Bright New Dawn of FAI Leadership

[daniel]

Lads www.derrycityfc.net is not an official website as such! things that are posted on this website are posted by fans, they are not in anyway connected to the club other than benig fans. The club do not popst on this site, nor do they pay for the up keep of this site, therefore it is not the clubs!

Also there is a disclaimer on this site, so for anyone from the FAI who may be reading this, stick this in your pipe and smoke it ya shower of b*sterds!

Disclaimer
Whilst this website has become the de-facto official website of Derry City Football Club, it is essentially an independent production and the views expressed on this website do not necessarily reflect those of the Club or its Board of Directors.

However, Derry City FC provides us with unparalleled access to players, staff and news and we enjoy an amicable and mutually beneficial relationship with the Club.

All proceeds from advertising/sponsorship on CityWeb, go towards the maintenance, upkeep and production of the site and associated projects (e.g. iCandy) – CityWeb is not a commercial venture and does not make a profit.

The use of editorial matter from newspapers, websites or other media sources is done so without the permission of the content owners but we operate under a strict commitment to fully credit the source of the content as well as provide hyperlinks back to the associated website, if it exists.

The views of contributing authors to CityWeb may not correspond with those of the site owners and the site owners take no responsibility for any defamation or libel contained therein.

If you have any questions or would like to contact the website team, please contact us via the Feedback page.

[B]

This taken from Derrycityfc.net

http://www.derrycityfc.net/site/about.php

[Dodge]

Isn't there a bit in licensing rquiring clubs to have a club website? Could Derry be Shelegated?

[John83]

Man, this is pathetic. A guy on the Derry forums put it very nicely, "At the end of the day, all the EL-related websites collectively probably do more to help promote the league than the FAI have ever done."

There was an article in one of the tabloids on this. Someone's posted it online here (http://www.irishfootienetwork.com/gallery/d/3914-1/derrycity.jpg). This whole thing has brought far more negative attention on the FAI than the article ever could have on its own. Ironically, the FAI's own belligerent incompetence is serving to highlight their belligerent incompetence. Maybe they deserve a fine.

[daniel]

Isn't there a bit in licensing rquiring clubs to have a club website? Could Derry be Shelegated?


:rolleyes: nice try

[OneRedArmy]

:rolleyes: nice tryHis point is valid.

Clubs are required to have a website.

[Krstic]

His point is valid.

Clubs are required to have a website.

Ahem..... 5000 Euros it is then;)

[daniel]

Should have been more specific, i was on about Derry being Shelegated lol.Havent actually read the licence criteria, but having a website is a bit of a weird one wouoldnt ye tink?

[Dodge]

Not really. All clubs should have programme, website, tv gantry, press facilities etc etc. A good thing enforcing this IMO

Of course you shouldn't be shelegated, you shouldn't even be fined but expect the worse with these clowns

[charliesboots]

Should have been more specific, i was on about Derry being Shelegated lol.Havent actually read the licence criteria, but having a website is a bit of a weird one wouoldnt ye tink?

Not really, clubs must also have facilities for the press etc. If in their licensing application submission Derry City listed their website as being www.derrycityfc.net then I'm sure the FAI are entitled to consider it as their official site.

If Derry claim its not their official site well then its a case of having your cake........

Either way its fvcking ridiculous that the FAI are handing out fines for articles that are 'fair comment'.

[John83]

Should have been more specific, i was on about Derry being Shelegated lol.Havent actually read the licence criteria, but having a website is a bit of a weird one wouoldnt ye tink?
It's expected these days. I remember one of the papers remarked that Limerick's website hadn't been updated in over a year or something while the club was going under.

[lofty9]

Official Site (http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=149129683):D

[pete]

First of all that disclaimer is hard enough to find & its not at all obvious the site is unofficial.

If the site is unofficial it seems the FAI can just change the reason for the 5k fine ;)

Recently the CCFC official forum was moved to separate domain
& now clearly marked as unofficial. This was more to do with requests by fans than any FAI pressure...

[dancinpants]

First of all that disclaimer is hard enough to find & its not at all obvious the site is unofficial.

If the site is unofficial it seems the FAI can just change the reason for the 5k fine ;)

Recently the CCFC official forum was moved to separate domain
& now clearly marked as unofficial. This was more to do with requests by fans than any FAI pressure...

Ah but Pete it doesn't matter a sh*te what size the font is FFS.
Atleast it states its an unofficial site. NOWHERE does it say its official.

