid every cent back. This just sends out the message that it's ok to rack up a pile of debt. Sure you won't even be slightly punished. We'll even pay your staff for you.

[pineapple stu]

The FAI paid your transfer fees for you; what's the difference?

[Mr A]

Where were the FAI when Shels reneged on wages?

Not in charge of the league at that stage for a start. And the FAI are not supporting financial mismanagement, they're trying to prevent it at Harps and in the case of Drogheda and Cobh save themselves from the consequences of it.

And I really have no idea what Shels have to be bitter about, I still don't think anyone has topped the follies committed at Tolka. At least DUFC had some small chance of their stadium coming off and the whole thing working out.

And didn't the FAI attempt to help Shels get into Dalymount BTW?

[LeixlipRed]

No comment on the Drogheda situation Stu? Or is it just an anti-Shels thing when you moan about finances?

[LeixlipRed]

How are the FAI trying to prevent financial mis-management by promising to underwrite a derisory offer on reneged wages? Debts that were accrued through overspending of Shels like proportions? It just continues the boom and bust cycle.

[pineapple stu]

I've commented plenty of times on the Drogheda situation.

I agree with you that the FAI shouldn't be giving the club money (I still think the Revenue debt will see the club wound up, so the FAI will be called on to guarantee the wages), and that they should have stepped in a lot earlier. I also don't think their actions (bar in Harps' case) constitute, as Mr A said, saving the clubs from themselves. I think it's just giving the example that it's OK to go bankrupt. But I also think your whining is blinkered at best, and I wanted to highlight one fact which you ignored.

[Mr A]

No comment on the Drogheda situation Stu? Or is it just an anti-Shels thing when you moan about finances?

I think you'll find that Stu may have hazarded the odd comment on the DUFC situation.

And I don't think there's a chance that Drogheda will return to the same sort of spending as before.

[Mr A]

I've commented plenty of times on the Drogheda situation.

I agree with you that the FAI shouldn't be giving the club money (I still think the Revenue debt will see the club wound up, so the FAI will be called on to guarantee the wages), and that they should have stepped in a lot earlier. I also don't think their actions (bar in Harps' case) constitute, as Mr A said, saving the clubs from themselves. I think it's just giving the example that it's OK to go bankrupt. But I also think your whining is blinkered at best, and I wanted to highlight one fact which you ignored.

I think if they're wound up the players get nothing and the FAI won't have to pay anything, although I may be wrong.

In the DUFC and CRFC cases the FAI are attempting to save two clubs who have brought themselves to the brink by overspending. While that can be seen as rewarding their failure, I think it's better to try to keep the clubs in existence where possible.

[Dodge]

I've also heard that the FAI have refused to sanction some club budgets as they thought they were overly optimistic

Good news

[pineapple stu]

In the DUFC and CRFC cases the FAI are attempting to save two clubs who have brought themselves to the brink by overspending. While that can be seen as rewarding their failure, I think it's better to try to keep the clubs in existence where possible.
Possibly, though it can pee off clubs who don't get any money even though we do everything right.

Vetoing budgets I've no problems with. Should have been done a long time ago. Dublin City budgeting for 1500 attendances springs to mind.

[Réiteoir]

Shels fans will NEVER be in any position to pontificate to supporters of other clubs about financial matters.

Back to the topic in hand - I agree with the majority - the FAI are trying to be proactive with regards to future budgets - which is a good thing

[Dodge]

Possibly, though it can pee off clubs who don't get any money even though we do everything right.


How very thatcherite of you

[pineapple stu]

Typo, actually. Edited part of my post as an afterthought, but forgot to run through the whole sentence. But I like it that way now. :)

[Kildareman]

The FAI taking action to protect the clubs from themselves is a sensible move but to offer to pay back a clubs debts is not.

BTW when Kilkenny were in trouble what help was offered to them?

[Buile Shuibhne]

Shels fans will NEVER be in any position to pontificate to supporters of other clubs about financial matters.




What a load of bombastic bullsh*t

Look at who's pontificating now :!:

Shels fans are just as entitled to post here and offer their views - as are fans of all clubs.

[Macy]

For all people tend to blame them for what is wrong in the league at the moment they are doing a decent job of trying to save the clubs from themselves.
Eh, wasn't licencing supposed to stop this happening in the first place?

