Printable View
because when they finally get it right it will be the same year as when an eircom league club wins the champions league:rolleyes: otherwise they will continue to chop and change. I agree with ye and it should be down to preformances on the pitch only. To me, surely waterford have to be the in the boiling pot at the moment more so than anyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
how is it ignorance? we have done this to death (and as you say you are new) and the common perception is CHF and UCD are in trouble if delaney gets his way, with rovers, galway and possibly limerick passing them. i never said it was right.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmandmythdledge
it just so happens that the only people in a flap before anything was actually proposed were all ucd fans.
honsestly, you arent worried? the new stadium plans may be far too late to save you
Funnily enough, I'd say Waterford have nothing to lose. They didn't vote for originally, but I can see them possibly changing come the vote. They're screwed under proper rules, but they're in a city and have a relatively decent recent record, so they might be tempted to vote for on the grounds that nothing worse than relegation will happen them anyway. Possibly the same for Bray.
And how will we ever keep reasonable players over here if we don't actually have the means to pay for them....?Quote:
Originally Posted by reginald
Think about it - you're suggesting that there should be no relation between a club's income and the amount it is willing to spend on players. The kind of thing that Leeds United used to do when they were in the English Premiership.
As an analogy, it would like some fella working on minimum wage complaining that he can't get the credit to buy a Porsche, a fancy big house, flash suits etc etc and saying 'But how will I ever attract a glamorous wife without being able to pay for these things'. The real question is, how would you ever hope to hang-on to such a glamorous wife once the money ran out...! *
* Apologies for the momentary 'Swiss Tony' Impression....
Why ? :confused: Should the leaders of the FAI not be allowed to propose any changes to Irish football without fear of losing their job ? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
That'd be one way of ensuring terminal inertia.
I don't think his position would be tenable when he's actively trying to favour some clubs over others while directly flouting UEFA Fair Play statutes. If the vote were to go against him, we'd know at least 1/3rd of the clubs wouldn't share his vision for the future, so it'd be a kind of vote of no confidence.
Firstly - the FAI and the EL are in-effect a federation of different elements within Irish football. So, you're suggesting that if even a small minority (one third) of the members of that federation disagree with any particular policy suggested by any particular leader, he should be made to walk ?? Do you know any organisations whatsoever (e.g. trade unions, political parties) who follow such a ridiculous approach to decision making ? It would totally stifle any form of chnage or progress at an instance, and completely emasculate leadership.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
And how exactly is Delaney actively trying to favour some clubs over others ? He may well be actively favouring criteria that he believes are for the future benefit of the game in Ireland - and I'm sure many fans would broadly agree with him on those. But to suggest that he is deliberately cutting the cards to work against certain specific teams is paranoid.
Finally - how is he directly flouting FIFA Fair Play statutes ? A lot of leagues have off-the-field criteria that must be met to belong in certain divisions. The French have the most brutal example. There is a broadly accepted principle within football that a club's presence at the senior table shouldn't be solely about their on-field performances. Once that principle is established under any criteria (e.g. stadia, financial controls etc) it is equally as valid for any other off-the-field criteria. The genie has long been out of the bottle here.
I think you're letting your hatred of such proposals colour your judgement and translate into bitterness towards the architect of them.
The difference between that and the current proposal is that once a team meets the off-the-field criteria it competes equally with the other qualifying teams. That's very different to saying that 'x' number of seats in the stadium is worth 'y' league points.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
I agree with you though that there's no point in expecting a resignation.
What current proposal ??? Nothing has been announced yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bald Student
from todays sun
All clubs recieved the proposals yesterday
12 Team league in 2007
10 Team in 2008
Reserve 'A' League
U21 Winter League
League cup Winners v 1st Division winners for a place in Setanta Cup
Prize Fund up from 230k to 450k a year.
League Structure based on following criteria
50% on the field sucess - 20% on this season, 30% over last 5 seasons
10% on Infastructure
15% on Uefa License
15% on Sustainablity and Future Plans
10% on Location
Half a million prize money, is that between all the clubs or just the winners? It'd be great if it was just for the winners (even if they do end up being Cork!), obviously with lesser amounts to the others.
Indo Article
The FAI have dangled an E800,000 carrot in front of the 22 eircom League clubs to entice them into a merger with the association.
From 2007 the top flight will be known as the Premiership and the winners will receive a massive E225,000 in prizemoney. Shelbourne received a paltry E18,000 for winning the 2004 league while Cork City won E100,000 last season.
The prize fund for the Premiership is to jump from E233,500 in 2006 to E450,000 next season with the First Division pot rising from E81,000 to E100,000, half of which will go directly to the winners.
