How many LOI clubs have made a formal public response to the Lucid proposal?
Printable View
How many LOI clubs have made a formal public response to the Lucid proposal?
I know with us that there was no statement from our website on this Lucid proposal but from talking to other Longford Town fans we are strongly in favour of Lucid!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
Appreciate fans may be, but I was trying to find official club positions, but am struggling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martinho II
Dundalk chairman Mike Treacy was supportive of an AIL on twitter recentlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
If there's one thing I'd plead with those against the Lucid proposal to stop saying it's things like:
"People are saying an AIL is a magic fix that cures all ills"
"People need to stop thinking it's a silver bullet"
And things of that ilk. I really haven't heard many say that, and I doubt it represents a significant proportion of people. And I certainly doubt it represents a lot of clubs at board level.
I'm 100% pro an all-island league and my opinion on the Lucid proposal is tempered by that. But I do have concerns about what's been released so far. Even that absolute mess of a video that was deleted swiftly from twitter would make me question the judgement of those involved.
Bohs, as a club, haven't released a statement in favour (as far as I know) but board members have voiced there support in personal capacities online. The Bohs official twitter account follows the AIL one. I know how ridiculous it seems to mention that but there you go. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
Why though?Quote:
Originally Posted by bohsmug
But no statement from the club?Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgonigle
Though it may be a bit ironic, iirc, that he is supporting an idea based on a deal with an online TV company, and only recently was on Twitter looking for a 'stream' :rolleyes: to watch a Dundalk game. :D
Post was supposed to readQuote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
-----
If there's one thing I'd plead with those against the Lucid proposal to stop saying it's things like:
"People are saying an AIL is a magic fix that cures all ills"
"People need to stop thinking it's a silver bullet"
And things of that ilk. I really haven't heard many say that, and I doubt it represents a significant proportion of people. And I certainly doubt it represents a lot of clubs at board level.
I'm 100% pro an all-island league and my opinion on the Lucid proposal is tempered by that. But I do have concerns about what's been released so far. Even that absolute mess of a video that was deleted swiftly from twitter would make me question the judgement of those involved.
-----
I don't know how I wrote "isn't" instead of "is". Made a balls of that.
And as stated, the overwhelming majority of those clubs are from a unionist background. That is a simple straightforward statement of fact. Look at the freely available demographics of the clubs/areas concerned. Does that mean every single decision maker in NI football is form a unionist background ? No. Just the majority.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
How can you explain the IFA going back on its decision to have a policy of not playing GSTQ at Cup Finals involving nationalist teams, immediately after the DUP asked to meet them ? Which resulted in the absolute Horlicks that happened with your own club last year. If the IFA genuinely strove to be a neutral middle-of-the-road body it wouldn't have done that. In fact, it probably wouldn't play the anthem at all.
Not at all. Those running individual clubs will take their own views on the basis of what is best for them. Their fans will often take very different views - which would place the likes of Linfield and Crusaders in a difficult position, as their fans appear to be adamantly against the idea. Much of which is summed up in the sort of "two countries, two leagues, end of story" stuff you see posted on the Irish League Forum. That's the unionist mindset that pervades football in the North, and has for years. Donegal Celtic and Lurgan Celtic even had to threaten legal action with the backing of the NI Equality Commission in 2002 to stop their applications to join the League structure continually being blocked. If the IFA did not have a unionist mindset, then it would feel uncomfortable with the anthem and flag issue for internationals and be looking to chance it. But they're not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
Why would it need a statement? He's chairman of the club and the closest employee to the owners. His opinion is the clubs opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
I'm sure if there was a pay stream available for the final he would have paid it. All the more reason to support the idea
But it was not the clubs that made the decision, it was the IFA Board. Are you aware of the current demographics of the Board?Quote:
Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
Yep, money, stadium development and no backbone. Think of the RHI scandal.Quote:
Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
There is much more reasoned debate on ILSF on this subject, than the few "two countries" type poster. Those legal cases are some 17 years ago, and while there are still things that need sorted, the organisation has moved on considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by EatYerGreens
It wasn't the final.Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgonigle
Club statements are made on behalf of a club via their board or management committee.