Yeah, pat on the back to the FAI for shutting the stable door...

[garyderry]

Possibly, though it can pee off clubs who don't get any money even though we do everything right.

Vetoing budgets I've no problems with. Should have been done a long time ago. Dublin City budgeting for 1500 attendances springs to mind.

cant blame the FAI they didnt run the league then

[garyderry]

What a load of bombastic bullsh*t

Look at who's pontificating now :!:

Shels fans are just as entitled to post here and offer their views - as are fans of all clubs.

Whatever about $hel$ fans in general,
you certain shouldnt with all the crap you posted here
and on the $hel$ forum that there was nothing wrong with what Oillie Byrne
was doing to the club. Complete rubbish from you as usual.

[OneRedArmy]

cant blame the FAI they didnt run the league thenExactly Gary.

The League was the clubs back then, and they had no interest in saving their fellow clubs.

As for Stu's point of being unfair on the other clubs, yes, it probably does introduce moral hazard but its a bit like bailing out the banks, its unavoidable if we still want football to continue. And like the banks, those involved in misrunning clubs should be prohibited from being involved in future.

[Buile Shuibhne]

Whatever about $hel$ fans in general,
you certain shouldnt with all the crap you posted here
and on the $hel$ forum that there was nothing wrong with what Oillie Byrne
was doing to the club. Complete rubbish from you as usual.


I post very rarely here

My complete rubbish is every bit as valid as your complete rubbish.

[Mr A]

Eh, wasn't licencing supposed to stop this happening in the first place?

Yeah, pat on the back to the FAI for shutting the stable door...

Ideally licensing would have worked perfectly from the start, but then ideally the clubs wouldn't be such utter plonkers when it comes to money. It seems to be finally growing teeth as club budgets are being vetoed where they are over optimistic. It was always likely that licensing would be an imperfect and gradual process since the clubs seem so determined to undermine it and find loopholes where possible.

If things are finally getting a little better, why not recognise it?

[pineapple stu]

If things are finally getting a little better, why not recognise it?
Everyone's recognised the progress in vetoing budgets.

Bailing clubs out will only work if there's strict measures to ensure this doesn't happen again. Vetoing budgets may help, but history suggests this will happen again, albeit not on the same scale as the past couple of years. I don't think history repeating itself is to be praised particularly.

[pateen]

Have to agree, the FAI ARE doing a good job even if Fran Gavin's head is still in the clouds. Its a big learning curve for them so hears hoping for the 2009 season

[Dodge]

Gavin knows full well the sclae of things the league is facing. that he chooses to try and put a positive spin on things is a plus IMO

[EL123]

In the past weeks the FAI have:

* Put forward a rescue package for Cobh (albeit rejected by their members)
* Helped stop the budgetary madness at Harps by vetoing a budget that could well have sunk the club unless last year's mess is cleaned up first.
* Intervened in Drogheda's negotiations with the PFAI and are to act as guarantors for repayments from DUFC.

For all people tend to blame them for what is wrong in the league at the moment they are doing a decent job of trying to save the clubs from themselves.
It never ceases to amaze me how people react to things without taking into account the full history of the problem. I agree, for all intents and purposes it looks as if the FAI are bailing out clubs for the problems they have themselves created but as the FAI are the custodians of football and are the ones who set the rules in the first place wouldnt it have been better if:-

1. Cobh Ramblers problems had been addressed by the FAI earlier on in the season when it would have been obvious to the FAI through their moitoring systems that they were facing real trouble.

2. Ditto for 1.

3. Intervening in Drogheda's wages negotiations is not a matter for the FAI. The contracts were entered into between Drogheda United and their players. Again if the FAI had been monitoring, as we are led to believe, the situation at Drogheda over the past year, it would have been obvious that they were spending beyond their means and an embargo on signing more players should have been put in place. This wouldnt have sorted out the situation but could have stopped the unrealistic spending and prevented other clubs from losing valuable players.

It really looks like throwing sugar at the situation after the damage is done yet again, so that the FAI come out smelling of roses.

Sad really.

[A face]

Gavin knows full well the sclae of things the league is facing. That he chooses to try and put a positive spin on things is a plus IMO

I think so as well. There is enough blind negativity out there about the league so that slot doesn't need to be filled. Given his role, if he doesn't show the league in a good light with balanced opinion then who will.