[BohDiddley]

It does say it is 'Derry City Football Club Online' (is there another 'more official' site?).
While this is another instance of Derry wanting to have it both ways ;) , it in no way excuses the FAI action.

[micls]

Ah but Pete it doesn't matter a sh*te what size the font is FFS.
Atleast it states its an unofficial site. NOWHERE does it say its official.

Nowhere on the site maybe but the question is did Derry submit it as their official site for licensing?

Still doesnt make this right though

[dcfcsteve]

Steve ive tried pm'ing you.i cant as you've exceeded your limits

Apologies Daniel - have cleared some space now.

[dcfc_1928]

derrycityfc.net IS the registered official website - so there's probably very little argument there.

Is that what makes it official? Probably. I didn't register it with the league. The club however doesn't fund it in any way, and the domain name is "owned" by me. But to be fair thats probably how most "official" EL sites work.

However, the main point in this argument was the fact that it was removed IMMEDIATELY from the derrycityfc.net website and still - 2 weeks later - they saw fit to fine the club and have an ongoing €1000 daily fine because the "official" site retained a link to the story hosted on another website.

The site also contains links to derrycitychat.com, irish Football Online, Belfast Telegraph, Derry Journal, Irish Independent - should Derry City FC be responsible for the content of these websites also?

[charliesboots]

The site also contains links to derrycitychat.com, irish Football Online, Belfast Telegraph, Derry Journal, Irish Independent - should Derry City FC be responsible for the content of these websites also?

Absolutely and I'm gonna trawl through them all until a find an article critical of the FAI and inform them immediately.

Derry City must not succeed with this campaign to destroy Mr. Delaney!! :D

[Tis-smeee]

hould Derry City FC be responsible for the content of these websites also?

In a word Yes , you have poor john in his office all upset and fearing for the safety of his staff for having the audacity to point out the obvious facts, you scoundrel

Its a ffaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrcccccccccccccccccccccccccceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeee

[dcfcsteve]

derrycityfc.net IS the registered official website - so there's probably very little argument there.

Is that what makes it official? Probably. I didn't register it with the league. The club however doesn't fund it in any way, and the domain name is "owned" by me. But to be fair thats probably how most "official" EL sites work.

However, the main point in this argument was the fact that it was removed IMMEDIATELY from the derrycityfc.net website and still - 2 weeks later - they saw fit to fine the club and have an ongoing €1000 daily fine because the "official" site retained a link to the story hosted on another website.

The site also contains links to derrycitychat.com, irish Football Online, Belfast Telegraph, Derry Journal, Irish Independent - should Derry City FC be responsible for the content of these websites also?


Regardless of whether the site is official or not - there is a much bigger issue at stake here that i believe would see Derry City succeed if they took the FAI to court over this.

And that is a simple Freedom of Expression principle, as guaranteed under Bunreacht na hÉireann. Article 40, Section 6, Subsection 1.1 states the following :


"The State guarantees liberty for the exercise of the following rights, subject to public order and morality :
i) The right of the citizens to express freely their convictions and opinions"

I cannot see how the FAI's actions can be seen as anything other than a breach of that constitutional guarantee, and I strongly suspect that DCFC would win a legal challenge on this matter if they chose to do so. And I hope for the sake of Irish football that they or some other club/person does chose to challenge this petty suppression in the Courts. The whole thing would blow up so badly in Delaney's quiffed face.

[dcfcsteve]

Derry City must not succeed with this campaign to destroy Mr. Delaney!! :D

By God - you're right, CB !

No - that job is best left to Delaney himself........! :eek:

[BohDiddley]

Regardless of whether the site is official or not - there is a much bigger issue at stake here that i believe would see Derry City succeed if they took the FAI to court over this.

And that is a simple Freedom of Expression principle, as guaranteed under Bunreacht na hÉireann. Article 40, Section 6, Subsection 1.1 states the following :



I cannot see how the FAI's actions can be seen as anything other than a breach of that constitutional guarantee, and I strongly suspect that DCFC would win a legal challenge on this matter if they chose to do so. And I hope for the sake of Irish football that they or some other club/person does chose to challenge this petty suppression in the Courts. The whole thing would blow up so badly in Delaney's quiffed face.
Agree with the principle. But, in their licence agreement, would clubs not give up that right? Other than letting football fans have their say, which inherently is a threat to public order, on what basis is the fine levied anyway?

