Bright New Dawn of FAI Leadership

[dcfcsteve]

A contract that guarantees your silence on certain matters is not illegal and is very common.

Silence to disclosing sensitive information/facts that would, for example, place the state in danger (Official Secrets Act) or give an unfair economic advantage to rivals (non-disclosure contracts) = yes.

Silence to disclosing your own personal opinions, so long as they don't breach other laws = no.

If you assert your right to express those opinions, the Constitution will support you - even if you have signed a bit of paper to say you will suppress your opinions. When suppression of your opinions is no longer a voluntary act, and is instead enforced, that's when it becomes unconstitutional.

If, however, you had agreed to suppress your opinions in return for money, then that would be a different matter again, as the financail exchange in return for exercise of certain duties would change things (though that might still fall foul of the Constitution).

Enough conjecture though - is there a lawyer in the house who can clear all this up.......?

[charliesboots]

How are confidentiality agreements unconstitutional ?? There is a huge difference between signing an agreement to not dislose commercially sensitive information/facts, for example, and signing one that removes your ability to express your own personal opinion.

If I knew that you had committed an illegal/unconstitutional act, and then you made me sign a Confidentiality agreement to prevent me disclosing that information, the law would support me if I did disclose it. If it became clear that I knew of your activities when they were happening and did nothing about them, it would probably also in fact seek to punish me for not disclosing the information (thought this is where it gets complicated).



This is not an appropriate example though - as it's a scenario that is within the law/legal system, which itself is based upon the constitution. Like I said - I'm no lawyer though - so perhaps one of the leagl eagles on here can clarify the whole situation either way.

Regardless of all the above - the bottom line is this : show me the bit of paper where Maribor Kev signed up to say he would not criticise the FAI ?

Look I'm with you on this. I think the clause is ridiculous. However, people here seem to think that DCFC will win a legal battle hands down. I'm just saying that that is not necessarily the case.

Maribor Kev may not have signed up for anything but if DCFC consider the site to be their official site then they are liable for the content of the site.

[charliesboots]

When suppression of your opinions is no longer a voluntary act, and is instead enforced, that's when it becomes unconstitutional.

But it is voluntary if you have volunteered not to do it.

Enough conjecture though - is there a lawyer in the house who can clear all this up.......?

Not yet but nearly

[passerrby]

I dont understand did the fai tell them to remove or move it from an official site first if it was not an official site then they could not have moved it. just a question.

[dancinpants]

I dont understand did the fai tell them to remove or move it from an official site first if it was not an official site then they could not have moved it. just a question.

Was on the "official" site derrycityfc.net. Insisted on the articles removal, which it was immediately. It was moved to an unofficial site, derrycityweb.net

[dcfc_1928]

When they were on the original site, each blog article also displayed the following "disclaimer". Probably not worth the paper its written on though......?

"Articles are submitted by contributors to CityWeb. The views contained therein may not correspond with those of the site owners or of Derry City Football Club."

[pete]

Derry City could challenge the gagging agreement but then again ye did sign up for it so might be difficult. However the league hasn't even started so this is going to come up every few weeks after the season starts.

On a separate topic its going to be a culture shock for eL clubs to keep their mouths shut. Thankfully Oily is gone because he would never be able to accept the regime going forward...

To ensure smooth running of the league the FAI will need to ensure proper structures in place for clubs to appeal decisions inside the game without having to go to the Courts.

[daniel]

First of all that disclaimer is hard enough to find & its not at all obvious the site is unofficial.

If the site is unofficial it seems the FAI can just change the reason for the 5k fine

Recently the CCFC official forum was moved to separate domain
& now clearly marked as unofficial. This was more to do with requests by fans than any FAI pressure...

Guess what Pete, a disclaimer on most contracts you will sign will be in veryyyyyyyyy small writing! there is nothing to say that a disclaimer must be easy to find, and if people had a brain it wouldn't be as hard to find as you may think!The fact that there is a disclaimer on this site should stand Derry in good stead

[SwanVsDalton]

*Draws curtains*
*Closes blinds*
*Checks for bugs*

I don't much care for the FAI.

*hides*

[passerrby]

cant remember the exact rule but clubs can be held responsible for comments from officers of there clubs and comments in mags, programmes, websites controlled by that club, and again clubs voted for this, I remember it was argued at the time that clubs maybe unaware of comments from managers or fans on websites until it is to late, but it was generally agreed that as long as clubs moved swiftly to remove offending articles no punishment would follow so am surprised at this outcome.

[SwanVsDalton]

Even if this is the case, the size of the fine is extraordinary. Perhaps the FAI are seeking to stamp some authority, perhaps their coffers are running a little low due to the cost of 'promoting' the league but it's baffling that they seemed to believe that the punishment would generate some kind of positive effect. Madness.

[Raheny Red]

Why not move it to -> londonderrycity.co.uk

[Jerry The Saint]

*Draws curtains*
*Closes blinds*
*Checks for bugs*

I don't much care for the FAI.

*hides*

€1000 please.

Lads, I've been authorised by John Delaney himself to collect all fines on behalf of the FAI. Ask about our special Season Ticket offer - for the low, low price of just €15,000 you will be able to spend the entire season badmouthing any FAI Board Member, FAI employee or family member thereof with impunity.

[soccerc]

Here is a view of an Irishman living in Sweden in response to the fine(s)

http://www.derrycityweb.net/htsrv/tr...k.php?tb_id=34

[chippie0001]

I wonder what Bohs will be fined on Friday night:

Will it be €5k per Delaney out banner in the ground
Will it be €5k all in for as many banner as you like
Or will it be €5k for each banner shown on TV?

Could be quiet a bill all in all.

[dcfc_1928]

http://www.derrycityweb.net/index.ph...&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

Here is a view of an Irishman living in Sweden in response to the fine(s)

http://www.derrycityweb.net/htsrv/tr...k.php?tb_id=34

[exile]

I wonder what Bohs will be fined on Friday night:

Will it be €5k per Delaney out banner in the ground
Will it be €5k all in for as many banner as you like
Or will it be €5k for each banner shown on TV?

Could be quiet a bill all in all.

ah sure they can afford it now

[Raheny Red]

Did nobody cop onto this joke of a mistake yet

http://forum.shelbournefc.ie/chat/vi...=110639#110639

[Dodge]

Did nobody cop onto this joke of a mistake yet

http://forum.shelbournefc.ie/chat/vi...=110639#110639

Read it on the Rovers forum as soon as the draw released. Can't believe you only noticed now.


Doesn't affect me so didn't bother mentioning it myself

[Krstic]

Sweet Jeez, we've got Pat Fenlon, Dave Rogers, Greg O'Halloran and Alan Moore.
And now we're taking the FAI to court, what next Ollie Byrne as Chairman