FAI proposals for future of Eircom League...

Low attendance alone wont get you kicked out of the league ? I should not have said a crowd of 83 gets you kicked out but a crowd of 83 at your home game is a good indication your not good enough for the Premiership the FAI are trying to implement.

Its a system where you are capable of gaining 1000 points. You could have 0 people at your games and still survive. It makes up a part of the overall criteria for the Premiership Clubs.

Ive said this in another thread but its worth repeating.

Everyone agrees the Club Licence idea is a great one (when implemented correctly and fairly). The Club Licence does not take into account your final league position does it? Clubs can be booted out of the Premier on the basis of not meeting seating rules or whatever other rule gets you the boot.

Nobody seems to have a problem with that ?

I was a little worried that the decision would be taken behind closed doors and the elite group announced at some press conference but I have to say Im impressed so far with the details of how the 1000 points are made up.

The 50% off field points will come down to a matter of opinion by this board but as long as they are fair in their approach I dont see why any club can complain. They do have the 500 points broken down a little so it should be fairly transparent why clubs didnt get the required points and the FAI cant hide on why they refused clubs entry.

Also it was said even if you are out of the initial 12 teams you have the option of promotion at the end of the next season and have that year to put in place things like A League teams and other aspects that will mean your are able to meet the criteria set down by the FAI.

I really think Clubs should try and gain as many points as possible over the coming months and not continue to moan as t why they cant meet x y and z.

If you dont aim for anything you wont get anywhere.

I'm not surprised at the UCD fans being most vocal about this issue, if I supported them I'd probably be saying the same thing.

BUT to focus on one of the non-sporting criteria, PS and some of the others have eloquently tried to state that the shouldn't need a bigger ground than their support demands.

However, we had an example within the last 12 months of how this is patently not the case.

The League Cup final was held in Belfield and was, to be frank, a joke. Attendence was around 2,000 and the majority of fans were forced to stand, with no terracing, other than a grass bank, and no cover.

Those who were able to get into the stand brought their rosary beads as the wooden beams bounced up and down under the fans. How this stand gets Health and Safety approval I don't know.

If UCD were to attract a similar crowd again, the planned facilities for the Bowl would not suffice for a similar attendence, never mind a growing attendance.

Your views are based on the premise that domestic football is perpetually doomed to be a small time minority interest.

Why should forward thinking clubs be held back by your lack of ambition?

I'm glad some people are willing to try, and fail if necessary, rather than not try at all.

UCD's success is admirable, but it is contingent on the rest of the League not growing, as UCD as a club clearly don't have the appetite for growth.

By all means support your team and oppose the changes, but at least have the honesty to admit that your team has least to gain from a stronger domestic game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

UCD can and have survived comfortably on low gates for over two decades now. I don't think Dublin City can, but that's a matter for their board. The figures themselves are irrelevant. If you can manage to survive and put a team on the park that is capable of not getting relegated from the Premier Division then clearly it's no reason to kick someone out. I'd be more worried about a club pushing it so close with the Revenue that they earned themselves a winding up notice in the paper.

---

It may have escaped your attention but the FAI are trying to set about changing the view of the barstoolers.

It is hoped (this is my feeling from what they say) that with a set of clubs in the Premiership all capable of attracting bigger crowds that something will snowball and maybe, just maybe!, that we will see a league where grounds have decent gates and the publics opinion that nobody goes to the games will be changed. If you have a set of teams in the premiership that are capable of attracting good crowds through proper marketing then why are you against it?

Your crowd of a few 100 might be good enough for you to survive but its damaging to the EL as a whole and despite the good work of other clubs in the league it appears that some teams are happy enough just to survive and dont have any real ambition.

Its all about changing opinions and I dont think 2 Dublin teams playing in Dublin to a crowd of 83 is acceptable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

BUT to focus on one of the non-sporting criteria, PS and some of the others have eloquently tried to state that the shouldn't need a bigger ground than their support demands.

However, we had an example within the last 12 months of how this is patently not the case.

The League Cup final was held in Belfield and was, to be frank, a joke. Attendence was around 2,000 and the majority of fans were forced to stand, with no terracing, other than a grass bank, and no cover.

