Foot.ie Q&A - Brian MacNeice - Questions

[Please keep this thread to questions only, if you'd like to discuss the Q&A or any questions asked please do so here. --adam]

OK folks .... Its that time again, we have lined up another Q&A session....... We, the patrons of foot.ie are invited to compose questions on and for the Genesis Report and Brian MacNeice.

Brian, who works for Genesis Strategic Management Consultants has volunteered to shine some light where possible on the recent Genesis Report regarding the eircom League, and possibly the previous reports they carried out for the FAI. Here is some of the media reports on the original Genesis document that was released.

You will have a week to compose you questions below and we'll pass them onto Brian, then he'll send back his answers and we'll post them up here, same as normal.

All normal message board rules apply, no abuse will be tolerated, this thread will be policed and not foul play will be permitted.

Supporters and paying punters for eircom League games seem to be the biggest group of stakeholders in the Irish game but they were group that were consulted the least in the last reports, why was that?

Good job Face! Just hope we don't have another Bob Breen on our hands! ;)

(1) Why were attendance figures in the report lifted straight from www.European-Football-Statistics.co.uk without consultation with the person who collated the figures to guage accuracy? I personally gathered those averages from fan guesstimates on foot.ie. I certainly wouldn't consider using them for such a major report; why then did you feel comfortable using the figures? Also, why was the source (indeed, no sources at all) not credited?

(2) The Genesis Report says eL attendances fall behind the Celtic League (424k) and the Heineken Cup (815k) (page 6). These figures are grossly inaccurate - the actual figures are 199k and 178k (if you count Ulster's games; source - www.ercrugby.com and ww.CelticLeague.com). Why was this very simple statistic, which is used to condemn the league, so wrong?

(3) You say you did not have access to detailed club accounts for your report (page 7). Why not? This would appear a major gap in the Report's source data. Are club accounts not being submitted to the FAI in accordance with UEFA Licencing? Were any other UEFA Licencing irregularities noted? (e.g. reporting of attendances) Do you believe the FAI is implementing UEFA Licencing properly, in light of subsequent financial troubles at Rovers, Waterford and Shels?

(4) Why was there no supporter consultation before the NLSA submitted - without being approached by Genesis - a document shortly before the deadling date? Were there plans in place to consult any eL Supporters' Clubs? Why was it not felt necessary to consult with them?

(5) The Report states Ireland's UEFA ranking is 40th. Why was the huge improvement in the past two seasons not acknowledged? Last season, the league was 27th, and many feel the teams underachieved. 27th over a five-year span would see the eL champions gain a bye to the Second Qualifying Round of the Champions' League. This is also in line with your Vision for the League (page 13). This is surely now self-fulfilling?

(6) There is absolutely no reasoning behiind the decision to support -

(i) a ten-team Premier

(ii) ground-sharing

(iii) that the FAI are best placed to promote the eircom League.
Why not?

(7) Do you honestly believe names such as -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genesis Report page 18

• eircom Professional Super league
• eircom Elite Irish League
• eircom Ireland Super League
• eircom Irish Premiership
• eircom FAI Premiership.

---

would be taken seriously by the Irish public?

(8) The Report recommends that a second consultation period be held (page 21). This was never held. Why not?

(9) What are your opinions on a league with clubs being cherry-picked based on geography, history, attendances, facilities, league position, etc.? In you opinion, is this consistent with the findings of the Genesis Report?

(10) From reading this forum and discussing the Report with various supporters, it would appear that a majority dismiss the Genesis Report as amateurish, poorly-researched and irrelevant based on the above weaknesses. How do you counter these claims?



A lot of questions, I know. I'd imagine there'll be less funny questions (like with Digger) and consequently more room for serious questions. I'd imagine the above covers a rather large quantum of what was being queried here at the time too, so hopefully you'll find the room to fit all of them in!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

(1) Why were attendance figures in the report lifted straight from www.European-Football-Statistics.co.uk without consultation with the person who collated the figures to guage accuracy? I personally gathered those averages from fan guesstimates on foot.ie. I certainly wouldn't consider using them for such a major report; why then did you feel comfortable using the figures? Also, why was the source (indeed, no sources at all) not credited?

---

In addition to this, all clubs are required by UEFA licencing (correct me if I'm wrong about that) to submit accurate attendance figures to the FAI on each match. Why did Genesis not get in touch with the FAI to access this information rather than use the above mentioned rough guesstimates?

- Why were anecdotal attendance figures used from the internet but stated as fact.

- The report seems to do reasonable job at stating what the current situation is but is very short on proposed changes. Why did Genesis not recommend a set of required changes. Surely some proposals were more worthy than others?

- The report mentions how other sports are well marketed by their sponsors (GUinness, Heiniken etc...) but never mentions how eircom fail to associate their products with the league

- 1 sponsor was contacted and although from the NLSA its curious why no wider communication with fans

- Why did so few officials from the clubs participate?

- You mention how extra funding is required but do not mention where this will come from or how much is required. How can the there be a plan without a budget?

- Dublin ground sharing is mentioned an inevitable without explainiung why this is the case...

- Did you investigate possibilities for municipal stadium sharing between other sports?

- What yearly budget do Elite level clubs need to progress to the next level?

It is advocated that there should be two stadia in Dublin shared between the four 'big Dublin clubs'. The FAI have seemingly deemed that Pat's should move in with Rovers and that Shels should move in with Bohs. As an author of the Genesis report, what would your view be that the FAI are now trying to push Bohs into a corner by taking Shels in as co-owners of Dalymount Park for what amounts to a fraction of the value of the land? Have the FAI misinterpreted the Genesis Report?

