Ah that's ridiculous, he just didn't want to incriminate himself I reckon.
Printable View
Ah that's ridiculous, he just didn't want to incriminate himself I reckon.
Then why have a meeting? The one sure-fire, 100%, absolutely banker, certain question that was going to be asked tonight...and that's the answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
But surely he knew when calling the meeting that that's the main question ffs. Surely he could have thought of something better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longfordian
I really don't know what he was thinking but it seems inconceivable that he as chairman wouldn't know if they were paying two different contracts or not surely he saw the accounts each year?. I agree that if that's the best he could do it does beg the question of why he bothered with the meeting?. Was there anything constructive to come out of it?
Another view:
(Nike Air Jesus)Quote:
My interpretation is that the board think we can win the contract fight. On that basis we will be playing First Division football with a local, youthful squad on a vastly reduced expenditure. This will be as our current Wellvan incarnation and involve restructuring the club debt.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/image...82_meeting.jpg
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...sh/8351121.stm
(harridawg)Quote:
Yes, Pat's original answer was "erm..I don't know", but he went on
for a while after.
My take on that answer was that his definition of a dual contract was different to theirs, and certainly not underhanded or mischievous.
He explained that the player was signed in the off season,
he was also the first player that Pat signed himself.
Accordingly, he put together an agreement on DCFC on letter-headed paper, and thought that was that. This was Jan 2008.
It was only when the FAI rang him to ask about it that he was aware
that a player has to sign the Standard Form Players Contract,
which nullifies all previous contracts (in accordance with
term's 27 and 28). This was signed 12 days later, Feb 2008. This is the gist of the problem.
If they had an issue with this, why are we only hearing about it now?
Granted, Pat may have ****ed up originally, but one thing that came out tonight was that he has put his life savings into this club,
somewhere in the region of 300k, and yes, he has made mistakes.
But we don't deserve to be thrown out of the league for the
contracts issue. Financially, maybe, but again tonight they laid out what they were doing, even up as far as last week to address our financial problems, in some sort of 3-5 year plan.
I actually feel sorry for the man, he was visibly upset at the beginning. When some of us throw our life savings into the club,
maybe then we can criticize them.
Other points- Pat doesn't want us in the Irish league, and is 100% sure we will have senior football in some guide next year.
The FAI couldnt even produce the full copy of the contract (of the player in question) on demand during Saturdays meeting. Nor would they provide detail of the accusations ????? WTF !Quote:
Originally Posted by micls
The big crowd tonight were more hostile towards the FAI than i expected. Delaney is damanding Derry players come clean by Thursday, why would he bother if he already had all the evidence !!
Further:
(harridawg)Quote:
side from trying to run the club like a business, Pat also acknowledged in similar words, trying to run the club to please everyone.
Meaning, paying bigger wages than would be ideal, and trying to keep up with other clubs. Again, mistakes which have cost us dearly.
A fair point he made, when the team are winning the team and the manger are superstars, when they are not, it's the boards fault.
The FAI refused to give them an advance on their 4th place money the day before the Dundalk game. Pat acknowledged the players playing without wages, and pointed out the players commitments with kids and mortgages. This seemed to genuinely bother him.
Bear in mind, as he pointed out, when you read in the papers and news that DCFC did this, or DCFC did that, what they are really doing is pointing the finger at Pat himself and the 3 other board members.
And I've just remembered, that 300k figure RTE are bandying about
thats a hypothetical, what Delaney has done is said that
"if this arrangement with Quigley is with 19 other players, it would be 300k"
no definitives, no evidence, just allegations.
Even Pat confirmed that both the letterhead agreement,
and the standard form contract were identical.
He was firm about that.
As others have long noted, regardless of the contract situation, the debt looks unpayable.
There seems to be wildly different views as to what's gone on. I can't believe that the FAI would throw Derry out and be saying what they're saying if they weren't sure they had enough evidence. They're not that stupid and they do seem prepared to bring whatever they have into court. Time will tell I guess.
Well the players are registered with the FAI so they hold their registration. Transfers between LOI clubs have to be sanctioned by the FAI and transfers to clubs in different football associations require the FAI to release the registration.Quote:
Originally Posted by centre mid
Whatever about the tax implications for the players as individuals, surely it would be restrain of trade to withhold their registrations?Quote:
Originally Posted by DmanDmythDledge
Or are their sanctions within the SPC for this?
A good point was made the meeting tonight.
Why weren't we brought up before the disciplinary committee instead of being brought before the FAI Board?
This is worth posting
-This mythical €337k figure is made up. It is an extrapolation.
-They took the difference in the two contracts for DQ, and applied the same % difference to every player. They then took the inflated figures, totalled them and multiplied it for a year.
Ah, the joys of super slo mo on Sky +. As stated, the actions of the FAI today in their free briefing on media and antics such as that detailed above don't paint them in a great light.
I haven't seen the interview with Delaney, but based on the quotes I've read, it seemed obvious the 337k was an extrapolation. I don't think he tried to claim otherwise. He said something like "if I was to tot this up over 20 players it would be 337K" according to the reports I read. Context is everything too, so without seeing the interview in full it's difficult to know what he actually said.Quote:
Originally Posted by MariborKev
In any case, that's not really important. It doesn't matter whether it's 50k or 350k, the main question is, is it true that a large number of players had dual contracts? If so, it really doesn't matter what the total sum of money involved was, as it would show that there was systematic and premeditated deception involved on the part of DCFC, in which case they haven't a leg to stand on.
If, however, McDaid's claim that it only applied to 1 player, and there is some sort of explanation for that, then clearly it's a completely different matter.
It's still very hard to imagine why Delaney would just make this stuff up though. Is McDaid trying to claim that Delaney and/or the FAI as a whole just decided to kill DCFC for no reason? Even though this brings the viability of the whole league into further question? Sure, the FAI are muppets, but still, it just doesn't make sense.
I reckon Cregganite would get along well with the chap who wrote this letter to the Irish Times!
http://www.irishtimes.com/letters/in...#1224258476032
Quote:
Originally Posted by cregganite
You reckon?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nigel P. Cooke in the Irish Times
There seems to be a difference of opinion between the two of them about who was welcome at the Brandywell. Was it just Southerners, or Southerners and Europeans? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by sonofstan
The handling of this situation by the FAI is bemusing, they say that Derry, requested a meeting with them and then confessed to the use of dual contracts, Derry's reward for coming clean (Pat Mc Daid denied any dual contract confession bar the one case) was to be not demoted or lose points but expulsion. They now want the Derry Players past and present to come forward and place their careers at the mercy of the FAI punishment. As was said in MNS tonight even in cases of match fixing in Italy clubs were relegated not forced out of the league. It is also curious that Derry were not shown documents that were today made freely available to journalists. Is that fair or professional ?
One way or another I hope the full truth comes out because as a fan I abhor cheating no matter who it comes from and if it is Derry then they should come clean take their oil . Derry have serious financial issues to concentrate on.
Here comes the fudge.
Also Derry fans, remember we we'd have our meetings with Ollie and he'd tell us everything would be ok and the vast majority of Shels fans would believe him, then come on here and say so and you lot would laugh and say how naive they were and not to be taken in by his sob story? Well....
Didn't see Delaney's perfomance on six one, and would trust him about as far as i could throw him. However, the spin from Derry this morning on the radio is that the FAI don't have the evidence rather than it didn't happen.
I guess they (Derry) are at the "all in" stage - if they were operating dual contracts, it'll only take one other player to crack and they're screwed, but with added damage to goodwill for the club.
Or maybe it's the board that are going "all in" - a handy scapegoat in an FAI conspiracy to take focus off the rest of the financial side...
In answer to the question posted in several places as to why the FAI are demanding that the players come clean if they already have evidence:
The players have been a party to the deception and cheating. I think the FAI are actually being pretty lenient by offering an amnesty if they come forward and admit the whole truth.
Plus obviously there is the considerable bonus that if they do all (or even some) come forward that Wellvan no longer have a leg to stand on.
From todays Sun
"There are 22 players that we've looked at. Take player 11 who we were told was earning €750 per week. On Wednesday, Derry told us they were paying that player €1050 net , if you gross that up it is €1312. The difference in what we were toild the player was earning and what the player was actually earning was €562 per week.
Here's player 4 , who on the standard player contract signed on Feb 11 2008 was earning €550. According to a contract signed Jan 25 2008 the player was earning £650Stg. Derry claim the standard player contract supercedes that but the players bank account shows the player was earning £2700Stg per month - as per the original contract.
If we tot up the 22 players that amounts to €337,000."
If nothing else, it proves that Derry were paying completely mental wages.
I personally think Derrys big problem isn't the FAI, because I'm quite sure that the FAI will accept them again for next season in the 1st divison (the division below the top division in case it's called something else). I think the big problem is the debt. liquidation looks more of a threat than anything else, from where I sit.
Exactamundo. Although of course you could argue that the FAI thing ends any chance of avoiding liquidation. If that chance had existed previously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
Please remove us from your comment as we have not had any issues, financial or otherwise to deal with in the past few seasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sicuani
Careful what you say sicuani, this may be an internet forum where you can spout rubbish, but be aware that you cannot make up lies and expect to get away with it.
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
But this begs the question as to why the FAI decided to go all out on us, when the passage of a very short amount of time (probably a fortnight), we would've hung ourselves anyway (debt, 65% shareholding, Dungannon, Linfield gate money, players wages........).
It was like stamping on the toes of someone clinging to a window ledge whose grip was slipping anyway.
One argument could be made is that the FAI are doing this in order to actually increase the chance that we'll have a team next season by forcing regime change and with it our chances of getting a license.
But thats almost the equivalent of using a nuclear bomb to quell a riot.
Not "throwing good money after bad" may explain why the FAI are withholding DCFC's Prize money i.e. they don't want to hand over 80k to Wellvan, so that in a couple of months time Wellvan collapses with debts of, say, 420k, rather than 500k.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
Indeed, if Delaney is taking a pragmatic view, it may explain why the FAI is acting just now i.e. any earlier would have screwed up the 2009 Season, any later risks dragging it all into the 2010 season.
Meanwhile, intervening now allows DCFC the maximum time to clear up the existing mess and put something in its place for next season.
See my previous post as to the FAI's timing. At best, if they hadn't acted now, they'd have had no excuse for not handing over DCFC's Prize money.Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
At worst, by appeals and part=payments etc, Wellvan might have clung on until after the start of next season and closing down a club at that stage is a hell of a sight messier than doing so now.
Still, its a hell of a big fight to pick for expediency's sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
I'd tend to agree with this. By focusing on this issue, and pulling the possible safety net of prize money away from the board they're going to force the end of the club forward a lot.
They won't give Derry C the 80k because 60k of it is Dundalk's!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by EalingGreen
In what way? Outstanding transfer fee?Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
Anyhow, I doubt the FAI will have any trouble finding a good home for it - better than Wellvan, at any rate!
Spot on SB. I think that this has been a very welcome distraction for the board. It focuses the Fans anger at the FAI rathen than the Derry Boards' incompetence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bruce
Even though, by the sounds of our Lawyer we probably have the FAI on a technicallity, it really doesn't matter as we have a debt of £500,000 that will put us to the wall anyway.
All these latter posts are making sense around the £80k being held back. Ive no qualms about being relegated, if Wellvan do go into liquidation and sease trading could the fans and a new group be set up a new company and still receive the £80k plus the European money gained from this yrs Europa League. I think if it isnt then the money should be dished out between the other 21 clubs or even help promote the A Championship clubsQuote:
Originally Posted by Krstic
No, it couldn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flexy
The existing licence would go with Wellvan, any new entity wouldn't have rights to prize money owing to Wellvan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flexy
Magicme from my reading of that don't think he was trying to have a go at monaghan for having any kind of financial difficulties, more the fact that the country as a whole did, with every club effected even in small ways, lack of willing sponsors etc. Don't see how anyone could just throw a well run clubs name in for the sake of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicme
I'd assume the prize money would go to Dundalk (who move up to fourth) with theirs going to whoever finishes fifth now (Sligo?) and so on down. There'll be 20 or whatever last in the first division gets left over but that's not a big deal.
What I can't get my wee head round is the fact that a lot of us assumed these dual contracts meant Derry were actually paying UNDER the going rate of wages because of their parlous financial situation.
Now it turns out we were paying well OVER the going rate. That was just crazy and I for one cannot fathom how the Board could ever justify it. Did they think Derry City were somehow immune to the economic facts of life ?