Those who were able to get into the stand brought their rosary beads as the wooden beams bounced up and down under the fans. How this stand gets Health and Safety approval I don't know.

---

The eL set out the rules for this competition full well knowing the state of the ground of all the eL clubs. It was set that the a coin toss between the finalists would determine where the venue was held. No preconditions about stadium standards were set out before hand. We were more than entitled to host the final and I think we did a fine job. There was seated capacity for about 1,000 and not everyone even bothered to pay the extra few euro to avail of it.

Quote:

---

If UCD were to attract a similar crowd again, the planned facilities for the Bowl would not suffice for a similar attendence, never mind a growing attendance.

---

We're designing the Bowl to meet the standards set out by the UEFA licencing. What more can we do? A League Cup final is about the one anomalous occasion where we'll struggle to host the occasion. If Derry got into the CL, the Brandywell would prove more than inadequate. Look at Shels, they could potentially draw over 20,000 for a CL tie. Should they go out and build a 20k seater for that one rare occasion?

Quote:

---

Your views are based on the premise that domestic football is perpetually doomed to be a small time minority interest.

---

I believe that to be true to a certain extent.

Quote:

---

Why should forward thinking clubs be held back by your lack of ambition?

---

What you call lack of ambition I call pragmatism.

Quote:

---

I'm glad some people are willing to try, and fail if necessary, rather than not try at all.

---

I'm not. I've chatted to Jim Roddy about this before and while I found his enthusiasm and desire to push domestic football forward most admirable and infectous, I also found his stated goals to be unrealistic and he seemed to lack a good explanation as to how to get there.

Quote:

---

UCD's success is admirable, but it is contingent on the rest of the League not growing, as UCD as a club clearly don't have the appetite for growth.

---

I believe that a rising tide lifts all ships and a positively viewed league by the Irish public would benefit ourselves too. I don't feel there's as much room for growth as others believe and I fail to see how any of this goes towards achieving significant growth.

Quote:

---

By all means support your team and oppose the changes, but at least have the honesty to admit that your team has least to gain from a stronger domestic game.

---

UCD has as much to gain as anyone from a stronger domestic game, but I don't see how some of these changes help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by higgins

It may have escaped your attention but the FAI are trying to set about changing the view of the barstoolers.

---

That may be so, but I see little in the plan that's going to do so.

Quote:

---

It is hoped (this is my feeling from what they say) that with a set of clubs in the Premiership all capable of attracting bigger crowds that something will snowball and maybe, just maybe!, that we will see a league where grounds have decent gates and the publics opinion that nobody goes to the games will be changed. If you have a set of teams in the premiership that are capable of attracting good crowds through proper marketing then why are you against it?

---

Do you realise that most of the teams currently capable of attracting the biggest crowds are already in the Premier Division? Replacing say Dublin City and UCD with Shamrock Rovers and Limerick is not going to significantly change the average crowds or the league all that much. You make it sound like some radical groundbreaking change. The teams towards the lower end of the table are still going to get poor attendances and the teams towards the top better attendances. The difference of a few hundred in the average attendance of the league and a couple of bigger gates for every club will not be enough to get anyone off their barstool.

Quote:

---

Your crowd of a few 100 might be good enough for you to survive but its damaging to the EL as a whole and despite the good work of other clubs in the league it appears that some teams are happy enough just to survive and dont have any real ambition.

---

It's pragmatism and reality. All leagues have teams of varying sizes and capabilities. Not all 92 clubs in the English league can win the Premiership and not all 22 clubs in Ireland can win the Premier Division. That's reality. We're the only set of fans who treat clubs not wanting to win everything beyond their scope as an offence.

Quote:

---

Its all about changing opinions and I dont think 2 Dublin teams playing in Dublin to a crowd of 83 is acceptable.

---

Two Dublin clubs playing to a crowd of about 2000 is hardly acceptable either. It's a league wide problem, not a UCD or Dublin City problem.

Dublin City only "survive" because they are in Dublin with options to rent grounds & sign players from other teams that got relegated to failed to be promoted. If they were in any other county they would not exist.

Will there be minimum entry criteria to the new Premiership from 2008, minimum facilities?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

We were more than entitled to host the final and I think we did a fine job. There was seated capacity for about 1,000 and not everyone even bothered to pay the extra few euro to avail of it.