[Mr A]

1. Cobh Ramblers problems had been addressed by the FAI earlier on in the season when it would have been obvious to the FAI through their moitoring systems that they were facing real trouble.

2. Ditto for 1.

3. Intervening in Drogheda's wages negotiations is not a matter for the FAI. The contracts were entered into between Drogheda United and their players. Again if the FAI had been monitoring, as we are led to believe, the situation at Drogheda over the past year, it would have been obvious that they were spending beyond their means and an embargo on signing more players should have been put in place. This wouldnt have sorted out the situation but could have stopped the unrealistic spending and prevented other clubs from losing valuable players.


What could the FAI do during the season for 1+2, cancel player contracts? They could have enforced transfer embargoes but presumably the clubs did not reach the 65% limit to allow that to happen. Licensing is the main tool at their disposal and they do appear to be tightening it up, and it is that that I welcome.

As for the Drogheda situation- yes it was obvious they were spending beyond their means but up until quite recently the 3 directors were footing the bill. As it turns out the guarantees given under licensing weren't worth a damn and the FAI obviously fecked that part up but their response seems to be correct at the moment in that they're limiting crazy budgets going forward rather than just seeking guarantees that they'll be covered. As for getting involved in the wage negotiations, I believe they are right to try to help save DUFC. The demise of the club would not be a good thing for Irish football, so whatever previous mistakes have been made attempts to keep the club in senior football are worth a go.

I'm not saying the FAI are perfect or brilliant- I'm just saying they seem to be getting better than they were previously. The tragedy is that the clubs should not need big brother to keep them from killing themselves.

[EalingGreen]

I know it's hypothetical, and may well never happen, but what would be the implications of FAI bailouts etc for any future All-Ireland League?

Presumably in an AIL, all the constituent teams would remain Membership of their respective Football Associations (FAI & IFA), with some sort of Organising Committee, whose Members would be drawn from the two FA's, responsible for running the competition.

That being so, it could hardly be acceptable e.g. to the IFA and its participating clubs if the FAI were to support Drogheda, or vice versa (e.g. if the IFA were supporting Coleraine), since this would prevent a "level playing field".

Indeed, it could conceivably skew the Setanta Cup (if it ever comes back) if, mid-tournament, say, the FAI were to pay the wage bill of one of their clubs, so that they didn't have to sell players, just before a Cup game against a Northern side. It's unlikely, I know, but there is potentially serious money in the Setanta for those clubs who are in with a shout of winning it.

Obviously, it is for each Association to determine how it runs its own financial affairs (Licencing etc). Nonetheless, whilst with a domestic League, every Member has a say in what their own Association does (to an extent), on a cross-border level, EL clubs cannot influence what the IFA does, nor IL clubs what the FAI does.

Just a thought.

[pineapple stu]

I'm not saying the FAI are perfect or brilliant- I'm just saying they seem to be getting better than they were previously.
It's kind of like those newspaper articles saying no English fans were arrested at their most recent game, and aren't they great.

[SligoBrewer]

Whatever about $hel$ fans in general,
you certain shouldnt with all the crap you posted here
and on the $hel$ forum that there was nothing wrong with what Oillie Byrne
was doing to the club. Complete rubbish from you as usual.

Completely disagree. Shels were punished for the actions. Relegated and not given any help by the FAI. Drogheda have been helped by the FAI and not punished. Despite doing THE EXACT SAME THING. This is double standards. :mad:

[pineapple stu]

not given any help by the FAI.
Their transfer fees were paid for them FFS. How much more help do you want?

[SligoBrewer]

Their transfer fees were paid for them FFS. How much more help do you want?

I retract that if true.

[red bellied]

Their transfer fees were paid for them FFS. How much more help do you want?

They can sort out monies owed to Sligo Rovers for Faz's transfer so.

[pineapple stu]

I retract that if true.
They paid the Alan Cawley fee (plus interest) after Shels refused to despite losing a court case. I recall Fintan Cassidy rather smugly posting here that they'd never paid the money, but we received it from the FAI.

[SligoBrewer]

They paid the Alan Cawley fee (plus interest) after Shels refused to despite losing a court case. I recall Fintan Cassidy rather smugly posting here that they'd never paid the money, but we received it from the FAI.

