It was mentioned on another thread about central contracts. Now I know the clubs would go mental, but it would make sense, if the governing body were efficient and interested in domestic football, other than to keep their place the the UEFA and FIFA troughs.
But thats just it, not all the clubs are being punished.there certainly seems to be several variations of the rule book flying about these days.
Can you quote me some? I'd definitely agree with you if you said the rule book was wrong, because clubs like Bohs shouldn't be allowed treat everyone involved with them like dirt for a whole year and then suddenly clean themselves up for a few weeks in time for licencing, but I'd be at pains to quote a breach of licencing (other than Drogheda's stadium which can be explained at the same time) that hasn't been acted on.Quote:
Originally Posted by LK37oldskool
Because the FAI seem to be more lenient on the bigger clubs than the smaller ones....the likes of Shels, Derry, Cork get put down to FD while Bohs get totally away with it while the likes of Galway, Kildare, Cobh are booted out of the league. The FAI is rotten to the core.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSFShels
Course not can 100% say they wouldnt do that no chance would they do something like that sure that would be as stupid as lets say stopping one of the top teams in the world playing in this country over a made up 3rd party agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSFShels
There was no A League when Shels were relegated, I've no doubt they would have dumped us in it if there was. Derry and Cork had to form new clubs to get into the First Division (no matter what their fans will tell you), Bohs haven't gotten away with anything as such, they've just tidied up their ship in time for the 1 time in the year when the FAI bother to check up. I fully agree that the FAI need to make sure clubs are running properly all year round, and to use points deductions where this isn't the case. But Galway were booted out of the league because they had players left unpaid going into a new season, Kildare decided it wasn't worth carrying on, and Cobh were in a heap and still aren't eligible for a First Division licence 2 years on. Big clubs generally survive quicker because they have more fans to exploit to drag them out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Town Legend
It clearly wasn't a made up agreement. The Dublin Super Cup is evidence enough of that. The FAI were just after their own interests in that. They would have applied it to other clubs too because they need the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhitearmy
Was clearly not signed at the time they stopped us so should have had nothing to do with it. Funny they couldnt show us it when asked.Quote:
Originally Posted by CSFShels
Did the FAI not drag Bohs out of it? Find it very hard to believe their fans stumped how many hundreds of thousands of euro they owed!! All you have to look at is the farce that Limerick are in at the minute. Shams get their friendly with Madrid yet the FAI cancel a big money spinner for them against Barcelona!!! And now they're witholding a licence for them going to court!! You can't come on here and say the FAI deal with all clubs fairly!! It's clear they favour the bigger clubs!
How is it clear that it wasn't signed at the time? Perhaps I'm missing something here. As for them not showing it when asked, I'd presume its moreso to do with the fact that they knew Limerick hadn't a leg to stand on anyway because of the participation agreement.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhitearmy
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSFShels
lol my sides. first up in licensing you cant budget for a loss as your budgets wouldnt be accepted, limerick budgets were accepted. Both Limerick Football club and before them Limerick 37 (before they ceased trading ) both recorded profits so your opinion (if it is your own :rolleyes:) is untrue. Now can you find out where they want us to stash the cash, sort code and bank details in waterford or phibsboro maybe? :cool:
But everything you've just said there has been slanted. The FAI didn't drag Bohs out of it as such. They gave them prizemoney in advance which they've done in the past for clubs big. medium and small(where small clubs are actually eligible of course, First Division clubs never are because you have to finish a certain place in the league to actually get prizemoney). The Rovers-Real friendly and the Limerick-Barca friendly are like discussing chalk and cheese. Rovers did not organise their friendly with Real. Platinum One did. The FAI saw the commercial viability of such events and decided they wanted the whole cake, no1 else was allowed have a piece, including Shamrock Rovers. If Rovers or Platinum one tried to do the same now, the same result would have occurred. There is also very little evidence to suggest that the FAI are withholding a licence because Limerick are going to court. They're probably being vindictive because of it, but I've no doubt there is also a genuine reason they're choosing to hang them on. If Shamrock Rovers or any other big club you want to mention try take the FAI to court, I think you'll quickly find they'll get less preferential treatment too as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Town Legend
Becuase they announced that they had signed it months after the friendly would have taken place and said that cancelling the Barca game was just a good will gesture or something like that before the deal.
They couldnt even get the attendance that wasnt allowed right.
Funny not having a leg to stand on but yet they had to agree to our terms in court.
Anyway this is nothing to do with this thread dunno why i brought it up we will let the court decide who was right with the Barca thing. Im also confident we will get our licence.
Do you think Fingal budgeted for an operating profit? Of course not. It was the same situation as the one I mentioned (which may not be the actual one) and we've now seen how that ended up. Clubs can budget for an operating loss as long as the cash is backed up by an individual's guarantee. The FAI don't seem to be accepting Limerick's guarantee. Limerick also made a loss last year according to all reports I've seen. I'll try find some for you if you want. If you do want me to, can you please quote me some where it says Limerick did make a profit last year and then we'll be even.Quote:
Originally Posted by gael353
Of course you'll get your licence, and no1 is debating that Limerick were wrong in the case of the Barca friendly. I merely quoted the FAI's motives for doing it. Didn't defend them. I hate the FAI as much as the next man.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhitearmy
Incidentally, what was the projected income from the Barca friendly, does anyone know?
Think i read in a paper that the club would have made 100,000. Not 100% sure on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by peadar1987
So the FAI and their underhandedness have a significant proportion of the blame for the €220,000 they're now demanding be stumped up by the club. *sigh*Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewhitearmy
what i would really love now is a Limerick press release akin to last years.
Loooovely!
80,000 I think.
No idea what's going on with the conditions on our licencing - if we're being asked to front up the entire lot, it's madness. If it's just that the FAI are looking for certain concrete evidence of our ability to cover any shortfall in income comapred to the budget, that's more reasonable. Though, like Dodge, I wonder what form it takes - are the FAI actually looking for funds transferred to an account? Does it remain there until the end of the season?
If I remember correctly, Arkaga were asked to provide some sort of guarantee, but in their case, when it all went horribly wrong, the money was no longer there. Maybe the FAI have decided to look for more definite evidence now. You'd think that they'd make this common knowledge prior to licencing though.
Also, I'd be surprised if Limerick were the only club with a potential deficit to be covered by a guarantee.