---

First of all the stand sold out 30 mins before kick off.

And having the option of standing on a open grass bank or jostling around a rail at pitch level is unacceptable.

You were entitled to hold the final but your facilities weren't up to it.

And UEFA licensing standards are minimum standards. Many League's impose higher standards as the FAI is planning to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

Two Dublin clubs playing to a crowd of about 2000 is hardly acceptable either. It's a league wide problem, not a UCD or Dublin City problem.

---

You have to be joking with that last remark ?
If we all get crowds of 2000 for home games after the changes are made I would be well happy. Certainly the crowd was not as high as it has been in recent seasons but to go slag off a crowd of what I would have put closer to 3000 is dumb. If you cant see the difference between gates of a few hundred and a few thousand then you have no hope of understanding what the FAI wnat from this change.

and your very very wrong saying playing Rovers is little different to playing Dublin City or UCD?

In a Premiership of 10 teams where you get gates of around 2,000 for your 18 home games its a massive difference. When your fans can come to games where you get a decent crowd everytime it becomes a habit for people. Looking at fixtures and not showing up for UCD and Dublin is only serving to further isolate fans from the EL.

Having to play the likes of UCD and Dublin City is holding the rest of the clubs back despite what you think.

I will have to end this debate now as its clear to me your fighting your UCD corner and your not looking at the overall picture. Good luck to you in trying to stand in the way of anything that would improve the league we all watch but I hope the FAI win out.

Did say what more could you do but to aim for the minimum standards of the 1,500 seats ???
Its that attitude that holds your club back....

This shake up cant come soon enough for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

First of all the stand sold out 30 mins before kick off.

---

People chose not to take their seats then. There were empty seats.

Quote:

---

And having the option of standing on a open grass bank or jostling around a rail at pitch level is unacceptable.

You were entitled to hold the final but your facilities weren't up to it.

And UEFA licensing standards are minimum standards. Many League's impose higher standards as the FAI is planning to.

---

No standards were set out in the League Cup rules. How else do you think we got the final? We were entitled to as we won the coin toss. UEFA licencing standards had nothing to do with the League Cup. Now look, I don't pretend our ground is great, but we are looking to address the matter. We have sought planning application to upgrade the Belfield Bowl and hope to have it done in time for next season. There's not a lot more we can do at this moment in time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Higgins

You have to be joking with that last remark ?
If we all get crowds of 2000 for home games after the changes are made I would be well happy. Certainly the crowd was not as high as it has been in recent seasons but to go slag off a crowd of what I would have put closer to 3000 is dumb. If you cant see the difference between gates of a few hundred and a few thousand then you have no hope of understanding what the FAI wnat from this change.

---

I am not slagging off the crowd, I am simply saying all the crowds between Dublin clubs are poor. There's something hugely wrong here and shuffling a few clubs around and changing a name will not fix it. Indeed, I don't think it can ever be fixed barring Abramovich like investment into all clubs. We can make a small positive difference, yes, but at what price? Going against fundemental sporting principles? The EPL could put the likes of Leeds into the Premiership and drop Wigan and you can guarantee that attendances will rise. The SPL could put Dundee into the SPL in place of Inverness and attendances would rise. Sure, we can do the same, but that's not what football is about.

Quote:

---

nd your very very wrong saying playing Rovers is little different to playing Dublin City or UCD?

---

On the night you'll have a bigger crowd, in the grand scheme of things you'll just have one added bigger gate. You're the one telling me to look at the league as a whole.

Quote:

---

I will have to end this debate now as its clear to me your fighting your UCD corner and your not looking at the overall picture. Good luck to you in trying to stand in the way of anything that would improve the league we all watch but I hope the FAI win out.

---

I support the wage cap, I support a name change if it's positive, I support a pyramid system. I'll support the introduction of proper minimum standards across the board like stadium and structure, that are properly imposed no matter who can meet them. I won't support marketing criteria like crowd sizes, catchment area, geographical spread deciding placings in a league. If you call that progress, so be it, I call it franchise football.

Quote:

---

Did say what more could you do but to aim for the minimum standards of the 1,500 seats ???
Its that attitude that holds your club back....