The first most fans heard about this Genesis report was when it was issued.

How hard would it have been to set up an internet questionnaire or have a questions in all clubs programmes to gauge opinion? After all, as has been mentioned, we are the customers.

There should be a camera at EVERY premier game. Why was this not mentioned?

KOH

:ball: 1) The Genesis Report is frequently cited by those arguing in favour of groundsharing, and is it repeatedly and uncritically referred to by media who seek to frame groundsharing as a positive and even inevitable development. Did the report authors conduct any primary (original) research in the target market or audience?

:ball: 2) On what basis should Dublin clubs be required to groundshare, when provincial clubs with much smaller followings and catchment areas are to be encouraged to develop their own stadia?

:ball: 3) Football is the biggest participation sport in the country, according to the FAI. Yet, for political, cultural and historical reasons, it is one of the worst resourced. Should the Government consider current national participation rates in major sports when it determines relative allocations of funding in grants, subsidies and tax breaks?

4) Irish football is a sport largely based on local and regional loyalties. Where are the Genesis authors from, and what Irish teams do they support?

PS: I don't think these questions are answered in the report, but if they are, or have been elsewhere, I'd appreciate if someone would let me know!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BohDiddley

4) Where are the Genesis authors from, and what Irish teams do they support?

---

Scotland, I think.

Another question:

The Genesis Report reccomends groundsharing for Dublin clubs. Given that the clubs in question already struggle to draw support from their independent catchment areas, do you not think it would be detrimental to these clubs' chances of drawing a sizeable or even similar support while overlapping the same catchment area?

Do you agree with the new league proposal to select teams for the 2007 premier division based on location, marketability and other factors as opposed to pure promotion and relegation? Was this proposal a part of your report?

Anymore questions on this one lads ??

The Genesis Report in probably the most important document to this league in the last few years as it will directly effect the future of our league, if you have ever stared into open space and pondered or mused over what ever could become of our league then this is the thread for you !!

Ask the question !!

Who are Limerick City? Two of their directors were apparently consulted. ;)

Were the clubs co-operative in the report?

Why was an All Ireland League not fully investigated?

How can the report be justified as representative if the fans were not consulted? The Star were able to hold "Fans Forums" round the country, why was Genesis not?

What the reason behind giving Galway fans a presentation on the report, but rejecting an NLSA request for a open forum?

Given the choice, which do you think would be better for the league; For the FAI and Government to help fund one 10,000 seater stadium or two 5,000 seater stadia?

Why should a well run club, with a moderately successful team which has attained Premier Division status on merit, no serious financial issues be excluded from the Premier Division run by the FAI merely because it is located in Dublin and not in some provincial centre with no great tradition of supporting soccer and a poor quality team?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A face

Anymore questions on this one lads ??

The Genesis Report in probably the most important document to this league in the last few years as it will directly effect the future of our league, if you have ever stared into open space and pondered or mused over what ever could become of our league then this is the thread for you !!

Ask the question !!

---

A Face, can I suggest an explicit link to the Report? (WARNING: 6Mb DOWNLOAD).
I spent a good while Googling it before I found that you did, in fact, link it from your first post!

Quoted below (in italics) is the rationale presented by you underpinning your very specific call for ground-sharing.

This striking call is repeatedly cited by media and has become the basis for FAI and Irish Government strategy that appears set to determine the fate of a number of historic clubs and guide the the direction of millions of euros in public investment.

It runs to 150 words.

There is a need for considerable investment in facilities in all league clubs. However, investment should be prioritized on the clubs with clear strategic plans and planned outcomes. Investment in facilities should be prioritised in top National league clubs and/or clubs serving large population centres. The facilities investment should include provision to ensure high standards of:
• Floodlights
• Playing surface
• Training
• TV and media provision
• Family friendly facilities
• Seating
• Toilet and other facilities
• Catering/hospitality
Ultimately, the planned programme of investment in facilities should deliver a range of high quality, family friendly stadia and clubs across the main population centres and strongholds of football throughout the country. The facilities should be equipped to support the clubs in providing revenues outside match days.
It is inevitable that Dublin clubs will be encouraged to consider ground-sharing if they are to attract significant public funds for investment.



1) :ball: Do you consider that this passage represents an adequate analysis on which to base strategic decisions?

2) :ball: On what basis do you say it 'inevitable' that Dublin football clubs uniquely should ground-share as a prerequisite to receiving significant public funds, when this prerequisite has never applied to provincial clubs, nor to other codes, receiving state support?

3) :ball: When consultants are engaged in a high-profile study concerning public policy, what safeguards exist to counter the in-built temptation to favour spectacular recommendations that can be packaged as 'radical', 'innovative' or 'dynamic', rather than gradualist approaches that seek to enhance existing strengths in traditional clubs?

Are there any plans to publish the first two genesis reports? This would allow us 'stakeholders' to judge the FAI's progress for ourselves.

On the subject of the first two Genesis Reports - my understanding is that they called for an external person with business experience to come in as CEO of the FAI. This didn't happen. Do you think the FAI implemented the first two reports? Do you think, given the serious weaknesses highlighted in the eircom League Report, that people are entitled to assume the first two reports were just as poor?

I haven't read the report, so someone please correct me if I'm off here.

The impression I'm under is that the report wants no more than four clubs from Dublin. Given Dublin has around one third of the population of the country, how is this justified?