does anyone have the complete full list of points totals for both on the field and off the field???i thought they were meant to be published.maybe they will be in the papers tomorrow.they said there would transparency so i hope they do publish them.
Printable View
does anyone have the complete full list of points totals for both on the field and off the field???i thought they were meant to be published.maybe they will be in the papers tomorrow.they said there would transparency so i hope they do publish them.
Not unless each club is willing to divulge their off the field points. From what I am aware of, only a few have been forthcoming and I suspect a good majority will not release the figures unless they get the FAI's nod to so do.Quote:
Originally Posted by eamo1
From the indo, figures given by clubs themselves
Derry City
On The Field: 460. Off The Field: 370. Total: 830 (Premier Div))
Bohemians
On The Field: 420. Off The Field: 371. Total: 791 (Premier Div))
Shelbourne
On The Field: 493. Off The Field: 278. Total: 771 (Premier Div)
UCD
On The Field: 370. Off The Field: 374. Total: 744 (Premier Div)
Drogheda United
On The Field: 437. Off The Field: 300. Total: 737 (Premier Div)
Shamrock Rovers
On The Field: 380. Off The Field: 346. Total: 726 (Premier Div)
Sligo Rovers
On The Field: 340. Off The Field: 360. Total: 700 (Premier Div)
Bray Wanderers
On The Field: 333. Off The Field: 351. Total: 684 (Premier Div)
Galway
On The Field: 260. Off The Field: 389. Total: 649 (Premier Div)
Waterford
On The Field: 337. Off The Field: 295. Total: 632 (First Div)
Dundalk
On The Field: 247. Off The Field: 348. Total: 595 (First Div)
Cork City
On The Field: 460. Off The Field: N/A. (Premier Div)
Longford Town
On The Field: 430. Off The Field: N/A. (Premier Div)
St Patrick's Athletic
On The Field: 410. Off The Field: N/A. (Premier Div)
Those are very interesting. Waterford in spite of Partizan's sanctimonious embracing of the IAG process on the basis of all the great work he felt his club had done did in fact score comparatively quite low off the field. Shelbourne scored the worst of the known Premier clubs and have their off field record to thank for them scoring so well. UCD are the highest known off the field scorers of the of the old Premier clubs. Dundalk actually did quite well off the field but on the field stuff screwed them.
Basically, I think the way Galway used to the media to their advanatge n the closing week scored them a lot of off the field points.This seems to be what the FAI want - 'proactive' commercial side of a club, having positive stories published in a national paper.Also, Galway having Nick Leeson, and the job he has done, the FAI probably want him and them as an example of how the Club Promotions Officer should be operating next season.
I have to admit that a certain amount of my faith in this process is restored by seeing that UCD scored highly and Shels poorly off the field (which is scary given that they have one of the best stadia).
I still think that all the scores should be given out in detail though. Then each club would know what they were doing wrong and where to look for examples of best practise.
If this has to be done, it should be done right, and if the scoring was fair and balanced then the IAG/FAI should be able to stand over their marks.
Exactly and Dundalk are moaning that it should have been decided "on the field"! It was albiet over the few years of their worst results rather than the one year in at least 5 when they did something worthwhile on the pitch. There were always going to be winners and losers and looks like Dundalk are losers but not good ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
We're not talking about Fox News, Galway Harps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galway Harps
:)
I'd trust Fox News before the FAI in fairness JW!
dundalk had been using the media alot too in recent weeks,they were on newstalk and rte radio.so it wasnt just utd doing a few pieces in the media,and thats not what got them up,its a result of 3 years very hard work and its very dissappointing that the utd board are not getting the credit they deserve.but actually that might be good because then people wont know just how good nick and niall are and wont try take them from us.:) .but it was dissapoointing to read the indo today,yes there has to be questions still answered on transparency(the point of this thread),but i was expecting a feature story of galway utd or something similar talking about the good work done,nothing of the sort.