[charliesboots]

Regardless of whether the site is official or not - there is a much bigger issue at stake here that i believe would see Derry City succeed if they took the FAI to court over this.

And that is a simple Freedom of Expression principle, as guaranteed under Bunreacht na hÉireann. Article 40, Section 6, Subsection 1.1 states the following :



I cannot see how the FAI's actions can be seen as anything other than a breach of that constitutional guarantee, and I strongly suspect that DCFC would win a legal challenge on this matter if they chose to do so. And I hope for the sake of Irish football that they or some other club/person does chose to challenge this petty suppression in the Courts. The whole thing would blow up so badly in Delaney's quiffed face.


But Mr Delaney Sir may seek to rely on:



The State shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may from unjust attack and, in the case of injustice done, vindicate the life, person, good name, and property rights of every citizen.

There's also the idea that by saying up to the provisions of the new league which included a clause not to criticise the FAI that Derry City have waived their constitutional right to criticise the FAI.

[dcfcsteve]

Agree with the principle. But, in their licence agreement, would clubs not give up that right?

Not at all. The Irish constitution has supremacy over the FAI's own internal rules. The FAI cannot ask you to sign awsay your constitutional rights.

Where the FAI's rules run contrary to the Constitution, they are liable to be declared illegal if challeneged.

Maribor Kev's right to freedom of expression is being supressed by the FAI, who are levying punitive financial penalties upon an organisation that Kev is separate from (DCFC) in an attempt to have them deny him an existing opportunity to express those opinions.

What would make it even more interesting would be the fact that the 'offending' website actually operates in a different political/legal jurisdiction than the FAI. I suspect that could leave City free to do and say whatever the hell they liked with impunity so long as it didn't break any UK or European laws (beyond the obvious fall-out of incurring the FAI's wrath). I'm no lawyer though.

[charliesboots]

Not at all. The Irish constitution has supremacy over the FAI's own internal rules. The FAI cannot ask you to sign awsay your constitutional rights.

Where the FAI's rules run contrary to the Constitution, they are liable to be declared illegal if challeneged.

Maribor Kev's right to freedom of expression is being supressed by the FAI, who are levying punitive financial penalties upon an organisation that Kev is separate from (DCFC) in an attempt to have them deny him an existing opportunity to express those opinions.

What would make it even more interesting would be the fact that the 'offending' website actually operates in a different political/legal jurisdiction than the FAI. I suspect that could leave City free to do and say whatever the hell they liked with impunity so long as it didn't break any UK or European laws (beyond the obvious fall-out of incurring the FAI's wrath). I'm no lawyer though.

That's not true Steve. If it whereso then confidentiality agreements wouldn't be binding etc etc.

People waive their constitutional rights every day of the week. Example - Anybody tried in the District Court for an offence for which they can also be tried on indictment can waive their right to trial by jury and have the matter tried summarily in the District Court.

It's not as simple as you think.

[dcfcsteve]

But Mr Delaney Sir may seek to rely on:


Originally Posted by Article 40.3.2˚
The State shall, in particular, by its laws protect as best it may from unjust attack and, in the case of injustice done, vindicate the life, person, good name, and property rights of every citizen.



Do you honestly think any Court in the land would associate Kev's article with the above ? Facts are facts, and cannot therefore cause 'injustice, damage' etc - even if the target of your comments does not like facing up to those facts.


There's also the idea that by saying up to the provisions of the new league which included a clause not to criticise the FAI that Derry City have waived their constitutional right to criticise the FAI.

No, no, no !!! The Constitution has primacy here. The Fai Rules cannot be enforced where they are unconstitutional - regardless of whether you signed up to them or not. As an extreme example - if you sign an employment contract to be a bank robber or murderer, that contract is unenforceable under the Constitution/law, regardless of the fact that you signed it. Otherwise - what would be the point in having a Constituoino if it was powerless in the face of every bit of signed paper ?!?

[wws]

yes but people waive their constitutional rights everyday - for instance - allowing themselves to be tried summarily in the District Court on assault charges for example - even though they are constitutionally entitled to trial by jury.


duuuuh I thought EVERYONE knew this stuff -its basic

surprised at CB not picking up on it earlier

[charliesboots]

No, no, no !!! The Constitution has primacy here. The Fai Rules cannot be enforced where they are unconstitutional - regardless of whether you signed up to them or not. As an extreme example - if you sign an employment contract to be a bank robber or murderer, that contract is unenforceable under the Constitution/law, regardless of the fact that you signed it. Otherwise - what would be the point in having a Constituoino if it was powerless in the face of every bit of signed paper ?!?