---

It's called pragmatism. Show me a proper league where all the clubs are challenging for the title. Not being able to recognise your club's limits, that will destroy the league.

with respect PS, you sound like a worried UCD fan rather than a defender of irish football. where did you get 'franchise football' from?

the reality is ucd have not put the required infrastructure in place and only published a vague plan for a new ground after the writing was on the wall. you have had many years to upgrade your ground and havent bothered, spending all your budget on players. now the chickens are coming home to roost.

there are too many clubs in dublin, and after chf you have least to bring to the party. its a harsh reality but for once the Fai seem to be doing something radical with the domestic game and going after poorly run clubs. and i see very little in there that isnt logical and just. and rovers are far from safe btw

Ha, you can all call me ambitionless & a moaner & blah blah blah but in my opinion you're all living in a eL dreamworld.

This new shakeup will not bring bigger crowds or generate more interest. LoI football is what it is because of the English leagues. Thats where our players are & that where most of Irish footballs current/ future fans do/ will look to as their league. This is never going to change.

Giving the likes of Jason Byrne & Glen Crowe a token run for Ireland at friendlies is the best thing to happen to the eL. Kids can go & watch capped Ireland players at the weekend. But this doesn't happen enought for it to have an impact.

We are the fans of Irish football because we've been brought up on it. Barstoolers are not eL fans they're Man U fans & Liverpool fans coz thats what they were brough up on. If they want to see their team they have to watch it on telly. If we want to see our team we usually have to go to the match. Thats why I think no extra cash & no shakeup is going to change what the LoI is.

If they're going to have this new "Premiership", which no doubt they are, then I think the FAI should just get the teams to sign up for it not based on the points system but based on your finishing at the end of the year as they did across the water.

But its the FAI & at the end of the day they'll get their way. I think nothing will have changed in 5 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colie

Ha, you can all call me ambitionless & a moaner & blah blah blah but in my opinion you're all living in a eL dreamworld.

This new shakeup will not bring bigger crowds or generate more interest. LoI football is what it is because of the English leagues. Thats where our players are & that where most of Irish footballs current/ future fans do/ will look to as their league. This is never going to change.

Giving the likes of Jason Byrne & Glen Crowe a token run for Ireland at friendlies is the best thing to happen to the eL. Kids can go & watch capped Ireland players at the weekend. But this doesn't happen enought for it to have an impact.

We are the fans of Irish football because we've been brought up on it. Barstoolers are not eL fans they're Man U fans & Liverpool fans coz thats what they were brough up on. If they want to see their team they have to watch it on telly. If we want to see our team we usually have to go to the match. Thats why I think no extra cash & no shakeup is going to change what the LoI is.

If they're going to have this new "Premiership", which no doubt they are, then I think the FAI should just get the teams to sign up for it not based on the points system but based on your finishing at the end of the year as they did across the water.

But its the FAI & at the end of the day they'll get their way. I think nothing will have changed in 5 years.

---

the difference between the lauch of the EPL and here and now is that the clubs here are not run to the same high standards.

the FAI are saying 'we are rebranding and relaunching the EL, more money, better admin, better marketing. but we insist on a few changes, mostly to the way some of you are run. clean up your acts or we will act for you' and thats fine with me, becase the clubs wont by and large run themselves well without both a carrott and a stick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

with respect PS, you sound like a worried UCD fan rather than a defender of irish football. where did you get 'franchise football' from?

---

Actually, I disagree with the formula on principle. From seeing the way it has been put in the document I am a lot less frightened than I was for our place.

Quote:

---

the reality is ucd have not put the required infrastructure in place and only published a vague plan for a new ground after the writing was on the wall. you have had many years to upgrade your ground and havent bothered, spending all your budget on players. now the chickens are coming home to roost.

---

We would have had an upgraded Belfield Park in place but for the college getting a grant to build a research centre there. However, you are right about the fact that we're not up to standard. However, the FAI decided not to implement the licencing properly given that Derry were the one side to take it seriously. Had we been the only ones that didn't then I would accept our demotion. We have applied for planning permission, there's not much more we can do at the moment.

