Bohs and the FAI

[Ezeikial]

Yep, Bohs board have a monopoly on that all right. anyone recall the "we have no finanacial problems" line rolled out at Dundalk shortly before they could not pay players contracts ? Cork ? Derry ? drogs ? the 4% club ? etc etc etc.
As regards this non story, advances against guaranteed european income are nothing new (unlike Cork advance on money they MIGHT win). The fact that Bohs needed the advance are worrying but in the absence of bigger picture hardly illuminating.
still any chance for small clubs to have a go...........:rolleyes:

This smacks of more denial to me. Maybe it's just that you are hurt or fearful about the overall situation, or think that your club is under attack and you are duty bound to defend this.

Could I respectfully suggest to you that your club is under serious attack from WITHIN. The more the board trot out double-speak delusional nonsense and the more that gullible Bohs members and fans are prepared to accept this the greater the threat becomes.

Can you not grasp that it is irrelevant to the Bohs situation whether or not other boards have also been in denial?

For what it is worth (and I do accept that you will believe what suits you) at no time did the Dundalk board ever roll out the "we have no financial problems" line - in fact a fans forum to openly declare the probability of an end-of-season deficit occured last April! If you want a further illustration of the open-ness and candid attitude of Gerry Matthews to this reality, check out any of the published interviews on this forum. Heres a recent one - http://blackandwhitetown.squarespace.com/home/2009/9/25/gerry-matthews-interview.html

Your arrogance with the "small clubs" gibe sums up the situation - I just hope your views are not typical of Bohs supporters.

[BohDiddley]

For what it is worth (and I do accept that you will believe what suits you) at no time did the Dundalk board ever roll out the "we have no financial problems" line - in fact a fans forum to openly declare the probability of an end-of-season deficit occured last April!
I don't think the Bohs board is pretending that there are no financial problems, or that we are not heading for deficit, again.

[Longfordian]

I don't think the fact that they needed the advance for travel obligations is really the issue. Most people here wouldn't have a problem with that. It's the fact that part of that money was used to pay wages, and the fact that the FAI seemed to know this, that's the problem.

Clubs have been getting an advance on the money for years. I know we did in 2004 and 2005. The FAI weren't bothered what it was for, I don't think we pretended it was for any specific reason. We needed it, they gave it. The fact that we needed it early tells its own story but as the Bohs fans are saying it shouldn't be any great shock that they've been having difficulty paying the bills this year. I don't understand the fuss people are making personally.

[Guts&Glory]

Clubs have been getting an advance on the money for years. I know we did in 2004 and 2005. The FAI weren't bothered what it was for, I don't think we pretended it was for any specific reason. We needed it, they gave it. The fact that we needed it early tells its own story but as the Bohs fans are saying it shouldn't be any great shock that they've been having difficulty paying the bills this year. I don't understand the fuss people are making personally.

Agreed this particular issue is getting muddled up between Bohs money woes and the FAI advance.

Richard Sadler spoke on MNS earlier in the season that clubs could ask the FAI for their guaranteed euro money if they so wished AND that the club could use the money as they so wished the FAI did not put requirements on the advance. This is no more than what the club would do when the money came in anyway I.e. Pay the most pressing bills whether they be wages, suppliers, creditors etc.

Alternative is they could just let the bills stack up on the promise of paying the bills when the guaranteed money came in.

It would make more sense to give the advance.

Clubs participating in the Setanta cup all got advances as well.

Sligo, Pats, Bohs, Derry all could have got the advance if they wanted.

Bohs, cork etc overall money problems are a different issue but in my eyes are more pressing and important as by the FAI rules both should be relegated come end of season and Bray, drogs or whoever it may be that is in the bottom two are saved which would make a big difference for any club saved by Bohs or Cork demotion. .

[marinobohs]

This smacks of more denial to me. Maybe it's just that you are hurt or fearful about the overall situation, or think that your club is under attack and you are duty bound to defend this.

Could I respectfully suggest to you that your club is under serious attack from WITHIN. The more the board trot out double-speak delusional nonsense and the more that gullible Bohs members and fans are prepared to accept this the greater the threat becomes.

Can you not grasp that it is irrelevant to the Bohs situation whether or not other boards have also been in denial?

For what it is worth (and I do accept that you will believe what suits you) at no time did the Dundalk board ever roll out the "we have no financial problems" line - in fact a fans forum to openly declare the probability of an end-of-season deficit occured last April! If you want a further illustration of the open-ness and candid attitude of Gerry Matthews to this reality, check out any of the published interviews on this forum. Heres a recent one - http://blackandwhitetown.squarespace.com/home/2009/9/25/gerry-matthews-interview.html

Your arrogance with the "small clubs" gibe sums up the situation - I just hope your views are not typical of Bohs supporters.

Please explain the "denial" bit ? I simply posted that Bohs do not have a monopoly on delusional management (NOT that Bohs management was not, at times, delusional). How this makes me "hurt" or "fearful" is a figment of your over active imagination.
During the Dave Rogers debate when it was suggested that the sacking was due to finanacial concerns many Dundalk fans came on here to deny it, some quoting official statements. This proved as accurate as any finanacial decision taken at Dalymount. Perhaps you should try to grasp your own clubs limitations rather than constantly focus on those at Bohs as it just comes across as bitter at this stage. Feel free to comment about any issue at Bohs but if you want to be taken seriously cut out the sniping.;)

[SMorgan]

....
During the Dave Rogers debate when it was suggested that the sacking was due to finanacial concerns many Dundalk fans came on here to deny it, some quoting official statements. ...;)

WTF?? I've been critical of how Dundalk dealt with the Dave Rogers situation. The club were clearly wrong to sack him. But even I wouldn't entertain the notion that the clubs actions were motivated by monitory considerations. He was one of the club's best players at the time of his scaking and we sign 5 or 6 players after he left. So how the hell could his sacking have had anything to do with financial concerns??

[seand]

WTF?? I've been critical of how Dundalk dealt with the Dave Rogers situation. The club were clearly wrong to sack him. But even I wouldn't entertain the notion that the clubs actions were motivated by monitory considerations. He was one of the club's best players at the time of his scaking and we sign 5 or 6 players after he left. So how the hell could his sacking have had anything to do with financial concerns??

I'd be surprised if getting him off the payroll wasn't a contributing factor. Dead right to sack him for gross misconduct, pity they didn't do it by the book.

[Ezeikial]

Please explain the "denial" bit ? I simply posted that Bohs do not have a monopoly on delusional management (NOT that Bohs management was not, at times, delusional). How this makes me "hurt" or "fearful" is a figment of your over active imagination.


Happy to clarify for you:

My original post, part of which you quoted in your response, highlighted the obviously contradictory and increasingly delusional statements coming from the Bohs board, made bizarrely more apparent in the light of the emails quoted from July.

While you could have stayed silent, acknowledged it, or disputed it, you choose to respond, ignoring the central point and throwing out "red herrings" about other clubs. This indicates to me the possibilty of denial of the reality unfolding at Bohs.

The "hurt", "fearful" or "duty bound to protect" comments were simply speculation on my part as to possible alternative motivators - I don't know how you feel unless you express it.



During the Dave Rogers debate when it was suggested that the sacking was due to finanacial concerns many Dundalk fans came on here to deny it, some quoting official statements. This proved as accurate as any finanacial decision taken at Dalymount. Perhaps you should try to grasp your own clubs limitations rather than constantly focus on those at Bohs

I don't intend to buy your "red herring" - Dundalk have financial issues which they clearly acknowledged many months ago and have long since set about tackling in a very open and frank way.

Your statement about the Dave Rogers affair is simply and obviously incorrect, and I find it incredible that you could seriously equate the two issues on the level of open-ness or veracity !



.........rather than constantly focus on those at Bohs as it just comes across as bitter at this stage. Feel free to comment about any issue at Bohs but if you want to be taken seriously cut out the sniping.;)

Its very hard to take this comment seriously when I look back at your previous closing remark/snipe:


still any chance for small clubs to have a go...........:rolleyes:

[marinobohs]

Happy to clarify for you:

My original post, part of which you quoted in your response, highlighted the obviously contradictory and increasingly delusional statements coming from the Bohs board, made bizarrely more apparent in the light of the emails quoted from July.

While you could have stayed silent, acknowledged it, or disputed it, you choose to respond, ignoring the central point and throwing out "red herrings" about other clubs. This indicates to me the possibilty of denial of the reality unfolding at Bohs.

The "hurt", "fearful" or "duty bound to protect" comments were simply speculation on my part as to possible alternative motivators - I don't know how you feel unless you express it.



I don't intend to buy your "red herring" - Dundalk have financial issues which they clearly acknowledged many months ago and have long since set about tackling in a very open and frank way.

Your statement about the Dave Rogers affair is simply and obviously incorrect, and I find it incredible that you could seriously equate the two issues on the level of open-ness or veracity !




Its very hard to take this comment seriously when I look back at your previous closing remark/snipe:

Would love to respond but apparently that right only applies to some posters ;)