Desmond would be a huge loss, brilliant footballer.
Printable View
Desmond would be a huge loss, brilliant footballer.
Yeah, Sligo were smart tying him down on a long term deal, but if the rumour is true about a €150k release clause in it, they were absolutely mental.Quote:
Originally Posted by placid casual
In fairness, there's been a lot of flops from the LoI lately; it'll deflate prices.
Hopefully the success of Bazunu, Ferguson and Scales (off the top of my head) will start to help things here. And even Ferguson and Scales have a way to go yet to establish themselves as solid transfers.
But when regular top scorers are sinking without trace in the lower leagues of England, and then returning home on free transfers, then it's hard to blame clubs for being conservative in what they offer. And the LoI is rarely in a position to haggle too hard I guess.
(All that is release clauses aside of course)
Robbie Benson signing back with Dundalk today apparently….
Was there any indication of how much Bohs got for Ferguson? I see he was on the bench for Brighton last night.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Don’t know the ins and outs of it but I would imagine the only way the new long term deal was signed was if that clause was in it. Way below what he should be going for but I’m sure his agent (think it’s Gary Rogers) called the shots on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by nigel-harps1954
Add-ons in any Kenny deal will be much more important to Sligo than the relatively low release clause number. Look at how the Bazunu add-ons have worked for Rovers, extras now much important than initial fee for LOI clubs even if the reported €150k feels very low.
Rovers have signed a horse aswell ….
https://mobile.twitter.com/ShamrockR...19876355059718
If it's a case of Desmond going too and with Clancy being manager I'd be surprised if ye don't end up with both Redmond and Dan O'Reilly as I can't think of many centre backs within the league that are still available.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack B
Former Dundalk player influencing rivals player contracts...Conspiracy!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Nah Nah Nah Nah
Already turned into a Bohs - Rovers bitchfest 🤔
Rovers fans don’t seem to be impressed either…Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
James Brown to Pats and Matty Smith to Derry City according to Paul Nealon on Twitter….
Smith would hurt more than any of the Dundalk-bound players </3 Can't blame him if he's getting offered a 3 year deal though.
Some Rovers fans on social media.Quote:
Originally Posted by joey B
Not a fan of gambling sponsorships myself and suspect they'll be a thing of the past soon enough but objectively having Barry Geraghty and Henry de Bromhead promoting the club is a big deal. Anything that reaches beyond the LOI ghetto is a positive from a marketing perspective and if Rovers want regular 7k+ crowds it's a must.
Aodh Dervin and Aaron O'Driscoll signing for Shels apparently. Provided Shels pay the compensation for Dervin. Good luck to both, Aodh in particular. Aaron was very good last season too so no surprise he's gotten himself a good move.
Heard O'Driscoll was likely heading for Shels but as he's still under contract with Mansfield still things to be resolved. Dervin is out of contract with Longford but as he is under 23 there will be a development fee but wouldn't expect it to be massive
I forget how the compensation is calculated but I would expect an offer similar to what Shels paid for Kane would see the deal done easily enough.
I think it's possible to be big/successful with out potentially exploiting your vulnerable fans/members. Its a big no from me and I'd consider boycotting my club over it. One of the grimmest announcements I've seen in football.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeAreRovers
As a Rovers fan I completely agree - bad enough that we took the original sponsorship , but we had a choice as to accept/reject this…. Really poor decision as let’s face it only a matter of time before gambling sponsorship for sports is banned ; so shame we didn’t do the right thing …. Then again DD owns Betdaq and also controls the Rovers board , so no real surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by boynemunich
As someone who wouldnt dream of taking a thread off topic, this is more Loi promotional stuff than signings unless the gag on signing a horse is relevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by boynemunich
Hot potato topic, maybe sponsorship is different but not everyone who gambles is a gambling addict, like those who have a beer in a clubhouse are not all alcoholics - maybe there should be a no alcohol policy too but I dont think it would be too popular. Yes there is an ethical obligation to support peoples health and wellbeing but Im not convinced that driving industries like gambling/alcohol in to the shadows fixes a social problem - it may prevent younger people taking up an interest in future generations but online access in the home is potentially more an issue. Improved awareness of the potential issues and a whole lot more funding (government and donations) to support systems I think would be better than ignoring these industries and being outraged by their marketing. I am say this not either having an issue with gambling addiction or knowing someone directly who has. There's very often a whole lot more going on with than an inability to resist the lure before falling in to a concerning cycle.
