FAI proposals for future of Eircom League... [Archive] - Page 4

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:28 PM

I thought the requirement was to be able to hold 3000 people safely, not seat them?
It is, yeah. But it's still changing the goalposts. The proposed Belfield Bowl, for example, was designed with 1500 seats in mind per UEFA Licencing. Now we've to ensure the plans allow for 1500 additional people standing. The change might hit other clubs too (again, I know UCD best, obviously).

Danny

26/05/2006, 12:29 PM

22 marks for winning the Premier down to 1 for last in the First. Add that up over five years, add in the Cup results (10 for winning the FAI Cup down to 1 for getting knocked out in the second round), League Cup results (8 for winning down to 1 for group stage) and European results (1 for a win and � for a draw). Then sort by total score and appoint 300-290-280-...-110-100-90 to the clubs.

200 down to 60 for this season. An average gap of 6.363636, so don't know how that'll be worked out exactly.

Anyone wanna take it on them selves to do this up for each team ? ;)

Mr A

26/05/2006, 12:29 PM

The thing that worries me most is that the performanc eover the last 5 seasons is obviously known- so the FAI KNOW who's going to get the points here. This gives Shamrock Rovers a golden ticket back to the premier and fecks over Sligo. I think that this season should be much more heavily weighted, as looking into the past for an arbitrary period is very ropey indeed, and unfair considering some of the stuff that's gone on- especially at Shamrock Rovers.

I still think it's a pretty good document overall- and there can be changes made yet I think.

Student Mullet

26/05/2006, 12:31 PM

Really don't think UCD have too much to worry about in the short term at least.That's what I tought when I dirst saw the plans, UCD seem to come out in 8th position from the on-the-field numbers but then a ranking system is used so as the difference between each successive club is 10 points (out of 500), irrespective of how much ahead or behind other clubs you were. It has the effect of making the on-the-pitch element much less important than it seems at first.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:33 PM

I thought the requirement was to be able to hold 3000 people safely, not seat them?

In any case UCD's plans for a new ground are likely to help them. Really don't think UCD have too much to worry about in the short term at least.
I worked out the on-field stuff and we come 8th. I added in guesstimates of the off-field stuff and drop to 14th. Pure speculation obviously, but there's still enough to be fairly worried about.

I think I came up with Pat's, Bohs, Shels, Derry, Cork, Bray, Waterford, Longford, Drogheda and Sligo. Bubbling under were Galway (off-field didn't make up for their recent record) and Rovers (on the basis of no ground so no 3000 capacity and also failing UEFA Licencing). Waterford were helped by reaching the Cup Final recently, having a fifth (?) placed finish in the Premier and also being alone in a city. Bray surprised me, to be honest (obviously I didn't aim towards results).

Again, it's pure speculation as I don't know which way the off-field marks will be allocated, but there's enough to indicate that we won't get in.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:36 PM

That's what I tought when I dirst saw the plans, UCD seem to come out in 8th position from the on-the-field numbers but then a ranking system is used so as the difference between each successive club is 10 points (out of 500), irrespective of how much ahead or behind other clubs you were. It has the effect of making the on-the-pitch element much less important than it seems at first.
Yeah, basically the on-field stuff is worth 350, not 500, as the minimum you can get is 150. So in actual fact, there's potential for heavy weighting towards off-field criteria.

That said, as I was saying to you yesterday, there's no way of knowing whether the capacity, for example, is 100 for having enough and 0 for not having enough, or maybe you're docked 5 points for every hundred under capacity you are or something else random.

