Printable View
There is blame on both sides . Yes the first budget should not have been proposed at all . Then a revised budget was still unrealistic .
The cloth has now been cut to measure regretably at AMs expense and what he promised. But its simple maths and we deal with it or half way through
the season we are gone and for good this time.
The FAI need to put a salary cap on the league so its all part time.
stupid suggestion not even worth explaining to you whats wrong with your thinking that everyone should be part-time.....
Outcome from the meeting tonight , our budget was never refused by the fai because it was never submitted in the first place . Meetings were held with the fai and consultation and advice was given about the proposed budget . AM was given a budget but it has since been reduced in a big way . We are completely tax compliant and debt free but have a tiny budget going forward . 2 players have left in the last 2 days with lots more to follow , AM may also walk . But one thing is for sure the measures are being taken now instead of the middle of the season .We may very well be relegated but at least it will be on the pitch ..
Good to hear Ndrog........Roll on the louth derby!!!!!!!!! Wouldnt have been the same without it....Gaynor signed for us tonight...good playerQuote:
Originally Posted by ndrog
So was the LSC game called off because of this? Also who was the second player that left? I know Kenna signed for us, but who else is gone?
Cheers shep .Not looking forward to getting beaten on more regular basis than even last season but feck it , it least we are alive a cutting our cloth accordingly .gaynor is a good player who will do well for you .Damn it !Quote:
Originally Posted by shep
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndrog
Why was it not submitted?
There was a deadline for submitting budgets as part of the Licence application process.
Have the FAI fudged on another deadline and why were Drogs stalling?
I take it that the bottom line of what you were told at the meeting is that Drogheda will be in a position to get a licence and take their place in the premier division? I really hope that this is the case, for the sake of the supporters in Drogheda, for the wider good of the league, and in our own self-interest as near neighbours - the gate receipts from games against Drogheda are vitally important to us too!Quote:
Originally Posted by ndrog
If that is the case then the detail of what you were told is perhaps not vitally important to "outsiders" - but if your post is an accurate representation of what you were told you have every right to be very sceptical. For example, the claim that no budget was submitted and rejected by the FAI is simply not plausible, or that Alan Matthews was acting in good faith in agreeing deals oblivious to the budgetry problems. Additionally the impression that the players were given that a 10% reduction in wages would adequately solve the budget problem is obviously a nonsense when the reduction in budget may well be more like 30%.
The best strategy for survival for Drogheda United is to tell it straight to those who care most - Drogheda supporters. I hope that it is so.
Quote:
PFAI chief Stephen McGuinness has criticised the FAI for issuing official contracts to Drogheda United to sign new players before their budget was sanctioned........................
http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-2055634.html?
Good article, but nobody serious is asked any questions (not knocking the PFAI). I hope the FAI can come out strongly in this as I do see why SPC's were issued in advance, but surely if a club then can't afford said contracts they should be null and void. Good luck to DUFC in sorting this out.
Glad to hear that recent mistakes are being correctly early. I would still urge fans to find out why they happened in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by ndrog
I wouldn't worry too much about relegation. Any premier club that survives the season will stay in the Premier.
A reply taken from our forumQuote:
Originally Posted by Buile Shuibhne
PFAI chief Stephen McGuinness has criticised the FAI for issuing official contracts (Untrue) to Drogheda United to sign new players before their budget was sanctioned.
Worried recruits now fear they are tied (Untrue, not contracts signed) to the Louth club after they were asked to take a pay cut before a ball has been kicked in the new League of Ireland season.
Drogheda organised an information meeting for fans last night to discuss their plight after their latest budget submission was refused by the FAI (Untrue, no budget was submitted never mind knocked down) . It's understood they are dealing with a deficit in the region of €30,000 and there is some hope that a major sponsor might be willing to help out (Inaccurate).
However, they have angered players by asking them to take a 12.5pc pay cut, although some signings (We dont have any signings) have offered to take part in fundraising initiatives.
Others are aggrieved though, with Drogheda having outbid St Patrick's Athletic and Dundalk to snap up available talent before it emerged they didn't have the money to pay them in full for the entire campaign (No players signed, any agreement was a verbal agreement. All players were free to keep their options open like Conor Kenna did).