Mr p, on a tangentley related note what changed about the participation agreement/licencing between 2009(?) start of championship and this season?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
I'm not sure what you are on about tbh.
But still - why should we stop saying that?Quote:
Originally Posted by bohsmug
What's wrong with it?
Do you think we should all think Lucid is great and his plans will come to fruition, or that we should just try it and see? Because as far as I can see, the cornerstone of the proposal is that an AIL is significantly more commercially attractive than either the LoI or the IL. And it's just not, as the Setanta Cup showed.
Again, if someone went before you for a job interview and said they were confident they could double your turnover in 24 months, but they had no CV, references or contacts, would you give them a job?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
But that doesn't matter as he's no longer employed by Dundalk 😏Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgonigle
Different guy, Mike Treacy is still Dundalk Chairman. Mark Devlin has left his position as CEO.Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcgonigle
Thanks for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArFella
Isn't that the second or third CEO in two seasons. Seems to be a very hot seat up there ?
You see, Stu, this sort of stuff is nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
It would be similar to me replying with "so do you think we should all think the FAI is great". Which, of course, is not what you said.
It was hyperbole, of course.
I'm trying to work out (a) what you think I should say and (b) why you think I shouldn't say what I have been saying.
Because it's FAI-esque in the extreme to suggest to people they can't hold certain views, and not give any reasons at all why
The next man will be the 3rd CEO in as many season, it seems these "experienced" EFL guys come over, talk a lot nice words on how they will endeavour to improve the club for everyone, realize the absolute circus that the league and FAI are and run a mile. I don't know who the right man for the job is but the next guy must have some understanding of the league before coming on board because hitting the reset button every year can't be good for the clubs business operations.Quote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled
"Because it's FAI-esque in the extreme to suggest to people they can't hold certain views, and not give any reasons at all why"
This is an extension of the same thing. Misrepresenting an opposing opinion to your own by adding ridiculous statements and presenting that ridiculousness as the counter to your own opinion. It doesn't lend itself to any form of reasonable conversation/debate. It was never suggested (or even hinted at) that you or anybody can't hold certain views.
"and not give any reasons at all why".
My reasoning was literally in the very next line.
"... And things of that ilk. I really haven't heard many say that, and I doubt it represents a significant proportion of people. And I certainly doubt it represents a lot of clubs at board level."
Hold on a sec here bohsmug.
You said -
I've been saying those things, so I'm asking you why you think I shouldn't be saying them. In your above post, you say I shouldn't say these bad things because -Quote:
If there's one thing I'd plead with those against the Lucid proposal to stop saying it's things like:
"People are saying an AIL is a magic fix that cures all ills"
"People need to stop thinking it's a silver bullet"
So let's only have groupthink views which you think might be held by the majority?Quote:
I doubt it represents a significant proportion of people
Would you ever **** off out of that.
When I saw Mal Brannigan had been appointed ceo back when my first thought was these lads haven't a clue & this is going to end in tears.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArFella
Any sort of decent research would have shown Brannigan as a failure every where he's been.
Devlin has only been there since March.
Who ever is the next ceo is very important for Dundalk as this revolving door method of appointments can't continue indefinitely.
They need someone who not only understands the role of ceo but who also has some understanding of how things work in Ireland.
I should add to this that the FAI have said their aim from the current talks is to have the league Top 25 in Europe by 2025. The videos leaked/shared talk about 2/3 year distracts as standard. Is it ten mill the investment being proposed? Even over 5 years, that's serious money for a league that has basically no investment at present. The videos did an excellent job of describing what a successful LoI should look like.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
But Lucid seems to view a AIL as fundamental to that. Other posters on here I think view an AIL in a similar light - a success-in-waiting.
That's why I think it's entirely reasonable to argue that the Lucid proposal comes across as a silver bullet, when it really isn't.
And enough people seem to hold this view that it's worth espousing the opposite
Why doesn't Lucid throw his weight behind the current league get a load of money into it and then invite the NIFL clubs to join.
At this point that is his only prospect of delivering anything,
If the league here is successful the clubs up the North will start to agitate to join just like Celtic and Rangers want to join the EPL
Agree. With the AIL seemingly a dead duck, at least for the foreseeable future it would be hoped that he would lend his backing/experience/ work to date, to the LOI. Longer term a strong vibrant LOI would be more attractive to the IL clubs. it is also likely that any political issues will be diluted further as time goes on, thus negating any influence that may have over IL clubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
Most importantly, it would be a great opportunity to show his methods / structure (even on a scaled down level) could work. If its AIL or nothing one would have to strongly question his whole proposal.
Is that still something the Old Firm is pursuing? I hadn't heard anything about such proposals in years.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
You have no interest in progress, we get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
You couldn't be more wrong, but I do prefer to deal in fact rather than fantasy.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrtndvn
Wouldn't take much notice of that idiotic article.
It'll be interesting to see how Linfield-Dundalk passes off tonight and on Monday. I'm looking forward to both legs, hard to know how seriously both clubs and both sets of supporters are taking it though
Pah, you northern wimps should never go to a Bohs V Shams game so. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_Parker
There is a political dimension to football on this Island, and none more so that Dundalk and Linfield.That is no reason to avoid an AIL any more than Chelsea V West Ham means there sholdn't be an English League. Security precautions are a factor of football in every country, try going to a game in Italy without photo ID or any other example across the world.
It s nothing more than a lame excuse for those looking to avoid change.
Don't recall any crowd tensions outside of the norm in the Setanta.Good well policed friendly away games I was at in Windsor.Oval and Coleraine.
Get that back up and running with Lucids magic money tree.
Recall on the Bohs bus to Windsor Park we were “boarded by the authorities” going into Belfast and got a motorcycle escort. We survived the trauma (police boarding the bus) that’s seems so shocking to that “journalist” and I dare say most could survive it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalymountrower
Counter to his argument on western/midlands teams, surely a vibrant AIL with decent investment would make development of clubs more attractive ? The whole article appears to be “I don’t like the idea and I’m going to come up with something to make it look bad”.
Too much being made about security arrangements in that aritcle. Im surprised at the journalist as tbh I thought it was more tripe by a former editor GAA head at first. No more issue that at some of the higher profile LoI games. Windsor will be no hassle at all and well Oriel Park any security issue is to do with the ground - more with the way all fans have to enter the same side of the ground rather than it being an old ground. (On that and off topic I know but a pending planning application submission for development of land on the Ardee Rd so YDC side of the ground could soon resolve the issue of away and home fans all having to take the same route in to the ground).
Some softening of the NI stance on the Lucid proposals? It's looking like the initial version could be two separate leagues with individual national champions (presumably something like 8 or 10 team leagues with 14/18 game season) before a crossover league to determine all island champions (again similar numbers maybe 8 or 10 teams to finish with a 28 or 36 game season). https://www.the42.ie/ifa-cross-borde...85712-Jan2020/
It'll be interesting to see what comes out of the Hypercube study.
Dont like the idea of a 14 to 18 game league to decide champions (although would have worked well for Rovers last year :) )
Even with 1 guaranteed euro spot for the merged entity a 28 game season to decide AIL winners sounds like a recipe for a lot of meaningless matches ,
Maybe reverse it 28 game season for current league and an 14 game season to decide AIL.
Surely the season with the most at stake in terms of euro places and history should be the longest one.
I'd be more in favour of an all in scenerio then a hybrid that could end up seeing the (all island bit) being treated like the Setanta cup.
I just can't see any grounds on which the north will agree to an All-island league.
There is small 'p' politics at play here, and a certain mentality. Football in the north is a very unionist entity - just look at the clubs in the top 3 tiers, and the areas they represent. Northern football reflects the general mindset within unionism of being happy in their own wee world and wanting as little as possible to do with the south. It's no accident that the international anthem and flag issue remains stubbornly unresolved.
There are of course lots of coherent and sensible arguments against an AIL at the moment. But even if they were addressed, it would still face the fundamental barrier I've outlined above. So I just can't see this project going anywhere in reality.