Its only natural that Bohs be investigated regarding the salary cap.
They must have been having issues earlier in the season when the FAI issued the Transfer Embargo (I presume thats still in place).
Its the fact that it takes another club to raise the issue is whats embarrassing for the FAI.
Is there perhaps a Bohs player due to retire and avail of the 10 year tax back scheme?
If that's the case, that is exactly what the FAI are doing. They should just make it all wages, and then there's no loopholes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
I am not trying to justify anything. I am just throwing it out there - just like Rovers seem to have done.Quote:
Originally Posted by BYCTWD
Not patronising anyone. Sorry you have taken offence.
Maybe someone should ask the FAI to ask Rovers why their figures for training facilities and youth looks extremely low.
I assume Rovers lodged an official complaint against the spending practices of several other clubs like Dundalk for example as well. If they had to ask players to take wage reductions then they must have questions to answer as well, or do Rovers only want to bi**h and moan about bohs because they finished above them this season.
I wish both clubs would grow up and mind their own ****ing business tbh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BYCTWD
But thats just it. I dont know its not true. Do you?
If Bohs have been acting the maggot then they deserve what they get.
If Rovers have seen that then I'm sure the FAI have seen it and will ask the hard questions. If the FAI are satisfied they will issue a licence. End of. Will Rovers then start whinging about something else when Bohs post their next set of accounts. Will this be a seasonal event until Rovers finish ahead of them. Or will they take the FAI rulling as fact if it doesnt go their way.
Sling as much mud as possible - it seems to stick. Someone else on this thread says that Bohs have been 'fiddling the books for a while now'. Thats easy to say but he didnt provide any proof? I mean its getting ridiculous.
I think what is the annoying thing is not what is being asked but who is asking. It dosnt help that the club asking finished 2nd to the club being accused and is also their tradional biggest rivals. It just leave them open to accusations of Sour grapes and bitterness considering I cannot remember any other club doing similiar to another club.
If you or the Rovers board dont believe the FAI will conduct the licencing agreement process in a correct fashion then thats something they should take up with the FAI.
Yeah right...Quote:
Originally Posted by CMcC
If someone truthfully answered the question "do all those employees paid to work in youth development and in the bar actually work there" then this would all go away.Quote:
Originally Posted by CMcC
But nobody will answer the question directly.
Its not just Derry fans that exhibit ostrich behaviour.
How can any Bohs fans answer that without posting details of what every player was paid and getting a wages reconciliation report FROM THE AUDITOR & posting that online.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
All this sh**e comes from Rovers,Dundalk etc fans claiming bohs players are paid as barmen, groundsmen, window cleaners whatever without ever having anything to back it up*.
*(Excluding I herard it from someone who heard it from someone else!)
Also these accounts have been available online for months. If they really had such a problem why wait until now, unless its a last desperate measure to claim a league title in the boardroom after they bottled it on the pitch.
You need to make a distinction between posts, and posters, being dismissed as bitter, and the move by Shamrock Rovers being condemned in those terms, which is a valid point of view, even if you disagree. I don't think individual posters here have been so accused.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
As a club, Shamrock's action in running to the authorities, now that it's lost the league, is dishonourable. The accounts were out there for a long time before it raised its complaint. Even if the complaint is upheld, any moral validity it may claim is undermined by the fact that it waited until it lost on the field of play.
This forum generates a lot of heat discussing reasons why people despise the LoI. I'd put this sort of cynical blazer manoeuvre as top of the list, before quality of football, stadium facilities, and all of the other factors trotted out.
Interesting to note that not a single Bohs fan whose posts I've seen here or on the Bohs forum has expressed the opinion that the practise of getting around the 65% rule by paying players for other roles is not going on at their club.
In the absence of any evidence to the contrary I would suggest that Bohs fans would say its not going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
This has parallels with the thread about the findings of the racism allegations re Ndo but in reverse as it were.
To answer BYCTWD, yes I can see why the question would be asked but would have expected the FAI to be the ones asking - and not through the newspapers either.
Cretaro pulls a fine pint of Guinness apparently. :D
And then leaked it to the papers?Quote:
Originally Posted by BYCTWDWhich is EXACTLY what they did Einstein.Quote:
Originally Posted by CMcC
I've not got into the discussions on that, but, for the sake of argument, as you put it, are you seriously suggesting that racism is an equivalent transgression, and that racist behaviour should not be reported?Quote:
Originally Posted by BYCTWD
IMHO, that is of a different order entirely, and should not be compared to Stasi snitching.
€500 to join what and what do they get for that money. Just curious?Quote:
Originally Posted by paulok32
4 pages and nobody has answered the question. Some quality interference being run though....
Bury those heads any deeper lads and you'll pop out in Australia.
BYCTWD is there a post on this forum from you that isn't about Bohs?
Unbelievable! Surely this should be taken down considering it's simply not true.Quote:
Originally Posted by BYCTWD
From a former schoolboy director:Quote:
Just a point noted on the foot.ie forum where i wouldn't post.
Somebody says our schoolboys didn't receive medals because the league fees weren't paid-if you don't pay your registration fees you aren't accepted to the league or are thrown out.All our teams due medals got them.
