FAI finances

Back after a holiday, and my head is spinning with the high finance direction this thread has taken.

Made me think of dcfcsteve's despairing comment a few years ago...

http://foot.ie/threads/65851-UEFA-Co...=1#post1012694

I can answer that...


Anyway, good business by the FAI if true. There was no chance whatsoever of a 33rd team or a replay or anything. We got on the wrong end of a bad refereeing decision. We were hardly unique.

But kick up a bit of a fuss and get paid 5mm just to calm down...fantastic. JD earned his 400k in that move alone!

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Link to the story online here, although it's blocked to non-subscribers: http://www.thesun.ie/irishsol/homepa...r-Blatter.html

Don't suppose anyone has a subscription?

This article quotes what I imagine are the most important bits: https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/...2869--sow.html



The whole episode is a strange one alright, but haven't we come to expect this sort of carry-on from FIFA? And could you imagine the FAI turning down a gift of €5million, corrupt or not? I'm also embarrassed that that completely xenophobic "hand of frog" headline will be quoted globally, as if that's how Irish people commonly refer to the incident.

I was talking to a French pal at kids footy practice this morning. The area he lives in was featured in a newspaper's property section this week, saying lots of French are moving in because of a newly opened French school. I was asking if this was true and he said yes, there are Frogs everywhere now!

Can you answer it correctly tho stutts?

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Anyway, good business by the FAI if true. There was no chance whatsoever of a 33rd team or a replay or anything. We got on the wrong end of a bad refereeing decision. We were hardly unique.

But kick up a bit of a fuss and get paid 5mm just to calm down...fantastic. JD earned his 400k in that move alone!

Ha, that's one way of looking at it, but it all looks a bit dubious and dirty taking a backhander like that. But, as you say, if FIFA are willing to dish out such gifts, sure why not? It'd be arguably worse to turn down such a windfall. It's not as if hassling them further would have seen them bend the rules or anything either, so there was certainly no loss in accepting it. Sticking to their principles wasn't going to get the FAI anywhere.

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

I was talking to a French pal at kids footy practice this morning. The area he lives in was featured in a newspaper's property section this week, saying lots of French are moving in because of a newly opened French school. I was asking if this was true and he said yes, there are Frogs everywhere now!

I thought the term was widely recognised as pretty derogatory, but it depends on context, I guess. If an Irish person affectionately self-referred as a "paddy", it'd be very different to hearing the term shouted towards an Irish person from, say, a boorish English Defence League ruffian.

Has there been much made of this €5 million "compensation" payment in the Irish media? Online, I can find only the Irish Sun and Eurosport covering the story. Perhaps it was overshadowed by the World Cup final, but seems odd that something so scandalous involding the FAI would fall under the radar of the general Irish public. As osarusan mentioned, it's quite the story!

Is it true at all though, I mean the Sun is hardly the best of sources and I havent seen it anywhere else?

Probabaly because the Sun has just quoted an "insider" or something. The kind of source that can't be tackled effectively and is dismissed easily. Other news sources frequently prefer not to bother with that kind of thing.

I'd say it's because the Sun haven't revealed their source and under defamation law you're just as liable as the original source if you re-report it. Doubt anybody wants to get on Delaney's bad side.

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

I'd say it's because the Sun haven't revealed their source and under defamation law you're just as liable as the original source if you re-report it. Doubt anybody wants to get on Delaney's bad side.

I could do with reading up a bit on defamation law, but a few questions... They have re-reported it though, have they not? Surely the Sun couldn't get off scot-free by pleading, "But it was our unnamed source who said it first, your honour, and we're not telling you who he was!" Wouldn't the Sun be liable for publishing it, unless they offer the name of the source so he can defend his allegations? Would the FAI have no grounds for legal action merely on the basis of the Sun's story then?

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

I could do with reading up a bit on defamation law, but a few questions... They have re-reported it though, have they not? Surely the Sun couldn't get off scot-free by pleading, "But it was our unnamed source who said it first, your honour, and we're not telling you who he was!" Wouldn't the Sun be liable for publishing it, unless they offer the name of the source so he can defend his allegations? Would the FAI have no grounds for legal action merely on the basis of the Sun's story then?

Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly - I mean the reason other media sources haven't re-reported the Sun's story is because they're unsure of the source so they couldn't take the risk of printing it. From what I've heard, the Sun are happy that it would stand up to scrutiny, but nobody else is to know that.

As far as defamation goes, the Sun are liable as the publishers, as are any subsequent publishers of the same information. The FAI could initiate legal action, but if the Sun are able to go, "well, here's our evidence" and it checks out, then they will lose or drop the case.

Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin

Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly - I mean the reason other media sources haven't re-reported the Sun's story is because they're unsure of the source so they couldn't take the risk of printing it. From what I've heard, the Sun are happy that it would stand up to scrutiny, but nobody else is to know that.

As far as defamation goes, the Sun are liable as the publishers, as are any subsequent publishers of the same information. The FAI could initiate legal action, but if the Sun are able to go, "well, here's our evidence" and it checks out, then they will lose or drop the case.

Of course. That makes perfect sense. I think the combination of my long day and misunderstanding of your use of "re-report" confused me. I thought by "original source", you meant the alleged FAI whistleblower rather than the Sun itself. I comprehend now.

Ah jaysus, this is great news for Irish football - aren't we lucky with John!

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-30438869.html

GUBU but hey its Ireland, its what we do. At least he can buy more cans for the fans now.

Who's on the Board? What sections of the game are they drawn from? Do they have an interest in preserving the status quo?

Is there any independent representation on the Board? I don't think so, despite it being established as best practice in big sports bodies.

Did the ISC have anything to say?

Has the AGM taken place yet?

I'd love to see him hauled in front of the PAC again (timing of announcement is interesting with summer recess).

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Who's on the Board? What sections of the game are they drawn from? Do they have an interest in preserving the status quo?

Is there any independent representation on the Board? I don't think so, despite it being established as best practice in big sports bodies.

Did the ISC have anything to say?

Has the AGM taken place yet?

http://www.fai.ie/fai/about-fai/fai-...d-council.html

Only the main chamber is in recess, the Joint Houses committees are still working (http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/...itteeschedule/ ). But you'll have to fight your way through all the Garth Brooks fans to get to a committee!

Originally Posted by centre mid

I'd love to see him hauled in front of the PAC again (timing of announcement is interesting with summer recess).

Was he interviewed by the PAC previously?