Bohs exceeding 65%?

**Raheny Red** · 15/05/2009, 1:45 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Transfer embargo when no club can sign players until July is pretty funny in fairness...

As a Shels fan aptly put it this morning, "like being barred from a boozer for the duration of Good Friday."

**Ezeikial** · 15/05/2009, 1:54 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

"In recent months" probably encompasses the pre-season? I think they have cut the wage bill since last season (through a combination of releasing players and reallocating wages). It's just not enough of a reduction.

If they are relating to current wage bill versus last season, then the phrase "in recent months" is disingenuous at best.

Either way, I find it hard to get my head around the suggestion that Bohs have trimmed their wage bill by almost 40%, particularly when you consider the late pre-season additions of Keegan, Shelley, and Ndo.

I can certainly understand the accusations of cheating that are being levelled at Bohs. If they fail to get their house in order in relation to the 65% cap, perhaps they deserve the sanction of graveyard time visiting Kildare, Monaghan and Mervue as has been clearly stated as a consequence by Padraig Smith.

**John83** · 15/05/2009, 1:57 PM

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

I can certainly understand the accusations of cheating that are being levelled at Bohs. If they fail to get their house in order in relation to the 65% cap, perhaps they deserve the sanction of graveyard time visiting Kildare, Monaghan and Mervue as had been clearly stated as a consequence by Padraig Smith.

If that happens, it might actually generate some good will for and faith in the financial compliance side of the FAI administration. For now, it's not hard to imagine it'll all be fudged yet again.

**dublinred** · 15/05/2009, 2:13 PM

I can't see many clubs being within the 65% in the current economic enviorment , costs are generally fixed and income varies so if a club remains within the approved costs at the begining of the season and income is way down they can hardly be sanctioned by the people who approved the budget in the first place.

**niallsparky** · 15/05/2009, 2:18 PM

Originally Posted by RoversHead

"We are making every effort to get within the 65% rule..........I cant say what the chances of success on that will be .Im not going to put a bet on that."Brian Trench Bohs new PRO admitting last friday that Bohs are cheating and probobly wont stop.
The FAI transfer embargo is the powers that be saying we know your cheating and this will make it look like we are doing something about it.All emotion aside Bohs and Cork are cheats and both clubs have had ample opportunity to trim their wage bills to comply with the rule.

In fairness to Brian Trench, he's only recently elected. Our new board have some big problems to fix. I do agree though that if we finish the season above the 65% threshold then there should be a severe punishment.

**RoversHead** · 15/05/2009, 2:30 PM

Originally Posted by londonred

I can't see many clubs being within the 65% in the current economic enviorment , costs are generally fixed and income varies so if a club remains within the approved costs at the begining of the season and income is way down they can hardly be sanctioned by the people who approved the budget in the first place.

Costs are fixed to an extent but a club can release players they cant afford.The problem is budgets were excepted that were based on exagerated gate revenue in Corks case and champions league and domestic fantasy in Bohs case not to mention their magic pencil accounting, FAI dug this hole .

**GuisaSaigon** · 15/05/2009, 2:35 PM

Originally Posted by Buile Shuibhne

Some of the Galway lads might be able to answer this one.

If a club has to release players to get below the 65% - can They just release players who are under contract. Obviously in the current climate there's not much hope of other clubs paying transfer fees or being able to match the wages that these players are on?

Can contracts be voided in these circumstances?

When we ran into similar trouble last season our players eventually agreed to take a pay cut. All players were free to leave the club if offers came in from other clubs. I believe that some players who left the club at the time made arrangements with the Galway United that some severance payments were made periodically after they joined their new clubs/pubs.

Legally clubs cannot just release players under contract without coming to an agreement with the player

**Mr A** · 15/05/2009, 2:37 PM

In fairness to the FAI- they cannot dictate to private companies what they do, they can only punish them if they breach the guidelines at the end of the season.

And I'm not sure clubs can just release players they can't afford unless another club is willing to take them.

**RoversHead** · 15/05/2009, 2:39 PM

Originally Posted by niallsparky

In fairness to Brian Trench, he's only recently elected. Our new board have some big problems to fix. I do agree though that if we finish the season above the 65% threshold then there should be a severe punishment.

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season, buisness as usual at Bohs so.By the way your magic pencil accounting which got you the licence never mind your title and champions league entry shoulda had you relegated already and may still do.you are cheats and yis know yis are just ask Mr Trench.

**CMcC** · 15/05/2009, 2:48 PM

Ha ha - sounds like a school yard here. 'Yis are cheats !!!'

**RoversHead** · 15/05/2009, 2:52 PM

Originally Posted by CMcC

Ha ha - sounds like a school yard here. 'Yis are cheats !!!'

sorry for using an actual chant from some league of Ireland grounds i forgot this is foot.ie your just a grammar spammer in disguise.

**ashbournebohs** · 15/05/2009, 9:33 PM

Originally Posted by RoversHead

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season, buisness as usual at Bohs so.By the way your magic pencil accounting which got you the licence never mind your title and champions league entry shoulda had you relegated already and may still do.you are cheats and yis know yis are just ask Mr Trench.

RoversHead .Did you lot ever get around to paying that launderette bill for cleaning your gear.Whats that saying eaten bread is quickly forgotten.
It is a well known fact that your club is only alive because of the co operation of other league clubs..When the time comes for us to wind Bohs up and form another club sorry company we will give you a ring for advice..

**Ezeikial** · 15/05/2009, 9:42 PM

Originally Posted by ashbournebohs

RoversHead .Did you lot ever get around to paying that launderette bill for cleaning your gear.Whats that saying eaten bread is quickly forgotten.
It is a well known fact that your club is only alive because of the co operation of other league clubs..When the time comes for us to wind Bohs up and form another club sorry company we will give you a ring for advice..

Perhaps you should have asked for his phone number....

**niallsparky** · 15/05/2009, 9:51 PM

Originally Posted by RoversHead

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?

**Ezeikial** · 15/05/2009, 9:56 PM

Originally Posted by niallsparky

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?

Ahem - the small issue of spending far more then you could afford!

**L.T.F.C.** · 15/05/2009, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by niallsparky

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?

there is such an air of ah-ha-I'm-so-much-smarter-than-you smarmriness from this post.

**Sidefx** · 15/05/2009, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by Ezeikial

Ahem - the small issue of spending far more then you could afford!

Eh... people and glasshouses...

**Ezeikial** · 15/05/2009, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by Sidefx

Eh... people and glasshouses...

If by that pithy comment you mean that supporters of any club that is not running a surplus should not post here, then foot.ie is going to be a very lonely place.

There is an enormous difference between Ollie-esque overspending (and refusing to learn from mistakes) and a club that, recognising the possibility of a modest deficit arising in the future, calls on supporters for proactive assistance in fund raising.