CollegeTillIDie

26/05/2006, 12:37 PM

a wage cap in our league is the most ridiculous thing imaginable, how will we ever get any reasonably good players over here if they dont get paid well,obviously they will choose england
Given that 60 of the 92 professional clubs in England have financial problems ranging from minimal to borderline terminal which clubs exactly are these Irish players going to play for?
Any proposal that throws any team out of the Premier Division ,when they have not been relegated on the field, for reasons other than clubs being insolvent, financially mismanaged and totally debt ridden and incapable of achieving any off field criteria would not hold much merit.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:42 PM

I don't think it will matter if you have plans to build a ground I don't think that will be considered IMO if it was not in place by next year.
It wasn't stated as far as I know, but I think I'd agree. Which is nonsense, as grounds take time to build, and some were delayed because the Governement withheld grant funding because of Delaney's appointment!

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:43 PM

Anyone wanna take it on them selves to do this up for each team ? ;)
Done it already. Will try and dig up results.

Edit - forgot to include European results, but they won't make any appreciable difference. I added in marks for the league standings at present too and got the following -

Derry City 1
Bohemians 2
Cork City 3
Shelbourne 4
Drogheda United 5
Longford Town 6
St Patrick's Athletic 6
UCD 8
Shamrock Rovers 9
Dublin City 10
Waterford United 11
Bray Wanderers 12
Sligo Rovers 13
Finn Harps 14
Galway United 15
Dundalk 16
Limerick FC 16
Cobh Ramblers 18
Kildare County 19
Athlone Town 20
Monaghan United 21
Kilkenny City 22

Mr A

26/05/2006, 12:43 PM

Yes it will Rogue Trader, plans for development are specifically mentioned. I was just pointing out that going back 5 years hurts ye as you're higher than at any time in those 5 seasons, and were midtable in the first for some of them. However, ye should do well on a lot of other areas.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:47 PM

Yes it will Rogue Trader, plans for development are specifically mentioned.
Interesting. I stand corrected.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:49 PM

Just don't take it as Gospel!!!

It's a guesstimate based on the vague information given so far.

BohDiddley

26/05/2006, 12:50 PM

Looks positive on the whole, but one major problem: why is Niall Quinn among those who will decide the fates of clubs, given that he is actively engaged in taking sports investment out of this country?

chippie0001

26/05/2006, 12:51 PM

Sorry will nail my colours to the mast and say this won't work.

Firstly does anyone think the FAI will do this right given their track record. I don't and as soon as the buzz dies off, the league will be left rot again. Delaney and Co want a super league, full time pro. increased attendance etc yet have not given any indication on how they will achieve this.

Next the wage cap. I agree its needed to force clubs to run their affairs right. However I have no confidence the FAI will enforce it and we will still see clubs spending far more than they have got. What happens then?

Next on the 50% for football, clubs like Bohs/Rovers etc will get points for spending money they never had over the last 5 years while clubs who ran their affairs right won't. Rovers for example point out it was not them but the old board but will not benefit greatly for those actions.

As for future plan, well we hope to have a brand new 10,000 seater stadium and �25m in the bank. Makes us, in theory, the biggest club in the land. However given planning etc it might never happen. How do the FAI decide how realistic plans are or not?

Next I have no doubt this will end up in court, does that do the league any good? Can't see how it will.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 12:54 PM

Considered maybe the wrong word that I used but what I was saying is that you ye won't get many marks for this. Sure everybody has grand plans for their ground :rolleyes:
This is where subjectivity and court cases are going to come into it.

Ash

26/05/2006, 1:12 PM

In the last 5 years we've had 1 promotion play-off and 2 re-elections
so that dosen't bode well for us. :o

On the other hand we're doing Ok this season so far, have a new stadium
coming along nicely and our youth teams etc are decent so theres emerging talent.

Ash

26/05/2006, 1:20 PM

PDF's now available on www.fai.ie

pete

26/05/2006, 1:26 PM

I haven't read the details yet but it does not appear to be radical enough. The league is floundering & needs radical shakeup. All we can ask is the rules are the same for all clubs. If clubs cannot meet the criteria then sorry but tough.

Wages restrictions are very important. If the league is to be taken anyway seriously then have to ensure no boom & bust clubs.