That's not the case Steve. Contracts such as the ones you mentioned are unenforceable as they are illegal. A contract that guarantees your silence on certain matters is not illegal and is very common.

People also have an unenumerated constitutional right to bodily integrity. You can however permit a doctor to perform an operation on you. Bad example but you get the gist.

[dcfcsteve]

That's not true Steve. If it whereso then confidentiality agreements wouldn't be binding etc etc.

How are confidentiality agreements unconstitutional ?? There is a huge difference between signing an agreement to not dislose commercially sensitive information/facts, for example, and signing one that removes your ability to express your own personal opinion.

If I knew that you had committed an illegal/unconstitutional act, and then you made me sign a Confidentiality agreement to prevent me disclosing that information, the law would support me if I did disclose it. If it became clear that I knew of your activities when they were happening and did nothing about them, it would probably also in fact seek to punish me for not disclosing the information (thought this is where it gets complicated).


People waive their constitutional rights every day of the week. Example - Anybody tried in the District Court for an offence for which they can also be tried on indictment can waive their right to trial by jury and have the matter tried summarily in the District Court.

It's not as simple as you think.

This is not an appropriate example though - as it's a scenario that is within the law/legal system, which itself is based upon the constitution. Like I said - I'm no lawyer though - so perhaps one of the leagl eagles on here can clarify the whole situation either way.

Regardless of all the above - the bottom line is this : show me the bit of paper where Maribor Kev signed up to say he would not criticise the FAI ?

[wws]

That's not the case Steve. Contracts such as the ones you mentioned are unenforceable as they are illegal. A contract that guarantees your silence on certain matters is not illegal and is very common.

People also have an unenumerated constitutional right to bodily integrity. You can however permit a doctor to perform an operation on you. Bad example but you get the gist.

duuuuuhhh


see above

[dcfcsteve]

A contract that guarantees your silence on certain matters is not illegal and is very common.



Silence to disclosing sensitive information/facts that would, for example, place the state in danger (Official Secrets Act) or give an unfair economic advantage to rivals (non-disclosure contracts) = yes.

Silence to disclosing your own personal opinions, so long as they don't breach other laws = no.

If you assert your right to express those opinions, the Constitution will support you - even if you have signed a bit of paper to say you will suppress your opinions. When suppression of your opinions is no longer a voluntary act, and is instead enforced, that's when it becomes unconstitutional.

If, however, you had agreed to suppress your opinions in return for money, then that would be a different matter again, as the financail exchange in return for exercise of certain duties would change things (though that might still fall foul of the Constitution).

Enough conjecture though - is there a lawyer in the house who can clear all this up.......? :D

[charliesboots]

How are confidentiality agreements unconstitutional ?? There is a huge difference between signing an agreement to not dislose commercially sensitive information/facts, for example, and signing one that removes your ability to express your own personal opinion.

If I knew that you had committed an illegal/unconstitutional act, and then you made me sign a Confidentiality agreement to prevent me disclosing that information, the law would support me if I did disclose it. If it became clear that I knew of your activities when they were happening and did nothing about them, it would probably also in fact seek to punish me for not disclosing the information (thought this is where it gets complicated).



This is not an appropriate example though - as it's a scenario that is within the law/legal system, which itself is based upon the constitution. Like I said - I'm no lawyer though - so perhaps one of the leagl eagles on here can clarify the whole situation either way.

Regardless of all the above - the bottom line is this : show me the bit of paper where Maribor Kev signed up to say he would not criticise the FAI ?

Look I'm with you on this. I think the clause is ridiculous. However, people here seem to think that DCFC will win a legal battle hands down. I'm just saying that that is not necessarily the case.

Maribor Kev may not have signed up for anything but if DCFC consider the site to be their official site then they are liable for the content of the site.

[charliesboots]

When suppression of your opinions is no longer a voluntary act, and is instead enforced, that's when it becomes unconstitutional.

But it is voluntary if you have volunteered not to do it.


Enough conjecture though - is there a lawyer in the house who can clear all this up.......?
Not yet but nearly

[passerrby]

I dont understand did the fai tell them to remove or move it from an official site first if it was not an official site then they could not have moved it. just a question.

[dancinpants]

I dont understand did the fai tell them to remove or move it from an official site first if it was not an official site then they could not have moved it. just a question.