Quote:

---

there are too many clubs in dublin, and after chf you have least to bring to the party. its a harsh reality but for once the Fai seem to be doing something radical with the domestic game and going after poorly run clubs. and i see very little in there that isnt logical and just. and rovers are far from safe btw

---

As long as all 6 clubs can sustain themselves then there is enough. I'm not sure if Dublin City can, but the rest of us are able. UCD don't dilute any other club's support, I don't see how they are one Dublin club too many. Is there too many clubs in Monaghan? How are they going after poorly run clubs? They're going after small clubs, there is a difference. My feeling is that Shels are being poorly run, but I doubt they're being persued for it.

Where did I come up with the term franchise football? You find me a league that recently came up with its participants using criteria such as location, fanbase, merketability etc. that wasn't a franchise league.

Why do people consider franchise football as a bad thing???? It works in other countries and other sports???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sullanefc

Why do people consider franchise football as a bad thing???? It works in other countries and other sports???

---

It goes against sporting principles. I support my club in hope that they will be rewarded for their performances on the field, not for their potential marketability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

It goes against sporting principles. I support my club in hope that they will be rewarded for their performances on the field, not for their potential marketability.

---

What are your sporting principles??

Are you saying that sports that have franchises, do not have sporting principles???

American sports, australian sports, Irish rugby (munster/Leinster) our own GAA at intercounty level is a franchise. Do they lack sporting principles???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sullanefc

What are your sporting principles??

Are you saying that sports that have franchises, do not have sporting principles???

American sports, australian sports, Irish rugby (munster/Leinster) our own GAA at intercounty level is a franchise. Do they lack sporting principles???

---

I view those set ups as fundementally different to the principals that soccer generally works under, yes. I believe paramount emphasis should be placed on what happens on the field of play. As long as clubs are fairly putting players on the park and are not comprimising the safety of the crowd I believe the pitch should determine the rest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

I view those set ups as fundementally different to the principals that soccer generally works under, yes. I believe paramount emphasis should be placed on what happens on the field of play. As long as clubs are fairly putting players on the park and are not comprimising the safety of the crowd I believe the pitch should determine the rest.

---

The Australian league was revitalised earlier this year when franchising was brought in. Crowds have never been higher. It could work here.

As I said if it is good enough for other countries and other sports, why not here???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sullanefc

The Australian league was revitalised earlier this year when franchising was brought in. Crowds have never been higher. It could work here.

As I said if it is good enough for other countries and other sports, why not here???

---

The only instances I can think of franchise soccer are Australia, Japan, South Korea, United States and maybe one or two other Asian countries. The A-League involved wiping out some clubs and inventing new ones. If that's the price of higher crowds then I don't agree. As I said, yes, you can pick the top 10 or 12 clubs most likely to create the optimum average attendance, however that's not football. If that's your vision of football then I want no part of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogue Trader

What about UCD/Trinity/DIT United it would Tripple your attendances i say for sure ? :confused:

---

We draw our support from the locality, not the student population. We already have one club claiming to represent all of Dublin.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogue Trader

What about UCD/Trinity/DIT United it would Tripple your attendances i say for sure ? :confused:

---

That sounds like a great idea RT:p.

I see nothing wrong with franchising except where clubs moved around the country as in the US.

However i don't see much in the FAI proposals that will transform irish football in a dramatic manner. Everything bolis down to need for increased crowds as everything will flow from that - tv, media, facilities, improved players etc...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

Everything bolis down to need for increased crowds as everything will flow from that - tv, media, facilities, improved players etc...

---

It's catch 22, you'll never get your increased crowds without the latter. These new measures are not going to meaningfully increase crowds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

It's catch 22, you'll never get your increased crowds without the latter. These new measures are not going to meaningfully increase crowds.

---

I think you're being too harsh on them there. The 10,000 marketing money for each club will help, as will any other improvement in advertising. If the 'A' league creates a situation where clubs are trying to get into the league that'll increase the profile as well.

What won't improve crowds are gimmicks like name changes (or, for that matter, swapping between 10 and 12 teams again and again).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Student Mullet

I think you're being too harsh on them there. The 10,000 marketing money for each club will help, as will any other improvement in advertising.