Will be very interested to read any media & maketing schemes planned centrally by the FAI.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 1:30 PM

Fair enough but what makes you think Rovers will fail to get a Licence?
Yez fell down badly on the fact that youz failed UEFA Licencing last year (i.e. only club to have licence revoked) and the fact that yez don't have a ground with 3000 safe capacity (don't know if groundshares are allowed).

I don't necessarily agree with my own results, I should point out.

WeAreRovers

26/05/2006, 1:36 PM

Yez fell down badly on the fact that youz failed UEFA Licencing last year (i.e. only club to have licence revoked) and the fact that yez don't have a ground with 3000 safe capacity (don't know if groundshares are allowed).

We failed last year, this year we passed with flying colours.

As for having no ground, ironically it looks like UCD & Bohs maybe the only 2 Dublin clubs with grounds of their own very soon. Rumours (and no small amount of facts) suggest that Olly's little mob have already been given their marching orders by Ossie Kilkenny and his Mulden mates and that Pats are also on the way out of Richmond - if not senior football altogether.

Having said that the FAI will shaft who they want and look after who they want - and I say that as a Rovers fan who realises that we'll be looked after when others won't. Doesn't make it right though.

KOH

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 1:38 PM

UEFA Licencing over the past three years is looked at, I think. So yez'd score worst there as only youz have had a licence revoked.

Your last paragraph is spot on, I think.

NY Hoop

26/05/2006, 1:43 PM

[QUOTE=Jerry The Saint]And I cannot understand how anybody with the league at heart thinks it's acceptable that the Premier Division will consist of teams arbitrarily chosen by a panel of individuals appointed by John Delaney:

What's the alternative? We stand still and let the league flounder along? IF this is implemented to the letter it is good for the league. I know stu's results are not the finished article but it doesnt look like there will be much difference between who's in what division now and 2007.

I'm not saying this cos some think we'll be "looked after" either. Our league record over the last 5 years is pretty average: 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 11th.

KOH

DmanDmythDledge

26/05/2006, 1:50 PM

10% location
Will all Dublin teams get the same amount of points for this?

Danny

26/05/2006, 1:51 PM

Pats are also on the way out of Richmond - if not senior football altogether.

Jaysus WeAreHomeless, you really do like to be sensationalist dont ya....

DmanDmythDledge

26/05/2006, 1:53 PM

But I find myself being envious of the way that the IRFU radically changed rugby on this island 10 years (or so) ago. Look at Munster and Leinster now. They are huge.
But they are provinces. If you add up all the fans from Shels, Bohs, Pats, Rovers, UCD and Dublin City it would be more than Leinsters. You can't compare a province to a club.

chippie0001

26/05/2006, 1:55 PM

[QUOTE=NY Hoop
I'm not saying this cos some think we'll be "looked after" either. Our league record over the last 5 years is pretty average: 2nd, 3rd, 7th, 9th and 11th.

KOH[/QUOTE]

But is that fair given you spent money on wages you never had. Otherwise your record would be a lot worse maybe in a lower division. So now you are being accessed in an unfair manner given that you only paid 4% of the debts incurred. Not trying to start a Rovers/Bohs thing just trying to highlight how unfair this is.

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 1:57 PM

What's the alternative? We stand still and let the league flounder along? IF this is implemented to the letter it is good for the league. I know stu's results are not the finished article but it doesnt look like there will be much difference between who's in what division now and 2007.
My figures were for on-field only. Add in off-field and you can replace UCD, Rovers and Dublin City with Bray, Waterford and Sligo.

But WeAreRovers highlighted the problem - it's so subjective, they can (and likely will) cherry-pick who they want.

The alternative is proper implementation of UEFA Licencing.

Chippie's point is interesting too.

Jerry The Saint

26/05/2006, 2:02 PM

Derry City 1
Bohemians 2
Cork City 3
Shelbourne 4
Drogheda United 5
Longford Town 6
St Patrick's Athletic 6
UCD 8
Shamrock Rovers 9
Dublin City 10
Waterford United 11
Bray Wanderers 12
Sligo Rovers 13
Finn Harps 14
Galway United 15
Dundalk 16
Limerick FC 16
Cobh Ramblers 18
Kildare County 19
Athlone Town 20
Monaghan United 21
Kilkenny City 22

I take it this is the estimated ranking on football performance. Does anyone else find it odd that Derry (5th, 8th, 9th, 7th, 2nd over the past 5 seasons) come out first and Shelbourne (2nd/1st:rolleyes:, 2nd, 1st, 1st, 3rd) are only the fourth best team under this system! :eek: Crazy idea to include the league cup which was an U-21 competition for many teams over this period. Even including the FAI cup is silly - you get penalised for getting a tough draw in the early rounds:confused:

And this is the scientific part of the team ranking. I call shenannigans.

crc

26/05/2006, 2:05 PM

I don't like it. Promotion and Relegation should only be decided on performances on the pitch this season. Most of the off the pitch criteria is far too subjective, and sneakily concocted so the FAI can pick and choose who they want - it absolutely stinks.

By all means they should set (and enforce) minimum standards for stadium capacity, spectator / media facilities, wage caps, and increase the prize-money, but all this stuff about market size and sustainability will bring the whole league in to disrepute.

Furthermore, the proposed name is an absolute joke. Do the FAI think that they'll trick some barstoolers into stroling down to Richmond Park to see Liverpool v Spurs? We should be confident in what we are offering; even 'Carnegie League' would be better than the f*cking 'Premiership'!

pineapple stu

26/05/2006, 2:05 PM

Shels have done very badly in the Cup in recent years; Derry have an FAI final, a LC win and a couple of semis.

NY Hoop

26/05/2006, 2:08 PM

Dont think anyone agrees with clubs being demoted cos of field activities but its up to the clubs. IMO they will vote for this cos of the financial carrot.

And chippie its not fair that we were lumbered with incompetents as owners but what's done is done. Also examinership is better than liquidation ask the creditors.

Overall its a good proposal IMO and there's always going to be sticking points.

KOH

Jerry The Saint

26/05/2006, 2:09 PM

Shels have done very badly in the Cup in recent years; Derry have an FAI final, a LC win and a couple of semis.

If only they had known. Ollie could live to regret selling the Tolka lease to win leagues when he should have just concentrated on those mid-week league cup games. :)

Schumi

26/05/2006, 2:13 PM

The document on the FAI website says "At the end of the 2007 regular season, there will be one automatic promotion (Division 1 winners) and one club automatically relegated (last place in Premiership)." The word automatic inplies that only on-field perfromances (i.e. position in the league) will determine promotion. It's reasonable to assume that clubs relegated for off-field reasons will have strounger teams than teams already in the First Division and will be quickly promoted leaving us with the same teams in the 'Premiership' within a year or two. The play-off system will add to this.

If (for example) UCD and CHF are relegated for off-field reasons, logic would dictate that (as with most relegated teams) they would be challanging at the top of the division. If they were to get promoted, the 'Premiership' would be nearly identical to this year's. So what's the point of picking teams for next year's league?

Mr A

26/05/2006, 2:44 PM

They'd only get back up if they had then met licenscing criteria- but that doesn't include the beauty contest stuff- so it's a once off punishment rather than eternal damnation.

DmanDmythDledge

26/05/2006, 2:46 PM

So what's the point of picking teams for next year's league?
To make it look like they are doing something that will "improve" the league.