Prize money will account for E633,000 when the League Cup and Fair Play awards are counted and the association are also promising E10,000 to each of the 12 Premiership clubs for a promotion officer to help raise the each club's profile in their catchment area.
The FAI intend to reduce the Premiership from 12 to ten teams for 2009 by relegating the bottom three clubs at the end of the 2008 season.
Even though there is no promotion or relegation this season the 12 teams currently in the Premier Division are not guaranteed a top-flight place next season.
They will have to go through a complicated criteria process to determine who will make the cut and this will be overseen by an Independent Assessment Group (IAG) chaired by former UEFA vice-president Des Casey.
The IAG also include former Irish Sports Council chairman Pat O'Neill, Dublin City manager John Fitzgerald, former international Niall Quinn and FAI Project Manager Helen Raftery.
The criteria which the IAG will use to determine the 12 clubs to play in the Premier Division next season is based on a system of 1,000 points with 50 per cent being awarded for sporting criteria (the club's performance over the last five seasons) and the other half for non-sporting criteria.
At the end of 2007 the bottom team in the newly created Premiership will be relegated and replaced by the Division One winners who will also play off against the League Cup winners for a Setanta Cup place.
The second and third placed teams in Division One will play off with the 11th placed. The teams which finish in the bottom three places in the Premiership will receive no prize-money.
By 2009 the FAI also envisage an A Championship operating on a regional basis, which will contain reserve teams plus non-league sides and from which promotion to the First Division would be possible.
From 2007 clubs must sign participation agreement and will operate a cap on players' wages and costs which will be 65 per cent of turnover. Clubs are due to vote on the merger in July and the FAI have planned a series of information meetings with them over the coming weeks.
Ah, they're not really. They are in name, but nothing else.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
One-third is more than a small minority. I agree it's probably a bit radical for him to go because of one vote. But then he's overseen UEFA Licencing to be the mess that it is, he's tried to screw eL fans out of international tickets, he arguably shouldn't have gotten the job in the first place, he's pressing on with this on the back of a very shaky Genesis Report which he didn't even bother to question, it appears, and various other dodgy things he's done since coming to office. This is more like the straw which breaks the camel's back really. It's the first time clubs have actually voted on his vision for the league too. Wait until you see the criteria too - not the work of someone I'd want anywhere near Irish football. Elitist bullsh!t of the highest order.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
Ah now, that's naive. If he believes these actions are for the best in the Irish game, he's an idiot and should go. If he's at least in part being influenced by officials at certain clubs (as is my understanding from having asked around), he's corrupt and should go. There is no rational argument for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
UEFA statutes, not FIFA. I linked them in here before - do a search. Also what Bald Student said.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
Danny's post aside, read the thread. This was all posted to clubs yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
Bit wary of this alright.
The wages cap is a good idea but it must have a watertight system for implementation. Don't get caught up in what an individual player gets, its the overall budget for wages thats the relevant point. Now getting clubs, league, Revenue and PFAI to agree will be difficult.
From a personal viewpoint, I'm broadly in-agreement with this proposal. I have issues with certain elements of it, but not the broad idea.
As with any dramatic change, I acknowledge that there will be both winners and losers. But the guiding criteria I use in this is as follows.
Imagine how we'd like the Eircom league to be 5 or 10 years down the line.
I'm thinking of a league that is truely sustainable and that 'work's. Not one that lurches from crisis to crisis due to poor leadership and the constant presence of badly-run clubs, or clubs who's long-term viability is extremely limited. Not oe that in no way reflects the spread of populatuion around the country.
I'm thinking of a league that contains financially stable Premier clubs, attracting regular crowds of an average 4-5,000 to watch them in modern 6-10,000 all-seater stadiums.
I'm thinking of a First Division that is no longer a wilderness - one where all teams are also financially stable, attracting crowds of average 2,000 in 5,000+ all-seater stadiums. One where there are much stronger incentives - to progress northwards into the Premiership, and to not progress southwards back to the intermediate game.
A domestic game where the prize money on offer is of a level that sends out a message about how serious Irsh domestic football is being viewed.
A game where part-funding is being provided to employ a member of staff at every club to go out and build strong links with their communities.
Now - ask yourself, is that the kind of league you'd like to see in 5 or 10 years time ? If it is - my next question is not the predictable 'this proposal will deliver that' one. Instead, it is this. If the above league existed, could you really see a place in it for ALL 22 clubs that are currently within EL football ? To risk making myself unpopular amongst fans of certain clubs - would there be room in the league I've described above for a Premier match that attracts less than 100 supporters ? If not - can you realistically see all 22 clubs currently within the league making the required leap over the next 5-10 years to become viable clubs with a much larger average fan-base and a secure financial future ?
If you can put your hand on your heart and say that, under the type of stable and well supported league we would all like to see, there is genuinely room for all 22 current clubs then fine. But I personally cannot see how certain clubs can progress at the pace required off-the-pitch to survive under such a league. And if they wouldn't survive in the type of league that we want and we hope we are moving towards, then in all honesty what is the point in them staying in senior football at all ? A league will only be as strong as its weakest teams - and those teams will hold it back if a significant gulf in fan-base and financial viability opens up between them and everyone else.
I'll don my hard hat now in-advance of the expected flack from fans who suspect that the untenability of their clubs means that they're due for the chop. :ball:
Even though it's my gut reaction to disagree with any thing that comes out of Delaney's mouth, I like some of these proposals.
Better prize money is a plus, and I think the Setanta Cup playoff match between the League Cup winners and Div 1 winners is a great idea. The A league goes a way to get some sort of feasible pyramid system going, although still leaving the promotion thing wide open in regards to winter - summer football. Wage cap must be a good thing, but is 65% sufficient? I'd love to know everyones wages at the minute.
The disagreements seem to arise from that fact that tenable, but small clubs look to be in for the chop. I don't want to bring UCD into this again, but it's the example I'm most familiar with.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
A club with no debt, a decent infrastructure (training faculities, youth setup) and respectable league and cup results may well be screwed over by the fact that we have a small fanbase (and therefore no reason for a big stadium). I don't see how you can justify that in terms of advancing the league.
Of course, it's much easier not to look at it that way if you're in no danger yourself. :(
Always glad to oblige, Steve! Though I'll leave my UCD hat off for once.
The problem with the vision you have is that you talk about it as if it's completely achievable. Is it? I don't konw if it is; certainly not within the time-frame you're talking about. I don't think that's a failing of the league in particular - it's just reality. You currently have two or three clubs who can averag over 2000 a game. Nothing in this proposal indicates how we're suddenly going to have ten clubs averaging 5000 a game. No-one I've talked to - even those who share your optimistic vision - can indicate how this proposal will bring about the changes dreamt of.
The notion of a First Division that's not a wilderness is nice as well. This proposal, however, will kill the First Division. You're talking about comparing the bottom Premier team with the top First Division team and letting the one which scores highest into the Premier (again, this is just going on what I've heard). The Premier Division team will obviously score higher (by definition) and so will stay up. That's no grounds for promoting the First Division in general.
I'm curious as to how you reconcile clubs being for the chop with a vibrant First Division also. If you think clubs such as UCD, Dublin City, Kilkenny, Monaghan, etc are for the chop, you're looking at bringing in 2 or 4 new clubs into the First Division, whom you would expect to get 2000 a game within five years. It's five years since Kildare County came into the league. Prior to that you had the influx of '85 - Derry, Bray, Monaghan, EMFA, Newcastlewest and Cobh. Only Derry of those are getting 2000 a game 20 years on, and arguably wouldn't get it in the First Division these days. So on the one hand, you indicate that certain teams are unsustainable, and on the other hand have a vision of these teams - or teams currently lower than them - getting 2000 within five years.
It's all very well talking starry-eyed about 6000 crowds being a regular event, but you - and everyone else - make no attempt to indicate how this proposal is going to achieve that. My vision instead is of the league being dragged further into the mire by law-suits and legal challenges and becoming even more a thing of public mockery by barstoolers.
I'd obviously love to achieve your vision. But I don't see how this can possibly do it. It's pure pie in the sky, I'm afraid.
Incidentally, it's interesting that the ground criterion has suddenly upped and moved. UEFA Licencing required 1500 covered seats and nothing else, capacity-wise. Now suddenly 3000 safe capacity is required. (Just flicked back and that wasn't mentioned. It's on the proposal anyway). UCD (apologies, but again it's the example I'm familiar with) have definite plans for a 1500-seater ground on the basis of UEFA Licencing. Now we've to ensure we can fit another 1500 people into it, preferably by July.
The above could also be a description of a club with no future. It's easy to be a tenable club in a sh!t league. It's much harder to be a viable club under a more progressive and stronger league that we all hope we're moving towards. And if you're not able to plug that gap, you risk holding everyone else back. Why should the vast majorioty of clubs in Irish domestic football be held back by the limited future of a tiny number of clubs ?Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
True. Likewise, it's difficult to look at it in a positive way if you feel your club will be one of the victims. Regardless - even if I was opposed to uit because my own club was in danger of being one of the victims of it, I'd still like toi think that I'd openly acknowledge whetehr or not I objectively thought it was a good idea overall for our league.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83