Printable View
It's consistent with what you've said, other than hollow protestations of being 'for' AIL.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I wonder if any AIL proposal, from any quarter, would meet with your approval. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us as to the exact circumstances in which that might happen.
If that's true, then my apologies. I thought that P1's involvement only started once the decision had been made to train in Ireland.Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
The two main proponents are supporters of clubs with financial issues, so hardly impartial observations either. Was Fenlon just told next seasons budget for him to bring it up again?Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
Pat fenlon expressed a view on the matter as an individual (everyone knows here he is never shy about expressing his view :D). he does not speak for Bohs or the clubs view on the AIL (which I hope would be similar) if and when Bohs want a view expressed they will do so, and not "behind the scenes".Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It is patently obvious that an AIL would have a higher profile at least initially and could be expected to attract new fans to the games. As I said in another post this could be temporary (novelty factor) and it would be up to the League clubs to sell it, but this is easier to do when you have them in the ground.
Bohs already have supporters outside Phibsboro/ north Dublin so that argument is plain stupid.
It appears your objection to the AIL is predicated on the assumption that UCD would not be invited to participate (at least to the top division).
Please point out 1, just 1 quote from a post by Pineapple Stu where he says or implies that.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
No one should have to be "invited"!!Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
as pointed out in earlier posts all his contributions on the topic have been negative, I assume* that the issue of UCD participation may be a factor in his line of thinking.i know it would be a major shock for any poster on here to think of their own club when posting :)Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
* the use of "appears" in the original post
any new League setting up "invites" participants. The criteria the invite is based on is the issue that would need to be clear and transparent and there is no argument from me on the need for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
As far as I can see Stu's arguments are not based on anything to do with where UCD would end up. In likely hood they'd be a second tier team in the beginning much as they are now. In terms of off field criteria they meet all the requirements to participate in any league, they have a decent covered stand and pitch; they keep a tight financial ship. On the field they continue to develop many of the best young players in the league, in all likelihood UCD would eventually find themselves in the top level of an AIL by virtue of their player development and financial prudence. As others have pointed out most of the Northern clubs don't have much bigger fan bases, or better grounds, or more stable finances, eventually the clubs that are run sensibly, assuming licensing rules and the like are followed, will find their place and UCD's is invariably hovering between the premier and first divisions.
It's already in the thread, BD. Go back and read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
marinobohs - as with BohDiddley, I'd have to ask you to stop putting words into my mouth, thanks.
All the more reason... lots of clubs have financial issues or are a sponsor away from them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Sorry PS -- I don't see any substantive statement from you in favour of AIL other than the statements already cited, which are hollow beside the reams of problem-seeking that you've posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You don't see me saying I'm in favour of an AIL?!
I must have said it about three or four times in this thread alone! I've also said what I'd expect from it. I'm not going to hold you by the hand and teach you how to read, FFS. Go off and have another look, and don't bother suggesting I'm avoiding questions I've already answered.
LOL at the notion that problem-seeking is a problem with you - should we just blindly go with the plans instead?
Just a side note: an AIL would, if it had the blessings of the FAI and IFA, have half as many European places as currently are in the IL and LoI. This would presumably offset any initial gains.
On to the main issue: every year (hell, several times a year on here), there are proposed changes which will make things better. All the while, as we oscillate wildly between 10 team and 12 team divisions, clubs are going bankrupt or begging their fans and/or creditors for a bailout, players are going unpaid, and the needs of long term development is going unanswered. Sort that **** out, and we might, might, have some chance of convincing the public that a shiny new AIL is the next big sporting bandwagon.
No. That's not what I said, old chum.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
No, we should support the proposal to get everyone in a room to discuss it.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
:confused:My response to your suggestion of combining the 2 existing leagues and leaving them pretty much as they are is also in the thread, but you've managed to ignore responding to that.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
How would you propose combining two leagues with a combined 50 senior teams and then just leaving them as they are ? :confused:
Who do you think should run such a league - the associations who sat back and watched the individual leagues decline ? The league's/clubs who have proven themselves incapable of running anything in the past ?
Why don't you like Platinum 1, now that Jim Roddy is off the scene ?
As for the assertion that your motivation in disliking an AIL is at least partly due to being a UCD supporter, that was clear from previous threads we've had on this over the last 12-18mths. (and no I won't spend a couple of hours of my life trawling back to find them, as you know yourself from recent experience how hard it is to find and post from old threads).
But this actually proves the arguement for an AIL, rather than counter it.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
Every year there's tinkering changes to the league. Changes of the sort that will do nothing to improve the appeal of the product. Do you know of anyone who has got into the LOI purely as a result of the drop in Premier division size from 12 to 10 ??? :confused:
Conversely an AIL offers a significant step-change for the league, not just tinkering. Change of the calibre that will get the media interested inseeing how it unfolds. The media didn't give a rat's arse when we reduced the size of the premier division. I have absolutely no dobt that not just media here, but also elsewhere in Euope, nay the world, would have an interest in how our combined leagues fared. Much of that interest may be as much socio-political as footballing. But it's inteesst none the less, which we're starved of in the individual leagues.
Sure, we'd get attention. And then Bohs would go bust, and any goodwill we'd accrued would be gone again.
But it doesn't offer significant change, not without serious work on establishing and correcting the key reasons why domestic football isn't popular on this island. And the work that needs to be done can be done without the advent of an AIL - indeed, as John83 has said, it should be done before we talk about an AIL, so that when an aIL finally does come about, people who are convinced to give it a shot will actually find something to come back for.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfcsteve
Everybody talks about the danger of novelty wearing off, but nobody seems concerned enough to try and stop that happening.
And I'm not so sure that the media, who literally didn't cross the road to cover Bohs or Pats admirable performances in Europe just a couple of weeks ago, are going to show much interest in what is essentially the same quality of product, available in the same venues, just under a different name.