---

Well obviously that's going to help. But I've seen nothing that's going to help that necessitates the formulaic selection process.

we really need to see crowds of 5,000 at the bigger games more often. Its only Cork vs other big clubs down at turners cross that get those figures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Student Mullet

The 10,000 marketing money for each club will help, as will any other improvement in advertising.

---

Not sure, but i'm going to hazard a guess that the 10,000 will be a carrot to employ a marketing manager. A position that will cost at least 30,000 before a car, office, phone, tax, pension. a total of probably closer to 40,000. clubs will only recieve the 10,000 when they commit to spending a further 30k with it.

All well and good, but a marketing manager is no good without a marketing budget, whats the cost of an ad in a local or national paper, TV advertising, Radio advertising. You wouldn't get much change out of 100k for a decent years advertising your target audience.

Its all positive. and i think its all good, but you can't pick and choose which teams you would like in the league next season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pete

I see nothing wrong with franchising except where clubs moved around the country as in the US.

---

I don't agree with that either, but a closed shop league that included teams with big followings and positive images can't be a bad thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sullanefc

I don't agree with that either, but a closed shop league that included teams with big followings and positive images can't be a bad thing.

---

But why would clubs get big crowds if they continually had nothing to play for. 12 teams in a league, 5/6 would have something to play for. Thats not good at all...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

But why would clubs get big crowds if they continually had nothing to play for. 12 teams in a league, 5/6 would have something to play for. Thats not good at all...

---

Fair point

delaney was on radio 1 yesterday talkin bout new league. most what he said was encouraging. he's sure the proposal will be endorsed will and that he met with 4 or 5 clubs already and will meet with the rest to disuss it during the week. on the mereger he said that it needed to be done and that marneygate cost the fai a sh*tload in legal fees but it had nothin to do with them. he said that they want to have a live game every week within a year or two.

It seems like there are two issues here. First, who gets to play in the top flight first time round. Second, should there be a closed shop franchise in the longer round. These are separate issues IMO and I would certainly be utterly opposed to a league run on a closed shop basis in the long run. But, I don't get the sense that that is what is being proposed here.

But I am not posting to express my views, but to direct your attention to an academic paper on franchise vs non-franchise league arrangements, available at

http://www.economics.adelaide.edu.au...rtsleagues.doc

which some of you might find interesting.

Okay, just got my hands on the FAI figures in use for working out the 300 points for the last five seasons record. Guess what they have only worked out the last four seasons. This is the actual record that they have given to clubs. Also the figures include some dodgy records. Shels are top of the list, with a european total of 18.5 (1 pt for a win, 0.5 for a draw). Don't know about any of you, but with a record like that, surely they should have been in a quarter final or something.

A fair few numbers of mistakes, basic things like league placings.

Shels european record accoring to the official (confidential) FAI figures are as follows (actual results in brackets)

2001-2002
CL V Brondby 0-2 0-3
FAI: No Season Record - Actual: 0 pts

2002-2003
CL V Hibernian 2-2 0-1
FAI: 1.5 - Actual 0.5

2003
UEFA V Olimpija Ljubljana 0-1 2-3
FAI: 0 - Actual 0

2004
CL V KR 2-2 0-0
CL V Hajduk Split 2-3 2-0
CL V Deportivo 0-0 0-3
UEFA V Lille OSC 2-2 0-2
FAI: 9.5 - Actual: 3

2005
CL V Glentoran 2-1 4-1
CL V Steaua Bucharest 0-0 1-4
FAI: 7.5 - Actual: 2.5

Total FAI: 18.5 - Actual Total: 6

This extra points pushs Shels from fifth in the proper table to top spot in the FAI listing.

So in this one example the FAI are missing a season, and three of the remaining four are incorrect. There are also mistakes in the records for Longford Town.