Yeah, I think it's disgraceful the way the media never give Galway United any credit!
There's a difference between a few Dundalk staff moaning, and the slick article that Nick Leeson and Galway United got!
Well, we have a lot more going for us than UCD. You lot have been in the league over 20 years and your support base and marketability is just as bad as it was in 1985. In the intervening decades, you have made absolutley no attempt whatsoever to branch out into the south east Dublin locality despite the exit of Rovers from the area. What saves you is that you are a university team, otherwise you would have gone the way of Dodo City a long time ago. Ourselves on the otherhand have long had a strong link with the South East in terms of fanbase and player catchment and have numerous strong links with schoolboy and junior leagues in the area.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
Our link up with WIT now gives us the ability to attract and pay for the 3rd level education of promising youngsters. We received a tax compliance cert from the Revenue, cleared all our debts, UEFA badge coaches, Youth Academy to be set up after RSC renovation, received UEFA and Premier certificates and the RSC is due a major facelift (plans are available from Waterford City Council). After all that we scored one of the lowest in the League in off field criteria. How the hell is that? Am I aggrieved, damn right. I honestly think that the IAG/FAI has punished us for running ourselves properly. It looks like that PR has won over substance (whats actually on paper).
I'd love to see the break down of the points and see who went where.
Is the refusal to publish these down to the possibility of embarrassing some clubs? Will all clubs publish theirs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
If there is any accountability in the system at all, the points breakdown to each Club must be published. If not, we could have a case.Quote:
Originally Posted by JW.
In my opinion they should definitely be published to eliminate the legitimate grievances some clubs' fans may have.
Thats just plain stoopid. And I say that as somebody with a lot of sympathy for your club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
Does anyone know what the off the field criteria were?
The reason I ask is that I am surprised that Shels scored so low even considering the various off the field problems they have had this season, Tolka is one of the better grounds in the country and there is a big schoolboy set up there as well.
I am not begrudging what Galway have achieved but I would like to see the breakdown of points scored in each criteria when you consider Galway got over 100 points more than Shels
In my view, getting relegated isn't a disaster for Waterford, as they've struggled so badly in the Premier in the last couple of seasons and going well in Div 1 generally creates a better atmosphere and crowds than labouring so badly in the Premier Division. It can afford a club a chance to get itself into a more favourable financial position as well. For all that it's a pretty depressing league to be in.
having 3 winding up orders against your club might've hurt you McShels. Also not providing a match programme looks poor. Especially when its because you didn't pay the printer...
Your IAG don't seem to think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
Clearly you know nothing about UCD.Quote:
Originally Posted by Partizan
All those things that Waterford have UCD have also.
And we outscored you by miles.
Most clubs had a team of people or a committee working on the presentations and getting the structures in place.Quote:
Originally Posted by McShels
Your club is run largely by one man who would appear to have spent most of the last year sitting in his solicitors waiting room.
Go figure.
What the hell are you on about? You've really bought this hook, line and sinker. I know it's in a bad state in the RSC but the main thing that attracted you to this sport is what goes on on that green thing called a pitch. Marketability is an abstract notion. It's not quantifiable. How are you so certain what it was then and what it is now and how it all matches up to yours, and after all that ask yourself why would that even determine league placings.Quote:
Well, we have a lot more going for us than UCD. You lot have been in the league over 20 years and your support base and marketability is just as bad as it was in 1985.
How do you know what UCD do and do not do? I don't have a clue what Waterford are up to in these regards.Quote:
In the intervening decades, you have made absolutley no attempt whatsoever to branch out into the south east Dublin locality despite the exit of Rovers from the area. What saves you is that you are a university team, otherwise you would have gone the way of Dodo City a long time ago. Ourselves on the otherhand have long had a strong link with the South East in terms of fanbase and player catchment and have numerous strong links with schoolboy and junior leagues in the area.
