Rovers make official complaint to FAI about Bohs spending practices

[CharlesThompson]

Are you seriously going to be crass and insensitive enough to compare Rovers to child abusing priests?

This is getting surreal now.

Now that you mention it...

[pineapple stu]

Re biased/unjust moderation.

Do any Bohs fans actually understand the concept of a change of ownership? Like, do you understand that Rovers fans opposed what their board did, and in fact raised queries with the FAI about them the same way Rovers have no raised issues over Bohs with the FAI?

Giving out to posters for dismissing Rovers' questions on the basis of what their fans fought against is not double standards; it's merely an attempt at saving Bohs fans' embarrassment by continually likening their current board to Maguire & Co.

Are Bohs fans so completely heads-in-the-sand that they can't see this simple connection?

[BohDiddley]

Call it what you want Topia, i dont support any team, go to matches when i can, will openly admit that oweing to experiences over the years that Bohs would be my least favourite club of the lot but still makes me a neutral!

Thread seems to be getting dragged off topic. ALso its bareing more than a striking resemblence to the Racism thread a few months back, except everybody has swapped shoes.

Everyone except you. IIRC, you were content to look the other way when racism was the issue, and you're content to use that issue as an equivalent scenario to some half-baked allegations on accounts.

For a 'neutral', whatever that's supposed to mean, you're also remarkably well-informed on and animated by things Bohemian.

[topia]

Because thats the last year their spending was 'normal'.



Well the complainant did suggest that they should. But the issue here is the Bohs fans getting all hot and bothered about allegations being made against them and how unfair it all is, whereas they had no problem whatsoever throwing mud at Rovers over what turned out to be nothing.

Shoe on other foot etc.

If anything it was disprespectful to make a complaint on Ndo's behalf - he obviously didn't feel that the alledged incident was worthy of complaint - if indeed it happened at all.

You mean the 1st year Rovers spending was 'normal' or something?
How could it possibly be disrespectful to make a complaint on Ndos behalf? and how do you know he didnt ask the club to make a complaint? If you seriously think that Bohs made the complaint in an attempt to have Rovers docked points and that no racism actually occurred you have issues.
You are not comparing like with like here and you know it. Also how exactly did it turn out to be 'nothing'? Because you werent charged?
There seems to be an awful lot of Rovers fans on here getting excited about this while claiming that Bohs fans are getting their knickers in a twist.

[SMorgan]

Fair play to Rovers for putting these questions to the FAI. It was obvious that there would be those that, for very obvious reasons, seek to present their genuine concerns as sour grapes. The LOI owes Rovers a big thank you for having the courage to openly say what other club dare not openly say.

[sonofstan]

Fair play to Rovers for putting these questions to the FAI. It was obvious that there would be those that, for very obvious reasons, seek to present their genuine concerns as sour grapes. The LOI owes Rovers a big thank you for having the courage to openly say what other club dare not openly say.

Excellent. Any drier and there'd be camels walking across it.

[LukeO]

The rules need an overhaul if you can go round giving infractions because somebody says something you dont like to your mate. That was more a comment on the attendence of UCD matches hardly having problems with the guards rather than dismissing his opinion.

Im sure throughout this thread people have dismissed bohs fans opinions in this thread as them 'having their heads in the sand' is that not dismissing a fans opinion because of who they support? Did all these people get infractions???

Q.E.D.

[passerrby]

I too am completely convinved that bohs will be cleared of any wrong doing by the fai.. however that will not be enough for fair minded people throughout the game

[Dodge]

Fair play to Rovers for putting these questions to the FAI. It was obvious that there would be those that, for very obvious reasons, seek to present their genuine concerns as sour grapes.

But it is sour grapes. Why wait until after the season is over if its for the good of the league?

I repeat though, that none of this negates the seriousness of the allegations, npr the onus on the FAI to onvestigate

[SkStu]

marinobohs - don't go dragging the thread off topic. What Rovers' previous board did is of no relevance now.

(And I still find it amusing that, five pages after BYCTWD mentioned it, Bohs fans are still countering criticism of the club by comparing it to what Maguire did at Rovers)

so you obviously dont know what the word "compare" means.

Must have missed you saying the above on the Ndo thread.....

please see TG4 video. Rovers fans made monkey noises to Joseph Ndo.

Re biased/unjust moderation.

Do any Bohs fans actually understand the concept of a change of ownership? Like, do you understand that Rovers fans opposed what their board did, and in fact raised queries with the FAI about them the same way Rovers have no raised issues over Bohs with the FAI?

Giving out to posters for dismissing Rovers' questions on the basis of what their fans fought against is not double standards; it's merely an attempt at saving Bohs fans' embarrassment by continually likening their current board to Maguire & Co.

Are Bohs fans so completely heads-in-the-sand that they can't see this simple connection?

heres some double standards in moderation for you - youre saying that its fair to present questions based on a newspaper article, yet you are allowing things that were not mentioned in the newspaper article to be presented as fact by the keyboard warriors to be subject to "answering" from Bohs fans.