Poor Student

26/05/2006, 3:01 PM

It's hard to get into this argument after 11 pages but on the matter of UCD being a university club and therefore unable to be taken seriously, well that's only a matter of opinion and one reinforced by fellow eL fans constantly. Universidad de Chile and Universidad de Catolica are among the biggest and most successful sides in Chile and have been heavily connected to their universities over the years and I think Catolica continue to do so. Then there's Craiova in Romania, another successful university club. I don't think they're associated with the university anymore but they were during their most successful period. There is no reason why a university club with a university name cannot be taken and supported seriously. UCD suffer more from the general problem of the eL not being taken seriously and not being well supported than ourselves being a university club. We came late to the game and have no left over traditional support from the league's stronger times. We've had to build a fanbase up from zilch in the league's darkest period. We've been established for 20 years now and the fanbase is finally begining to grow and I think we're taking the right path by getting youngsters in at a young age and familiarising them with their local team as a real club like anyone else.

I believe the salary cap is a good idea. However this reminds me of the Nice Treaty, Ireland was portrayed as bad to accesion states and against their joining the EU because we rejected the terms of the treaty/couldn't be bothered to vote on it. I believe there is the odd good idea in principle, setting higher standards, salary cap etc. But the means of achieving this are not good, and just because I am against this it does not mean I am against progression.

Dodge

26/05/2006, 3:04 PM

*shudder*

I think I might be off to the LSL. Might win a cup there anyway....

wws

26/05/2006, 3:16 PM

some of the other proposals leaked today:

".....the term 'barstoolers' will be retired to be replaced with 'cash rich, time poor potentio-premiership crossover cutsomers' (CRTPPPCC's)

Pat Scully will only be allowed use the phrase "don't worry about (team x) they'll be right up there at the end of the season" ON EL WEEKLY if he has cross checked his team with John Delaney CEO and janitor of FAI-JD

a JD and Coke will now be a John Delaney and Coke at all affliated stadia

said stadia due in 2034

--------------------------------

Could you imagine Niall Quinns report card?!?!?

ah they were all so good in the end it was difficult to choose....he'll probably pick them out of a giant hamper live on the lat late show

Poor Student

26/05/2006, 3:23 PM

By the way, does anyone not think that any system that could save this season's Waterford team is a farce?

Mr_T

26/05/2006, 3:27 PM

Ash

26/05/2006, 3:28 PM

Iorfa

26/05/2006, 3:33 PM

By the way, does anyone not think that any system that could save this season's Waterford team is a farce?

Absolutely.

WeAreRovers

26/05/2006, 3:50 PM

By the way, does anyone not think that any system that could save this season's Waterford team is a farce?

I've been asking that question for months, well a variation of it and mostly to myself while drunk, but the point remains that Waterford are abysmal and are pretty much guaranteed a place in the P*********p next year.

They could go the rest of the season without picking up an extra point (and I don't fancy their chances against Douglas Hall either) and yet still deny Rovers, Limerick or Galway etc a place in the shiny new Smart Telecom How's Your Father Niall Quinn's Disco Pants Elite Premier League. Bizarre.

KOH

Buller

26/05/2006, 4:03 PM

I fully support nearly all of the changes the FAI want to make like even more money, wage caps, incentives for clubs to try and gain promotion from the first division as they can only lead to a more professional league....
However I don't know what they were on when they came up with "Premiership". that word is a complete mockery of our league and in my oppinion barstoolers will just laugh at it... :mad:

monutdfc

26/05/2006, 4:05 PM

LOL Post of the Month!

:D :D :D

second that!

Dodge

26/05/2006, 4:25 PM

They could go the rest of the season without picking up an extra point (and I don't fancy their chances against Douglas Hall either) and yet still deny Rovers, Limerick or Galway etc a place in the shiny new Smart Telecom How's Your Father Niall Quinn's Disco Pants Elite Premier League. Bizarre.
As long as only clubs that are/have been sponsored by Smart Telecom are allowed in, I'm in favour of this.

BohDiddley

26/05/2006, 4:55 PM

Sorry if this has been asked and answered before, too many pages
to trawl through, but why is Niall Quinn one of the people deciding
the criteria to shape the League of Ireland???

Surely if he was that bothered he'd invest more into football here
than buying Sunderland
It was asked, by yours truly, but I don't think there's been any answer. I really wonder about how much thought goes into these decisions.