Now, the players union have expressed concerns that those who signed the league's Standard Players Contract (SPC) could be bound to an arrangement (Not one contract signed!)-- even though the contracts can't be officially registered until Drogheda's figures get the Abbotstown go-ahead.
One player was at the club's United Park base yesterday in search of a copy of his contract and McGuinness believes that the order of registration is all wrong (Good luck to him finding that piece of imaginary paper). "Until budgets are agreed, the clubs shouldn't be given out SPC's to sign anyone," he said.
Like do they even try to get the facts straight!?
Players were originally offered X amount of money in the original draft budget. However, since the start of the year due to the recession businesses have been pulling sponsorship that was promised. Therefore the club have to keep paring away at the original budget. Until this week, when they have been able to settle on a final budget. That is prudent financial planning for the future. And is nothing but admirable in this League. It is regrettable that the players we had hoped to sign are now being offered less. But would they rather be offered a 50% wage cut after 2 weeks of the league or be given the option to stay or go under no false promises before the league starts and before they put pen to paper on a contract.
This way the agreement between player and Droghed United will be honoured by the club if signed.
And for this 'the best' of the Irish sporting media manages to contrive it into something negative and dishonest. Utter ****e.
_________________
We know why it happened . Original budgets were to high due to sponsorship promised not coming good . Alot like mid way through the season in Dundalk when players had to take a pay cut . Just glad its happened now rather than during the season .Quote:
Originally Posted by White Horse
ndrog, I don't know if you are giving your own independent opinion here, or re-hashing what the club have told DU supporters. Irrespective of which it us, the most important thing is that Drogheda United are able to take their place in the premier and can cut the cloth financially for the season ahead.
I also agree with you that it is positive that Drogheda are taking the necessary steps now rather then be unable to honour commitments during the season. But the claims that no contracts were signed by players and that no budget was submitted to the FAI are dubious. Some players clearer understood that they had accepted offers and had signed up on contractual terms (no idea if it was on SPC documents), and as far as I am aware a submission of a budget proposal for 2010 season was a pre-requisite of the licensing application to be submitted by January 29.
In fairness, while that post does make a good go at refuting the article (granted, based all on hearsay), trying to deny that players have been inconvenienced by the club reneging on verbal contracts does smack a bit of making excuses for the club without being willing to look at the possibility the club is wrong.
Players are entitled to be aggrieved if they turn down (to make up numbers) E400 a week at one club for E600 a week at another only to be told a month later that actually they can't offer that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
You are right there can be no doubt that having to go back on verbally agreed terms is unpalatable for all parties but would the players have rathered that we signed them and then could not afford to pay them. The club has communciated that sponsorship money which was expected resulted in he need for a lower budget and they reacted to this - what else could they have done? If Dundalks budget was hit by a major spnsor pulling out , what should they do differently?
It was an unpalatable situation for everyone and you do have to acknowledge the players situation and you can appreicate them seeing it as being shafted - but again how could it have been avoided.
The public meeting also demonstatred the amount of heresay that was presented by our neighbours on this thread as being factual. (well some of our nighbours not them all tbf)
Some people can keep those arms flapping and maybe just maybe they can keep the fire going :D
Facts as presented show that the club got a hit in the budget and reacted to fix it to ensure finacial statbility for 2010 - how is this a bad thing? Hopefully lessons are learn and some risk mitigations built into future budgets to take account of the current ever chaning ecomonic enviroment in reland which now means that no club can take for granted that sponosrship will be there all season.
From the ouside looking in, it seems to me United's board acted quickly and responsibly to a changing situation. Projected/forcasted income was not afterall going to materialise, they realised this now and decided to act at this moment to safeguard the club and indeed its employees throughout the season. What was the alternative - sit on their hands and hope they magic up some income (not currently forcasted) when in season? That would have inevitably ended in tears. Fair play to them. Yes it leaves a bad taste in the mouth for some players and indeed some rival clubs who were potentially outbid but on the face of it, this action avoids a melt down mid season.
If it was the clubs board that were driving the reduced budget, which I guess we can only take at face value. However, it's only a few weeks ago that we were being told there was a minimum needed to compete and how the budget couldn't be reduced so was going to be made up by extra fundraising.Quote:
Originally Posted by CMcC
Blaming the recession and sponsors pulling out is so Derry City 2009 !