Ok. Fair enough.
Going a bit o/t here but were Shels expected to pay the FAI back?
Probably not is my guess.

Drogheda should not be bailed out anyways and fully punished. It wasn't but 6 months ago they were still shelling out 'funds' to buy players. Namely from us.
But double standards should not be employed either.

[Bald Student]

Their transfer fees were paid for them FFS. How much more help do you want?
The Cawley money was 24,000 euro. The Drogs hole is much bigger than that.

[pineapple stu]

We don't know how much the FAI have given though. (They're surely not plugging the whole lot, are they?!)

I've agreed that I don't like the idea of giving stupid clubs money, but my point is to dismiss Shels fans' notions that this is an inconsistency on the FAI's part compared to what happened them. It's the exact same.


Going a bit o/t here but were Shels expected to pay the FAI back?
I think at the time, there was a suggestion the amount would be stopped from Shels' prize money at the end of the season. That was probably more to placate the other clubs though. Never happened, however.

Edit - on my first point, the (abridged) quote from the paper is


United officials have agreed to make some additional payments to the players over the next three months, and it is understood the FAI have guaranteed those payments.

So the FAI have underwritten "some" of the payments, but we've no idea how many.

[passerrby]

to get back to the main point I think it was more to do with saving face and not let the league crumble on there watch

[LeixlipRed]

Shels fans will NEVER be in any position to pontificate to supporters of other clubs about financial matters.

Back to the topic in hand - I agree with the majority - the FAI are trying to be proactive with regards to future budgets - which is a good thing

So when you go bust next season will you not be allowed to pontificate either? Just so I'm clear....

[pineapple stu]

I take it then your whinging about the FAI helping other clubs but not youz is retracted?

[SligoBrewer]

I take it then your whinging about the FAI helping other clubs but not youz is retracted?

I presume your talking to me..:confused:

[pineapple stu]

LeixlipRed.

[dcfcsteve]

The bottom line is that the FAI aren't child-minders.

The clubs who get themselves into financial problems in-turn only have themselves to blame. Fans pointing the finger at the FAI for being in some ways responsible or negligent is ludicrous.

Yes I know that licensing is supposed to stop a lot of the financial shenanigans that used to and still do go on, but the bottom line again is that clubs are responsible for the situation they put themselves in. The FAI can't save a club from itself if it's determined to go down a certain route, and there will always be loop-holes in any licensing system.

Then when clubs end up in financial schtook the FAI are stuck between a rock and a hard place : help keep clubs alive even when they've been run shambolically, or do nothing and effectively let them go to the wall. Neither is a good option to chose, but given the fact that the FAI'S job is football and the bad press the league has had for the last few years, I think they can be forgiven for trying not to let any more clubs hit the wall.

[Bald Student]

It's possible for the FAI and the clubs to both be in the wrong.

[pete]

Seems very likely the FAI will end up paying the additional wages for Drogs. IMO probably sets an unwarranted precedent.

What happens to Drogs next season if they need to use the FAI guarantee mid season? :confused:

[HarpoJoyce]

It's possible for the FAI and the clubs to both be in the wrong.

I'll take my chances with the FAI.

Some individual supporters tend to change their opinions as they grow or insist on breaches of the law. Including requesting (criticising when they don't) intervening in clubs' situations when there is a decision already before the High Court.

After edit:

Seems very likely the FAI will end up paying the additional wages for Drogs. IMO probably sets an unwarranted precedent.

What happens to Drogs next season if they need to use the FAI guarantee mid season?

Count, how many steps into the future have you gone? Is it three or four? In an attempt to post something determental about Irish Football.

[higgins]

The FAI paid your transfer fees for you; what's the difference?


You are twisting things with that statement.
You know full well Shels owed the FAI money then and that prize money was withheld.

[higgins]

Their transfer fees were paid for them FFS. How much more help do you want?


Every time you're pulled up on something you move to more made up bull.

Did the FAI pay the transfer fee and Shels don't have to ?
On what basis did the FAI pay that transfer fee ?

Do you seriously think the FAI would have done Ollie a favour like that !!

[ndrog]

Seems very likely the FAI will end up paying the additional wages for Drogs. IMO probably sets an unwarranted precedent.

What happens to Drogs next season if they need to use the FAI guarantee mid season? :confused:

why is that very likely .what r u basing that on ? you know something i dont ?