The level of nonsense some people will go to with this story is unbelievable.
rovers were right to hang em.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackholesun
bohs seem to be allowed to break every rule in the book and get away with it.
well done rovers.
What rules have we broken?Quote:
Originally Posted by roinuj
Forensic analysis of accounts is an advanced science at this stage. Loadza people are paid money to dig into accounts of competing public companies to determine which one invest in or not.
The Rovers board run the club very professionally and money is very tightly managed and budgeted, so Id imagine its easy enough for Rovers to look at the Bohs accounts and do a comparison looking at their attendences and wages info they have from talking to out of contract players to see if they suspect anything fishy is going on.
I also think the following the Derry case, fudge is off the menu and the FAI will be happy to make an example of any club they can to ensure that the decades of brown envelopes and messing that has gone on in the league is eradicated for once and for all. If Bohs or any other club are declared to not have meet the 65% rule for this season, then who knows what the reprecussions will be as this will be a first.
Finally, if Bohs are squeeky clean and have nothing to hide, then maybe in these recessionary times they might take the info from the complaint and use it to help bargain a better rate from DCU! ;)
bhs
http://foot.ie/forums/showthread.php...10#post1160710
cant say ye were not told
Chinese whispers. Rossi can't be full time as per condition to his insurance pay out, as a result he's part time. He also coaches for the club as far as I'm aware. What's the problem there?Quote:
Originally Posted by sligored
Next time you'd like to have a dig please do some research first.
I think BohDiddley is being a bit harsh on the Stasi tbh.
Yeah right, its usually just rumours threads around the LOI this time of year. This is great entertainment for the off season.Quote:
Originally Posted by SligoBrewer
It seems to my untrained eyes that this is more about gettin that laughable human being francie gavin off his fat arse to do his job , alongside the FAI & padraig smyth, in sorting out this league once and for all, for the good of ALL teams.
anyone waiting on answers from bohs fans are wasting their time.
bohs fans have shown themselves to be completely in the dark about their club so dont have the first clue about whats "goin down" in D7 .
best pre-season in ages!;)
Still post-season, I'd say. It's like an issue of Now! magazine around here lately. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by placid casual
Do you want the price quoted in Iraqi dinars or Zimbabwean dollars?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebeard
;)
bhs
what research do you want me to do - heres my original post from last may.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leejo
Mark Rossiter does not get wages from Bohs.
He took an insurance payout when his professional contract ended with Sunderland due to his knee injury. Therefore he cannot now recieve financial reward for playing football as this was part of the settlement.
He is paid big money for coaching instead of wages- another way of avoiding the 65% cap.
things might get better for some bohs fans when they get to primary school- poor lee-jo is making no sense.
Between me and you leejo mark does f*** all coaching- and a lot of your bar staff do f*** all barwork.
all of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leejo
are the moderators actually going to start moderating here?
Rovers themselves say they have NO EVIDENCE yet everything and every accusation under the sun is being thrown at Bohs here. From Derry (ha!), Dundalk (ha!) and Rovers fans (jaysis) and one particularly nasty Waterford fan.
Absolutely brutal.
Why dont people just let this run its course - if we are guilty of something Rovers (and the fact that theyve gone to the media with this) have ensured it will be discovered sonner or later. If we are not guilty, then this will die its death.
Primary school? Jaysus nice touch mate.Quote:
Originally Posted by sligored
Right, thanks for re-posting your original post and completely ignoring my point. Now I'd like to restate my point that Rossi is on a part time contract.
Research: http://www.bohemians.ie/component/jo...yer&p=1&pid=19 Pay particular attention to the last line of the first paragraph, notice the word part time.
More research: http://www.sligoweekender.ie/news/story/?trs=mhcwsngbkfIt's commonly known Mark is on a part time contract, if he was receiving no financial reward for playing football he would be classed as an amateur, no? He is legally allowed to play football part time, not full time. Once again I ask what's the problem there?Quote:
Sligo’s Mark Rossiter, happily back playing on a part-time basis after his full-time career in England was wrecked by injury, was among the Bohemians substitutes.
No one is saying Mark does or doesn't get paid for a coaching role but to say he ONLY gets paid for a coaching role as a means of avoiding the 65% salary cap is pure and utter tripe. Possible slander?
But then again you probably know more about my club than I do...
You mean none of them? Yet.*Quote:
Originally Posted by roinuj
*I added in the "yet" before someone else did, I'll remove once the figures are released and it is shown that we are legally under the 65% SCP
People are commenting on a newspaper article. Most of the comments here are contained in that, and the rest clearly implied. It isn't the job of the moderators here to save your club embaressmentQuote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Perhaps one or two bohs fans might wish to counter the allegations rather than call Rovers bitter.
Of course they're bitter, amnd perhaps if they had won the league they wouldn't have reported you, but that doesn't mean the allegations don't need answering.
