Under the rules of the FAI, the Dispute Resolution Chamber sat today to consider the case put forward by Shamrock Rovers F.C., Sligo Rovers F.C., the League of Ireland and Chris Turner on the status of Chris Turner's registration for the 2010 season. The decision of the DRC was that Chris Turner "is not a participant of the National league and is a free agent, entitled to sign for any club and seek registration of an SPC" (standard player's contract). They ruled on some other matters pertaining to the case but of main significance to Shamrock Rovers F.C. is that Chris Turner has been deemed a free agent. Also in their determination was a note that "there is a possibility of an appeal to arbitration pursuant to Article 31 of the SPC and Article 33 of the FAI DRC Regulations within 10 days". Shamrock Rovers F.C. will await developments with regard to any appeal by the noted parties before making any further comment or action.
From Shams website.
my reading of that is that neither contract was valid?? thats a bit bizarre.
so if Sligo appeals, Shams will wash their hands of him?
Ive heard/read that this may have gotten Sligo into a bit of trouble?
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
Where did you read this, or do you care to elaborate?Originally Posted by SkStu
on our own messageboard, from a Bohs fan who was talking to a Rovers fan (so take that with the pinch of salt necessary). Something to do with cash payments the FAI are investigating or something... (maybe just a FAI tactic to dissuade you from appealing this?) I dont know, just a rumour.
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
The Disputes Resolution Chamber (DRC) today (March 11th) issued its judgement on a case involving Sligo Rovers, Shamrock Rovers and Chris Turner.
The DRC heard that Mr Turner signed a 2009 Standard Players Contract (SPC) with Sligo Rovers FC on 11 November 2009. The FAI League Department refused to register this contract on the basis that the 2009 SPC had been superseded by a 2010 SPC.
Mr Turner subsequently signed a 2010 SPC with Shamrock Rovers FC in January 2010, prompting the Director of the League to bring the matter to the attention of the National League Executive Committee (NLEC), who decided to refer the matter to the DRC.
The DRC today issued its decisions:
1. The Director was entitled to refuse to register the SPC between Mr Turner and Sligo Rovers FC.
2. The Director was entitled to refuse to register the SPC between Mr Turner and Shamrock Rovers FC.
3. The Committee and the Director were entitled to refer the matter to the DRC.
4. Mr Turner is not a Participant in the National League and is a Free Agent, entitled to sign with any club and seek registration of an SPC.
5. Before Mr Turner can be registered, he is to repay the €5,000 paid to him by Sligo Rovers FC.
6. Mr Turner and Sligo Rovers FC are to be the subject of a disciplinary investigation by the National League Director pursuant to Rule 8.1.6 of the Participation Agreement, Schedule One, Section 2.
7. All parties are to bear their own costs, but the administrative costs of the DRC are to be borne by the Committee who referred the matter to the DRC.
8. The parties are reminded of the possibility of an appeal to arbitration pursuant to Article 31 above of the SPC and Article 33 of the FAI DRC Regulations within ten days.
Happy with that
Life without Rovers, it makes no sense...it's a heartache...nothing but a fools game. S.R.F.C.
6. Mr Turner and Sligo Rovers FC are to be the subject of a disciplinary investigation by the National League Director pursuant to Rule 8.1.6 of the Participation Agreement, Schedule One, Section 2.
Worst scenario possible points deduction in the league?
Anybody know what this rule says?
Subject to a disciplinary hearing under Rule of the Participation Agreement, dont make me laugh.These must be the same rules Cork signed up to and yet were allowed ride the FAI for how many months without any sanctions, the same rules Bohemians signed up to to remain within the SCP at all times and are 3.5 million in debt but still allowed to operate wiyjout sanction and they threathen an investigation inot us over Turner. What the **** are they like.
They rule Turner owes us back the €5000 so they must recognise this a full legal payment in accordance with taxation PRSI etc. so its not cash under the table as some might suggest.
We signed a player under a legal contract in 2009, the FAI bring oit a new contract in 2010, Turner sees this as an escape route and fecks off to Shams. So if the FAI hadnt brought out a 2010 contract Turner would be our player.
Absolutely ZERO CONFIDENCE IN THE FAI'S RUNNING OF THE LEAGUE.
Farsical organisation who are only interested in an all Dublin league
I don't know Alan. Like, I know how you feel but they had to start enforcing the rules at some stage and that's what they are doing with this investigation.