Trying to save Bohs fans from embarassment? Please - this is the sort of thread that gets you off. Seriously, you should be ashamed to call yourself a moderator.

[SMorgan]

please see TG4 video. Rovers fans made monkey noises to Joseph Ndo.

Well Bohs didn't cover themselves in glory when they had to deal with one of their own players in that regard.

[wexfordned]

Well Bohs didn't cover themselves in glory when they had to deal with one of their own players in that regard.

They fined & suspended him, what more do you want. Although going by the holier than thou attitude of the keyboard warriors on this site he should have been burned at the stake!

At least they acknowledged it happened, but thats another issue to the bulls**t posted by others on this thread.

[EnglishSource]

please see TG4 video. Rovers fans made monkey noises to Joseph Ndo.

Please withdraw this remark.

There is no evidence that any more than one person made the monkey noise, so the use of the plural is incorrect. Also, although the individual is highly likely to have been a Rovers fan, there is again no evidence as to who he is and what football team he supports. An independant enquiry has exonerated SRFC.

[osarusan]

Please withdraw this remark.

There is no evidence that any more than one person made the monkey noise, so the use of the plural is incorrect. Also, although the individual is highly likely to have been a Rovers fan, there is again no evidence as to who he is and what football team he supports. An independant enquiry has exonerated SRFC.

To be fair, just listening to it, it is purely a matter of opinion as to whether there was one fan, or more than one. You cannot say that the use of the plural is incorrect.

Anyhow, seeing as you apparently heard the monkey noises, could you post the same post in this thread please?

[CharlesThompson]

Remind me why you lot were kicked out of the league.

Of course if I had made an allegation as forthright as that about DCFCDCFC in the weeks leading up to that event I'd have been told to come up with some proof, the thread would have been locked and I'd have got an infraction... at least.

This place is dead as a football forum. Its a circus.

FFS What more proof do you need!!! There have been supporters (or is that alleged supporters?) of Shams, the real Rovers, Dundalkkk, Limerick, Waterford, UCD, Pats and probably some more that I can't remember without trawling through the last 10 pages that have explicitly stated,.. nay, PROVED that Bohs are fiddling the books by posting it here.

In fact I think that we should probably head over to the FAI HQ first thing tomorrow and throw in the towel. Under so much intense pressure and under the towering mountains of PROOF on this mb, there really is no other option.

[BohsPartisan]

Bull. You have no problem throwing allegations about Rovers about, even after the charges wre dismissed as malicious. The issue here is you as a group are throwing the toys out of the prams becasue people have the temerity to discuss a nrewspaper article about probable fiddling.

Its not gypoweb. people ask arkward questions and don't do osterich impressions.

So is it possible, definite or probable?

"Rovers do not accuse Bohemians of anything untoward, nor do they offer any proof of wrongdoing"

There was actual proof of what we "alleged". Of course the actual proof provided was with actual audable racist abuse is deemed inconclusive evidence in the world of foot.ie but the ramblings of a bunch of sore losers who declare that

"Rovers do not accuse Bohemians of anything untoward, nor do they offer any proof of wrongdoing"

and the over-active imaginations of some UCD and Derry fans are conclusive proof and we should get our heads out of the sand.

[MariborKev]

BP,

Would you accept that if you brought the accounts to any reasonable accountant, they might come up with the same questions Rovers asked/alleged to have asked?

Not saying anything is untoward, but they do certainly beg more than a few questions.

[BohsPartisan]

BP,

Would you accept that if you brought the accounts to any reasonable accountant, they might come up with the same questions Rovers asked/alleged to have asked?

Not saying anything is untoward, but they do certainly beg more than a few questions.

You think we don't have professionals auditing our accounts? LukeO already outlined any explanations that were necessary, the rest of this thread is just a few people (not saying yourself) trying to stick the knife in. What we're upset about is that this type of mud sticks whether its true or not and its this Rovers had in mind when going about things the way they did.

[Mr_Parker]

You think we don't have professionals auditing our accounts? LukeO already outlined any explanations that were necessary, the rest of this thread is just a few people (not saying yourself) trying to stick the knife in. What we're upset about is that this type of mud sticks whether its true or not and its this Rovers had in mind when going about things the way they did.

Having accounts audited does not necessarily mean that all basis are covered by such. Accounts are generally audited to ensure all financial regulations are complied with. An auditor would not be tasked to raise questions about football regulations in respect of accounts.

[dahamsta]

I've split off a good page worth of stuff here, it's off topic and/or embarassingly childish. Not one of the people bitching and whining about the moderation has taken the time to file a complaint in the Support forum, or to an admin. We're not mind readers. So either file a complaint, in detail and without the ridiculous emotion, or follow through on your adolescent threats to "boycott" the site and just feck off. You don't need to say goodbye, just click Log Out above and don't come back.

Finally, on the subject of LukeO, his behaviour was pathetic and disrespectful. I put my own time into this website, for zero profit because of the failed online ad market. I absolutely refuse to be treated with disrespect by complete idiots like LukeO.

Now can ye please either discuss the subject like adults and try to get on? It's just football folks, not nuclear war.

adam