Was on the "official" site derrycityfc.net. Insisted on the articles removal, which it was immediately. It was moved to an unofficial site, derrycityweb.net

[dcfc_1928]

When they were on the original site, each blog article also displayed the following "disclaimer". Probably not worth the paper its written on though......?

"Articles are submitted by contributors to CityWeb. The views contained therein may not correspond with those of the site owners or of Derry City Football Club."

[pete]

Derry City could challenge the gagging agreement but then again ye did sign up for it so might be difficult. However the league hasn't even started so this is going to come up every few weeks after the season starts.

On a separate topic its going to be a culture shock for eL clubs to keep their mouths shut. Thankfully Oily is gone because he would never be able to accept the regime going forward...

To ensure smooth running of the league the FAI will need to ensure proper structures in place for clubs to appeal decisions inside the game without having to go to the Courts.

[daniel]

First of all that disclaimer is hard enough to find & its not at all obvious the site is unofficial.

If the site is unofficial it seems the FAI can just change the reason for the 5k fine ;)

Recently the CCFC official forum was moved to separate domain
& now clearly marked as unofficial. This was more to do with requests by fans than any FAI pressure...

Guess what Pete, a disclaimer on most contracts you will sign will be in veryyyyyyyyy small writing! there is nothing to say that a disclaimer must be easy to find, and if people had a brain it wouldn't be as hard to find as you may think!The fact that there is a disclaimer on this site should stand Derry in good stead

[SwanVsDalton]

*Draws curtains*
*Closes blinds*
*Checks for bugs*

I don't much care for the FAI.

*hides*

[passerrby]

cant remember the exact rule but clubs can be held responsible for comments from officers of there clubs and comments in mags, programmes, websites controlled by that club, and again clubs voted for this, I remember it was argued at the time that clubs maybe unaware of comments from managers or fans on websites until it is to late, but it was generally agreed that as long as clubs moved swiftly to remove offending articles no punishment would follow so am surprised at this outcome.

[SwanVsDalton]

Even if this is the case, the size of the fine is extraordinary. Perhaps the FAI are seeking to stamp some authority, perhaps their coffers are running a little low due to the cost of 'promoting' the league but it's baffling that they seemed to believe that the punishment would generate some kind of positive effect. Madness.

[Raheny Red]

Why not move it to -> londonderrycity.co.uk :confused:

:D

[Jerry The Saint]

*Draws curtains*
*Closes blinds*
*Checks for bugs*

I don't much care for the FAI.

*hides*

€1000 please.

Lads, I've been authorised by John Delaney himself to collect all fines on behalf of the FAI. Ask about our special Season Ticket offer - for the low, low price of just €15,000 you will be able to spend the entire season badmouthing any FAI Board Member, FAI employee or family member thereof with impunity.

[soccerc]

Here is a view of an Irishman living in Sweden in response to the fine(s)

http://www.derrycityweb.net/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=34

[chippie0001]

I wonder what Bohs will be fined on Friday night:

Will it be €5k per Delaney out banner in the ground
Will it be €5k all in for as many banner as you like
Or will it be €5k for each banner shown on TV?

Could be quiet a bill all in all. :D

[dcfc_1928]

http://www.derrycityweb.net/index.php?blog=5&title=derry_s_blogger_fine_d_by_me_but_not_the&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1


Here is a view of an Irishman living in Sweden in response to the fine(s)

http://www.derrycityweb.net/htsrv/trackback.php?tb_id=34

[exile]

I wonder what Bohs will be fined on Friday night:

Will it be €5k per Delaney out banner in the ground
Will it be €5k all in for as many banner as you like
Or will it be €5k for each banner shown on TV?

Could be quiet a bill all in all. :D

ah sure they can afford it now :D

[Raheny Red]

Did nobody cop onto this joke of a mistake yet :confused: :eek:

http://forum.shelbournefc.ie/chat/viewtopic.php?p=110639#110639

[Dodge]

Did nobody cop onto this joke of a mistake yet :confused: :eek:

http://forum.shelbournefc.ie/chat/viewtopic.php?p=110639#110639

Read it on the Rovers forum as soon as the draw released. Can't believe you only noticed now.


Doesn't affect me so didn't bother mentioning it myself

[Krstic]

Sweet Jeez, we've got Pat Fenlon, Dave Rogers, Greg O'Halloran and Alan Moore.
And now we're taking the FAI to court, what next Ollie Byrne as Chairman:confused: :eek: