Clarity on what clubs voted for

[thomas]

My understanding is that the clubs voted to signal their intention to sign up to the new FAI league pending clarification on all the points people on here are getting their knickers in a twist over.

Sorry to spoil the fun.

[Cosmo]

My understanding is that the clubs voted to signal their intention to sign up to the new FAI league pending clarification on all the points people on here are getting their knickers in a twist over.

Sorry to spoil the fun.

That seems to be my reading of it too after reading todays papers. So the vote on saturday was pointless? :confused:

[Roverstillidie]

That seems to be my reading of it too after reading todays papers. So the vote on saturday was pointless? :confused:

no, the barrage of UCD apocalyptic spin was pointless.

[higgins]

But it has been fun watching the UCD posts go through the roof :eek:

Ive not seen so much over reaction since Kearney mentioned he was in talks with Shels ;)

[Roverstillidie]

it may be fun, but people might have believed that crap, and when they are right about something important, no-one will listen!!!

[A face]

Ive not seen so much over reaction since Kearney mentioned he was in talks with Shels ;)

Was never gonna happen, cant afford him ;)

[Magicme]

Its not crap RTID. Its called feedom of speech when people discuss their opinions on the possible outcomes of decisions being made without their imput. I for one feel it is heartening to have such an impassioned discussion on the possible development of our league....it shows that people are fanatical about their football and want the best possible service from their elected representatives.

Long live democracy.

[Roverstillidie]

thats fine, but they were throwing 'facts' into the mix and trying to pass it off as the inside track, and when delved, it was press reports we had all seen and chats with unnamed officials.
they could well be right, but they were aggressivly propagandising with shots in the dark, which is dodgy.

[Maynard]

thats fine, but they were throwing 'facts' into the mix and trying to pass it off as the inside track, and when delved, it was press reports we had all seen and chats with unnamed officials.
they could well be right, but they were aggressivly propagandising with shots in the dark, which is dodgy.

Are you John Delaney in disguise or what?;)

[pineapple stu]

My understanding is that the clubs voted to signal their intention to sign up to the new FAI league pending clarification on all the points people on here are getting their knickers in a twist over.

Sorry to spoil the fun.
So what you're saying is that clubs didn't vote for this new proposal, they voted to vote on it.

Doesn't that leave us in the same situation though? Namely, that the proposal to allocate clubs to divisions according to marketability and facilities is still on the table? This would be backed up by (indeed, it would better explain) Andy Needham's quote in the Irish Times -

"This is seen as the first full step towards a full merger between the league and the FAI as recommended in the Genesis Report on the workings of the league, with clubs being placed in divisions according to their league placing, facilities and marketability."

[Roverstillidie]

Are you John Delaney in disguise or what?;)

you are only proving that you are trying to bully those of us who arent in on the NLSA message with crap like this.

[Mr_T]

My understanding is that the clubs voted to signal their intention to sign up to the new FAI league pending clarification on all the points people on here are getting their knickers in a twist over.

Sorry to spoil the fun.

This is 100% true.

I reckon there are 2 possible reasons why this half baked "approval in principle" thing was put before the clubs, most of whom (even the 4 who abstained according to Seery in yesterdays Star) do approve in principle.

1. To get the message across and accepted before the season starts that participation in the Premier/First will not be entirely decided by on pitch promotion/relegation rules thus avoiding legal challenges from clubs who "get promoted" but don't make the Premier for other reasons. Nobody can say they weren't warned. IMO it should mainly be decided on league placings, but with no exceptions for clubs who fail on other categories such as fincance and infrastructure. Arbitrary c r a p like marketability and potential are just that, and no club should move up or down based on these things. But the clubs will have a chance to vote on the finalised criteria in June or whenever and can have a say about any silly criteria then.

2. Its fair to say that there would be no point wasting time drawing up a full set of criteria for a new league which required 100% compliance with strict criteria if the clubs were opposed in principle from day 1. Hence the waters had to be tested before going for the whole hog.

The process has been started with the blessing of the clubs, its now up to the clubs again to adopt or reject the final proposals and criteria for admission to a new league.

[Ronnie]

I believe if it was not approved last Saturday it couldn't be brought to the next stage. Or it would mean could not be brought brfore the league until 2007.

[Macy]

This is 100% true.

I reckon there are 2 possible reasons why this half baked "approval in principle" thing was put before the clubs, most of whom (even the 4 who abstained according to Seery in yesterdays Star) do approve in principle.

1. To get the message across and accepted before the season starts that participation in the Premier/First will not be entirely decided by on pitch promotion/relegation rules thus avoiding legal challenges from clubs who "get promoted" but don't make the Premier for other reasons. Nobody can say they weren't warned. IMO it should mainly be decided on league placings, but with no exceptions for clubs who fail on other categories such as fincance and infrastructure. Arbitrary c r a p like marketability and potential are just that, and no club should move up or down based on these things. But the clubs will have a chance to vote on the finalised criteria in June or whenever and can have a say about any silly criteria then.

2. Its fair to say that there would be no point wasting time drawing up a full set of criteria for a new league which required 100% compliance with strict criteria if the clubs were opposed in principle from day 1. Hence the waters had to be tested before going for the whole hog.

The process has been started with the blessing of the clubs, its now up to the clubs again to adopt or reject the final proposals and criteria for admission to a new league.
Fair play. Something like this released instead of all the leaks that Delaney put out would've saved a lot of confusion. Pity the league, the FAI or any of the clubs had the cop on to release this type of thing to the media or even the nlsa.

It at least gives the clubs, and hopefully the nlsa the time to fight the ridiculous, unquantifiable's such as marketability, potential, geographic spread etc etc.

[Maynard]

you are only proving that you are trying to bully those of us who arent in on the NLSA message with crap like this.

You are greatly mistaken. My involvement with the NLSA is virtually zero (and completely irrelevant) You seem to feel that there are wheels within wheels here, when in fact it is just an open discussion forum where people are entitled to speculate on the future of the league and their club's place within it. If people are making misinformed or speculative posts (in my opinion) then I would point to the lack of info coming from HQ, and the spinning and fudging of every syllable that does leak out.

Also I find it completely normal and acceptable that many people on here are wholly sceptical about ANYTHING with the FAI's fingerprints on it, given the way that eL fans were treated very recently by them.

[Poor Student]

Now who is the one scaremongering and making stuff up Roverstillidie? What's this NLSA conspiracy? I'm not part of it either btw.

[Roverstillidie]

I merely asked people to back up some of the wilder theories (that were not phrased as speculation, rather itk stuff) so we could make sense of what was actually on the table, as opposed to what people think might be.this led me to be labelled an employee of the FAI, John Delaney etc.

The NLSA statements on this match the tone of one or two posters and im wondering if they are simply using this to announce their arrival without waiting to see what the clubs were presented.

im hardly being unreasonable to ask those speculating to say they are and those with facts to source them.

[Poor Student]

I know that Pineapple Stu knows people in the know. That might sound cryptic but it's true. I also think one of the Dub City lads (maybe Maynard?) got bad reports from someone in the club. Both clubs are quite small and though you don't know these people you must know it's more than plausible they know the main people in the club who would be aprised (at least as much as one can be) of this whole process.