And this gives you any significant edge over UCD in what way?Quote:
ur link up with WIT now gives us the ability to attract and pay for the 3rd level education of promising youngsters. We received a tax compliance cert from the Revenue, cleared all our debts, UEFA badge coaches, Youth Academy to be set up after RSC renovation, received UEFA and Premier certificates and the RSC is due a major facelift (plans are available from Waterford City Council).
Everything you laud your club for is a recent development. You have a recent history of poor financial management and the ground developments, WIT link up are all new. Now that you've only just started to set out on the correct path you can't expect to be considered above clubs that have been doing it longer.Quote:
After all that we scored one of the lowest in the League in off field criteria. How the hell is that? Am I aggrieved, damn right. I honestly think that the IAG/FAI has punished us for running ourselves properly. It looks like that PR has won over substance (whats actually on paper).
I'd love to see the break down of the points and see who went where.
Partizan, since it emerged that your club appeared to be receiving some sort of clemency due to this bizarre process you embraced it with open arms and several times smugly posted how you met the off field criteria. Do you ever wonder what happened to you? You used to be a football fan.
Not going to get into this one on either side, but must say that just on its own merits that's the poorest argument I've ever read on an internet forum! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
Just because you know nothing about WUFC it must follow that a Blues fan can't know anything about UCD???
My despair for soccer in Waterford has now been replaced by despair for the future of our country! :D
I've argued the same rubbish ad nauseum for a long time I can't be bothered to articulate the merits of UCD's existence in full every single time. The obvious implication is that as a dedicated UCD fan I'm not intimately familiar with the underage and local links that Waterford United have in the South East and I doubt that Partizan has any actual researched detailed information on UCD's links. Do you? Can anyone non-UCD fan come forward and do so?Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
Thought that's what I said. You obviously are even if I'm not. As before, I despair. And please don't tell me you're a law student! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by stann
Good, because as you seem blithely unaware, I'm not arguing against UCD's existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
No I don't, but I'm not claiming to. The point I'm having such an apparent hard time making is that whether Partizan has those facts or not, it's a p!ss-poor argument to make to say he can't have those facts simply because you don't have similar ones about Waterford! That doesn't follow. Please don't tell me you're studying logic! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
I know from my situation as a similarly dedicated eL fan that I would have to do some serious investigation from where I'm sitting to actually make the assertions he does. His situation is mine geographically inverted. Judging by the way he lauds recent Waterford developments like the WIT link up, he doesn't even know the better known aspects of UCD's structures and I don't believe he has carried out that research. I shouldn't have to bother spelling this out as you know well what was implied but you just want to be smart.Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
I know what you're up to. You didn't seem to get my point. When you're arguing the same argument ad infinitum you're not going to produce the exact same watertight perfectly articulated argument each time.Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
Tiring rapidly of this now. I was just making a point about the way you came to your conclusions, not whether those conclusion were correct. To be honest it's not that important of a one to have to keep repeating it to you plus you're getting a bit cranky, so, go on, you can say you were right if you like, I've other things to do...Quote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
Before you go can you tell me then? And you might explain that last bit too. Usually when you argue the same argument ad infinitum it's because the other person doesn't or won't get it by the way, but if it's the same every time, how can it somehow not be the same every time? Go on, it is logic isn't it?! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Poor Student
Stann, you either knew what I meant and were being smart or you really didn't get what I was trying to say and now you understand.
For someone who is growing tired of this you seem to be finding new ways of prolonging it.:D
First bit right, second bit wrong. :D
And I do, but one's gotta do something while waiting for the transparency to kick in...
Then we certainly shall argue ad infinitum.;)
Pats got 364 for off the field activities. Ive seen the presentation and it was simple powerpoint job...
http://www.stpatsfc.com/news.php?id=1274
Bet you wish you thought of "Right here, right now".;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Criteria explained in this document. See 4.1 on Page 15. The whole process is described on Pages 14-16.Quote:
Originally Posted by McShels