As for the line some are taking that "its the job of the FAI to spot these things"; The cases of Cork, Derry, Drogheda (and others) have proven they simply can't be trusted to spot financial irregularities
BTW Bohs fans, don't play dumb here. We all know the same stuff has been posted on your forum. YOu all know you have/had a transfer ban in place
What? A lot of the stuff on this thread are ridiculous unproven allegations which I have actually addressed...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
http://foot.ie/forums/showpost.php?p...5&postcount=78
http://foot.ie/forums/showpost.php?p...3&postcount=93
You get an infraction for saying UCD have a small fanbase yet moderators are allowing posters get away with presenting it as fact that we are guilty of allegations which are totally without foundation. :confused:
Our wage bill in 2008 was big enough ffs, if we wanted to cook the books the board would have done a better job than that.
The points raised in the Daily Mail article are easy to answer.
1) Cost of training facilities - Bohs train full-time at the DCU elite facilities. I challenge anyone here to visit them and not understand why it costs big money. I would argue that it costs far too much, but it's easy to see why it costs more than where Rovers train part-time - a junior club's ground? It's like comparing a Porsche to a ****ing FIAT.
2) Schoolboy expenses - see post from Bohs' former Youth Director http://www.thebohs.com/forum/viewtop...=216864#216864
3) Fundraising expenses - The 65pc rule did not come into effect until 2008. Until then, most was included in the accounts on a net basis. i.e. if we ran a Last Man Standing competition back then, only the profit from that would have been put on the club's overall books and there would not have been itemised income and expenditure for running such a venture. The same goes for raffles, lotteries, Christmas draws, monthly draws, Gala dinners etc. Since the 65pc rule came in, it's important that all that kind of thing is grossed up so that all income is put on the books to keep within the SCP, so obviously the income and expenditure for EVERYTHING is going to makes its way onto the books, no matter how trivial it may be.
But funnily enough, Rovers didn't question the dramatic increase in income under the fundraising heading (246% of the 2007 figure), they just decided to focus in on the expenditure... As one accountant member on our members' forum said: "If Rovers showed our accounts to a competent accountant they would tell them this within two minutes." Instead, they put two and two together and got five.
Rovers fans might like to think Bohs members don't question this type of thing, but I can assure them there that the accounts were given a thorough going through by members at the last AGM by people with years' experience as accountants and people involved in other areas of finance.
4) Bars - Any Bohs fan will tell you that there are a hell of a lot less people drinking in the bars than ever before, that they've been on a downward spiral for the last 4/5 years and are really struggling to draw customers midweek in an area that is incredibly well-served by alternative bars. That, combined with the increased cost of buying stock in recent years and the overall national trend of less people drinking in bars has seen profit plummet from where it was 4/5 years ago.
There is no case to answer. Bohs are clearly guilty of exorbitant and unsustainable spending over the last few years, but we have nothing to hide here.
This is a total flier from Rovers, hoping that if they throw enough mud, some of it will stick. I have to say I'm disappointed with them on this one. I've impressed with the way they've gone about their business since the 400 Club took over but I thought the days of this kind of sniping belonged in the past and that league had moved on from Ollie Byrne-type pettiness.
So. Any opinions on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Yes... because the FAI believed we would not meet our pre-season financial projections and would be in breach of the 65pc rule. That did not imply any fraud, which is effectively what Rovers are implyinh here. It was more of a "offload players, start fundraising and get your ****ing in house in order" type thing. They were right to do so, we needed that wake-up call to get us within the SCP - it's taken a massive effort from members/fans to get us over the line... hence the massive reduction in our wage bill for next season so we don't have a repeat performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
No, I don't believe any player is being paid as a barman/fundraiser. I don't know enough about the youth section of the club to know if any of the players are involved in the coaching end of it, but I'm almost certain that they aren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
Without even getting into how it could possibly cost 3600 per week for DCU's training facilities let's just take the former Bohs youth director's most pertinent sentenceQuote:
Originally Posted by LukeO
and break it down into plain English.Quote:
However,the overall "spend" figure of circa 130k,seen circa 110k in income come back in
Bohs spent €130k on the schoolboy teams in 2008 (remember this doesn't count as wages as part of the 65% rule)
As per the former Bohs youth director €110k of this €130k somehow came back into the club as "income"
This €110k does count as income of which 65% could be spent on player wages.
Just to reiterate Bohs spent 130k on youth teams that doesn't count as wages however they somehow recovered 110k of this as income that did count towards the SCP.
There it is in black and white, it's in the accounts and the bohs youth director posted it on their board. How much clearer does it have to be that they are cooking the books?
You're totally trying to twist what he was trying to say, but you already know that.
He was clearly trying to make the point that the 130k figure was not the net loss, but that the loss was 20k because the schoolboy section of the club raised 110k (through its own sponsorship, fundraising etc.).
He mightn't have expressed it very well and did not explain how it raised 110k (as he said in his post, it was explained to members at the agm), but you know damn well that he did not mean that 110k from the 130k spent went back into the club... How the **** do you think we would manage that? Give the coaches 110k to divvy up among the kids and tell them to spend it on forecast coupons? :rolleyes: Spare me.
He also says the youth section compiled its own set of accounts, so I would imagine Bohs will be only too happy to present them to Padraig Smith to show that everything is above board.