There is one isn't there? Alcohol sponsorship has been banned for years. (Since Budweiser stopped being UCD's sponsors, which I think was around 2007)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
Yes, but UCD are well ahead of the curve with the restriction on alcoholic drink companies in sports sponsorship only happening legally last month. Sponsorship and provision of products at sporting events, gambling or drink, are not poles apart imo. So better strategies are needed to mitigate against associated social issues than concealing their existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
As Nesta hints, the ban on alcohol sponsorship on UCD's campus was an internal one. I think the SU drove it, but university management co-operated or perhaps even encouraged it.
cringe factor is at record levels on the advert itself, amateur hour attempt at comedy but i have no problem with a bookie sponsoring the club tbh.Quote:
Originally Posted by joey B
no drink sponsors , no cigerettes , next no bookies , then what?
Will the snowflakes be offended by McDonalds fast food sponsoring teams??
Where does it end with prohibiting sponsors though? Should the likes of etoro be banned too as stock and crypto investing is essentially gambling? Or food producers so as not to antagonise people with eating disorders? Or credit card companies for facilitating people to get into debt? There are so many problems that people can have, as a society I think we would be better off focusing on providing services to help these people rather than just outlaw the promotion of these products and pretend that they don't exist. Football itself is a horrible industry really. Boys getting abused in academies, young uneducated men thrown on the scrapheap with no supports, kit manufacturers and stadium developers using slave labour.
It's a good thing this didn't happen while Rovers were traipsing from stadium to stadium, or there'd have been some off-colour traveller jokes.
As it is, they need to reign in the marketing manager or whoever should have said neigh to all this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
To be clear here I don’t have a massive problem with gambling promotion,I gamble myself at really low stakes for a bit of fun really,but I can understand why people will and do have a problem with it,the crap presentation of it was what I was sharing it for tbh,cringe indeed….
Except it's not though. There is a large amount of science to the stock market, and research involved, for those who take it seriously. And it's a model by which companies raise funds to expand, create jobs etc. They don't make their profits from their share listings - the reverse in fact, as the share listing generally reflects their actual and potential profits instead. But for gambling companies, the act of gambling itself is the source of profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bucket
Obviously there is a certain degree of chance and risk involved in the stock market, as there is with literally everything in life. But it is way more scientific than picking a horse or a number on a rouletter wheel.
If the stock market really was just the same as gambling, then everyone's pension funds would be getting spent on a black jack table instead.
Someone who supports a better team than mine might make a crack about it being a change from them signing donkeys.
Maybe Rovers members could do a charity sweepstake… Rovers horse wins the profits go to charity maybe the Children’s Hospital FG have never built…
Gambling isn't my thing personally, and it does nothing for me. I'm not against it per se, but what I am against is the huge explosion in its promotion in recent years/this century. And it's basically the Brits' fault too.
Tony Blair brought in huge liberalisation of the gambling rules in Britain in the late 1990s - despite the fact that no voters were asking to have more gambling, and Labour not havong mentioned it in their manifesto. It was done because his party were raking in donations from the gambling sector, and they obviously wanted pay-back for that. What has happened since is that gambling has gone from being a fringe activity that always existed but wasn't really mainstream to something that cynical marketing has presented as being 'just a bit of fun, for everyone, and a normal part of everyday life'. And as so often happens - where the Brits led, Ireland followed.
Gambling is so in-your-face nowadays - it's literally everywhere. And unsurprisingly issues aroud problem gambling, debt, addiction, mental health etc have increased dramatically at the same time.
Again - no-one was asking for a dramatic increase in the promotion and availability of gambling. Just the industry itself. And it bought off a British government to secure it, and then the Irish government to meekly follow suit. And now we all pour money into the coffers of those companies. Many of whom are based in tax havens, so don't even have the decency to pay full taxes in-return for it either. Absolute parasites.
I'd happily go back to the old days of gambling being there for those who want to access it, but not in your face so you literally can't get through a single day of your life without some company trying to lure you into it. But hey - here's a race horse for your favourite football club, and you can help give it a funny name too ! Quick - spend all your money on it, as it's bound to be lucky :mad:
Good debates but suggest a thread is made for it and this goes back to signings
All profits go to the club's charity partners as outlined.Quote:
Originally Posted by DCSIL
Pat Hoban signing back at Dundalk,big signing for them….
Charlie McCreevy's personal interest policy as a horse racing fan and a gamler. He dressed up looser restrictions and tax cuts to assist with the funding of the Irish horse racing industry. It probably did the job too really but needs reform now which could be a restrictive bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
Meant to be a 3 year deal also for Hoban.Quote:
Originally Posted by joey B
Benson meant to be also signing and possibly by tomorrow, not sure on his deal, he usually only does one year.
Dan Kelly on 2 year deal also as per local reports, but these all need to be confirmed by DFC.
I'm clueless on calculation of development fees but Dervin is 22 out of contract and Kane is 23 under contract so I'd guess there will be a difference between both fees paid as Kane will be a straight transfer negotiation between Shels/DroghedaQuote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
Dan McDonnell was referring to it as "a compensation arrangement" for Kane in the Indo so I'm not sure he was under contract. Doesn't really matter either way I suppose.