Actually going through my original figures, there are a number of minor mistakes. I have an updated file, with the correct figures. the existing places are as follows: (FAI position in brackets)

1 Bohemians (4)
2 Cork City (3)
3 Derry City (5)
4 Longford Town (2)
5 Shelbourne (1)
6 St. Patricks Athletic (7)
7 Shamrock Rovers (8)
8 Drogheda United (6)
9 UCD (10)
10 Waterford United (9)
11 Bray Wanderers (11)
12 Finn Harps (12)
13 Dublin City (13)
14 Galway United (15)
15 Sligo Rovers (14)
16 Dundalk(19)
17 Cobh Ramblers (17)
18 Kildare County (16)
19 Limerick (18)
20 Kilkenny City (20)
21 Monaghan United (21)
22 Athlone Town (22)

If the FAI can't even have correct scores for the only currently quantifiable section of the criteria. It doesn't bode particularly well does it!!!

Isn't the current season the 5th of the 5 season average?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Isn't the current season the 5th of the 5 season average?

---

my reading was no, 30% this season, 20% past 5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roverstillidie

my reading was no, 30% this season, 20% past 5

---

Fair enough.
I'd be more surprised if the FAI got the calculations right to be honest. Thems hard sums......:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by floatinghoop

It seems like there are two issues here. First, who gets to play in the top flight first time round. Second, should there be a closed shop franchise in the longer round. These are separate issues IMO and I would certainly be utterly opposed to a league run on a closed shop basis in the long run. But, I don't get the sense that that is what is being proposed here.

But I am not posting to express my views, but to direct your attention to an academic paper on franchise vs non-franchise league arrangements, available at

http://www.economics.adelaide.edu.au...rtsleagues.doc

which some of you might find interesting.

---

Very good article :ball:

I can't see anything in it that wil get us to a viable stage as a league. Am I missing something - 65% on turnover on wages doesen't actually mean anything (I like the theory) - as lump sums from directors can also be off the books its impossible to fully implement.

The promotions grant is that a one year or an annual subvention? What if you were relegated do you lose the subvention and the person loses their job? Bottom line a club gets 10k towards a 40k min bill.

Costing clubs an extra 7k to be a member of premiership - so now that 10k promotions grant is down to 3k!.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Partizan

Look, if you go down do as one Rovers fan here said, take it on the chin and come back up. I think the proposals are perhaps the only concrete, professional and forward thinking plan that the FAI has ever dreamed up regarding the development of senior football in this country (no smart comments please). if this is done right, this could totally revolutionise the league from top to bottom. I'm in favour of the proposals and if Waterford are in line for the chop then so be it. I will not throw a big hissy fit and cry foul. Why because this is better for the League and the development of football in general even if it is at the expense of Waterford. If we go down, we go down full stop. We will come back as we have done before.

Right now UCD need to get their house in order as do many other Clubs including us. A couple of years sabbatical in the First Division might be what we need but you have to say that Waterford have a helluva lot more going for them than UCD in terms of infrastructure, marketablility and catchment area. UCD's future in the League IMO is guaranteed. They have and will continue to offer alot to football. However if I was a Dublin City fan I'd be sweating it right now. No ground, no support, no potential...

If anyone will be getting the boot in 2 years time it has to be this lot.

---

POTM.

Breifne Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Derry dont share their ground. Hopefully we'll be sorted soon. These clubs have potential and a future. CHF dont. You wont be getting the boot cos you'll implode before then.

KOH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NY Hoop

POTM.

Breifne Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Derry dont share their ground. Hopefully we'll be sorted soon. These clubs have potential and a future. CHF dont. You wont be getting the boot cos you'll implode before then.

KOH

---

This is so rich coming from you. Not too long ago there was this club, lets call them tallaght rovers with no grounds, debts everywhere. And in danger of relegation. They decided they couldn't continue like that so they decided lets pay everyone 4% of what we owe them, steal a manager from your closest relegation rivals at a crucial time of the season and start from new.

Their massive debt gets taken off their shoulders, the manager turns out to be a lunatic who doesn't even last until his former club actually do manage to be the direct club to relegated this former great. Their fans discuss how great the supporters club and the now completely reformed tallaght rovers are.

A free stadium, and 96% of your debts wiped out. Every club in the world would be grateful to just still be in the league if they were in the situation that you have been in for the past few seasons. We may be riddled with debt and share a ground, but we have an arrangement with Bohemians. AC Milan and Inter manage to co-habitat, as do Roma & Lazio. That has nothing to do with anything.

Each and every club should be more worried about building up their own fan base, rather than relying on other clubs to bring their fans to increase up their coffers.