We will get fined the 5k probably but have to pay our costs as well obviously. Horrible stuff and we are in trouble now.
The all Dublin league thing isn't anything to to with it in my opinion. Sure, like you said yourself, they bent over for Cork for two seasons.
I know I have changed my tune on this but they had the facts before them so I don't think you can argue too much.
Last edited by dong; 11/03/2010 at 11:07 PM.
What part of he never had his contract with Sligo registered do you not understand? It's not the FAI's fault Sligo tried to register him on an out of date form. Even if the FAI had registered him in November on the 2009 form he would have become a free agent on Jan 1st 2010 anyway. Sligo claim the 5k was an advance on wages to be given when the 2010 contract was registered. As Turner never signed this contract he has to give the money back. Plain and simple. The only farcical organisation in all this has been Sligo Rovers FC who now face an disciplinary investigation. A can of worms is being opened and the most ironic thing is it was Sligo Rovers FC who gave the FAI the can opener
Lets all forget about this **** his past says it all about him.
Derby county- Sacked.
Sligo rovers- Walked out
Bohs- Sacked
Dundalk- Walked out
Shams- Sacking pending
All this and not to mention being disgraced on international duty also, the guy is a ticking time bomb who invites trouble everywhere he goes and it wont be too long before shams see the true chris turner.
He signed a legal contract which the FAI should therefore register, otherwise all players on two year contracts are technically becoming free agents at the end of every season until such times as they decide whether or not they could be bothered honouring the rest of the contract. It shows the FAI up to be the jokeshop it is. Ask yourself: Could you possibly see this happening in England, or pretty much any European nation? At any level? It breaks EU law on so many levels.What part of he never had his contract with Sligo registered do you not understand? It's not the FAI's fault Sligo tried to register him on an out of date form. Even if the FAI had registered him in November on the 2009 form he would have become a free agent on Jan 1st 2010 anyway. Sligo claim the 5k was an advance on wages to be given when the 2010 contract was registered. As Turner never signed this contract he has to give the money back. Plain and simple. The only farcical organisation in all this has been Sligo Rovers FC who now face an disciplinary investigation. A can of worms is being opened and the most ironic thing is it was Sligo Rovers FC who gave the FAI the can opener
F*ck Chris Turner and Shamrock Rovers. Thats me done with this discussion, concentrate on the good honest pros that actually play for us.
Why the surprise?
Were we not expecting this?
It is the FAI we are dealing with - although I do hope that rovers have done everyting 'over the table'!
If it breaks EU law, then that will be shown during the investigation into Sligo and Turner's conduct. If Sligo feel their case is so water tight I assume they'll be appealing the decision?
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Not too happy with this outcome. Prior to the the DRC ruling a lot of the talk was about Rovers been entiitled to compensation, getting the 5,000 back etc. The impression i got at the fans forum in the clarion was that once all the information was out in the public Rovers would come out of the situation looking ok. The opposite seems to be the case.
We are worse off than when the situation started. We dont have Turner but granted we are getting the 5,000 back. We have to bear whatever legal costs we may have accumulated and now face possible disciplinary action (and whatever potential punishments that go with that).
Last edited by jamie m; 12/03/2010 at 10:12 AM.
He may well have signed a legal contract (the 2009 version) but it only becomes legal once the FAI register it. What's to say that Turner signed the contract in November, but Sligo never forwarded it to the FAI until January/February (as a lot of clubs are known to do)?
If so, Sligo should have got him to sign the new 2010 version if they hadn't already registered the 2009 version.
Up the Harps!!
Just put this thing to bed! We all knew how this would end,We dont live on the east coast so we were never going to get a fair hearing......
Till d End!
Is it impossible for you to fathom that maybe just maybe Sligo Rovers might be in the wrong on this one? Turner showed no loyalty or goodwill but Sligo Rovers f****d up the whole thing themselves. Nothing whatsoever to do with north south east or west.
As has been poted before in this thread. The FAI bent over backwards, multiple times, to save Cork, If they were a Dublin club, they'd have been gone
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
We are all paranoid here in Sligo and the thought that there would be bias against us is insane! What I can't understand is if our contract with it was useless, why would the investigating body not accept that Shams contract was above board? I also heard that shams gave him a 10k signing on fee, don't know if this is true or not, but there is no mention of it and there is no mention of them talking to the player while he was obviously in some form of agreement with us? But I'm just paranoid anyway.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks