The John Delaney Thread

[GypsyBlackCat]

Again, if Delaney wasn't Chief Executive of the FAI this wouldn't be an issue but he is. He is not a fan. He has duties and responsibilities as a diplomatic representative of our country. It's embarrassing enough seeing a Chief Executive getting publically drunk and making a fool of himself in foreign countries. This just takes it to another level.

Don't mix politics and football. It's a thin line, as Simunic and others have figured out. Somehow I don't think Delaney will get the same punishment though.

Interesting how Stokes actions & sympathies make him an IRA sympathiser in on one argument yet in another Delaney is just a harmless enthusiast of Irish rebel songs. Strange that..

Edit: WTF is he actually thinking like. There are already mild security issues to worry about when we host England. It's extremely foolish behavior when you actually think about it.

As for the YBIG crowd. Not the first time borderline litigious comments have been made. Only difference is now they are under a microscope.

I agree that the song is offensive and inappropriate for for a man in Delaney's position to sing in public. IMO, I think those songs are terrible and praise terrorism. Now I know that one mans...blah, blah, blah. But here's my issue. The song will cause offensive much like Dave Whelan's comments about the Jews and Mario Balotelli's tweet last night did. The English FA will open an investigation into the comments and decide if both men will be charged and both men will have a chance to appeal. Fair enough.

Now lets look at how the FAI handle things.

Delaney and the FAI must have felt that the song was inappropriate and/or offensive. So why not ask Balls.ie for a copy of the video and open an investigation? Why wasn't Delaney called in front of the BoM and ask to explain himself. The BoM should then decide if any action should be taken. If so, they should have reminded Delaney of his role of CEO and his responablities, gave him a verbal warning and warn him that his conduct (not just this but all those You Tube clips) is/was unacceptable and fine him. Delaney should then have made a real apology and said his action were unacceptable.

Instead we get this mess!

[Stuttgart88]

The fact that Bonnie and osarusan can't agree as to whether the song was offensive proves that at the very least the song had the capacity to offend, especially when some football fans on this island and in neighbouring countries (both of whom we host next year) are divided largely on the grounds of what was morally right or not during The Troubles.

I think even a dyed in the wool RA head can see how dumb it was for a man in his position to sing such a song in such a place, and at such a time. That remains an issue, but now, for me, a bigger issue has become how it has been dealt with by the man himself and the FAI BoM. And beyond that it copperfastens the belief that it is an autocratic, unaccountable and badly run organisation which is failing in many of its core responsibilities.

[BonnieShels]

Just to be clear I'm very aware of its capacity to offend. However any offence caused to some OWC nutcase is irrelevant to me and I wish we would move on to the real issue.
It's not a case of Osa not agreeing with me it is simply a case of him resorting to the ideal that All people should have a voice and we should be sensitive to their issues regardless of whether they have asked to be represented or whether they need to be represented.
He has ably, argued in the past about the FAI and the eligibility issue usually on the other side. I don't agree with him then and I don't know how it is of any concern of the general unionist or IFA supporting populace of the gob in charge of the FAI.

Concentrating on the song is distracting from the ham-fisted clusterfuc.k that was the succeeding few days after the video surfaced. These are much more important and we as stakeholders in this should be more concerned about it not that he sang Joe.

[Stuttgart88]

Just for the sake of stretching this argument, a "stakeholder" is usually defined as someone who can affect or is affected in some way by an organisation's activities. The FAI selects players brought up in the footballing jurisdiction of the IFA. So the IFA is a stakeholder in the FAI, as are its fans. The IFA may not be a stakeholder that the FAI should prioritise as there are definitely stakeholders further up the queue, but they are a stakeholder nonetheless, in my opinion. That gives them the right to get offended and to voice displeasure.

[BonnieShels]

Whilst you are correct in stating that, I think that we could infinitesimally calculate all the stakeholders down the food-chain here for as long as you want. But in this instance I am firmly of the stance, and I think that that is quite clear from my statements that the priority here is action on JD.

Offence is not a core issue in my mind right now. Sure, take care of it, but for the here-and-now we need to criticise and demand answers to the major issues of the bizarre timeline and the statements that were subsequently issued. Once they have been dealt with satisfactorily we should move on to offence etc.

[Gather round]

[Mr A]

There are plenty on this side of the border that would find IRA songs distasteful, it's not just unionists/OWC people. On the other hand I agree the song itself isn't the main issue.

[TheOneWhoKnocks]

Just leave it Osarusan. Pointless exercise.

[ArdeeBhoy]

You could at least credit the source you stole this from...

And draw attention once again to Post#344 in this thread!!!

[Crosby87]

Who is this Ira fellow? A Jewish chap?

[ArdeeBhoy]

Aren't they an investment vehicle in the US?

[DannyInvincible]

Don't mix politics and football.

Although those politics (such as the broad intent behind the above little cliché) that are in line with the politics of the governing bodies are all good, right?... Communities will always use their sports clubs as vehicles for their communal and democratic expressions. I don't think it's an inherently bad thing. Generally-speaking, I'd rather they still had a voice than they were suppressed. A sanitised football without such humanity is a rather bleak proposition. Reactionary and subservient soundbites such as the above do little more than protect the interests of a footballing establishment happy to bleed the game dry of its heart and soul and sell it to the highest bidder.

The FAI selects players brought up in the footballing jurisdiction of the IFA. So the IFA is a stakeholder in the FAI, as are its fans. The IFA may not be a stakeholder that the FAI should prioritise as there are definitely stakeholders further up the queue, but they are a stakeholder nonetheless, in my opinion. That gives them the right to get offended and to voice displeasure.

Only if the IFA and their fans think they have some sort of possessive right over those players, surely? The IFA have no moral justification to be rowing with the FAI on the eligibility of Irish nationals to play for their country. FIFA and CAS both agreed the IFA had no legal case.

Just leave it Osarusan. Pointless exercise.

That's rich!

[Charlie Darwin]

Great Gift Grub today, Delaney advertising the special FAI "no cam" smartphone: http://www.todayfm.com/player/podcas.../Gift_Xmas_Ads

[osarusan]

Just to be clear I'm very aware of its capacity to offend.

so why do you dismiss those who might be offended as bleaters, moaners, knuckle draggers, OWC clowns, etc?

However any offence caused to some OWC nutcase is irrelevant to me and I wish we would move on to the real issue.

And what about offence caused to people who are not OWC nutcases? If you recognise the song's capacity to offend, is the offence caused to them relevant to you?

Concentrating on the song is distracting from the ham-fisted clusterfuc.k that was the succeeding few days after the video surfaced. These are much more important and we as stakeholders in this should be more concerned about it not that he sang Joe.

Again, different people will think different aspects of all this are more or less important.

As somebody who doesn't find the song offensive,and as a ROI fan and stakeholder, you are more concerned about the hopelessly inept series of responses by the FAI. That doesn't mean that every ROI fan and stakeholder shares your view on what's the real issue here, and you don't get to dictate to people what they should be caring about and discussing.

Furthermore, there are other people out there who are not ROI fans or stakeholders, and why should they care about the FAI response (edit: in terms of how it demonstrates their uselessness and cronyism)? For them that's not the real issue at all, and it doesn't make sense for you to insist that there is one 'real' issue more concerning than others, and that everybody should 'move on.'

[ArdeeBhoy]

With respect that last paragraph's hardly going to apply to anyone on this MB.
And seems spurious rationale that if anyone else is going to be offended, then the reverse applies and surely they would care about the FAI response...

[GypsyBlackCat]

In fairness, I think the IFA and Northern Ireland fans have a right to be annoyed and offended. The FAI and Delaney knew it would cause offence and that it was bad press. That's why they acted that way. If they had of went about it the right way then this would have died down by now. But by covering it up and saying the matter is closed they have inadvertently said that the singing of Republican songs by its members is ok and that they aren't taken a serious hardline against bigorty and sectarianism.

We can debate until the cows come home about the song but that's not the issue. The FAI and Delaney have made this issue 100 times worse.

[Stuttgart88]

Here's Dion Fanning's take on things. Good article but I'd have preferred if he had made explicit what he implied, I.e., we need a whole new FAI

http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-30785094.html



I loved the bit: when the FAI find themselves in a hole they apply for drilling rights.

And his quote from Declan Lynch: the FAI are the dysfunctional sporting body other dysfunctional sporting bodies call the galacticos.

[Stuttgart88]

It's very hard not to think about the workings of the FAI when reading Fintan O'Toole this morning

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fi...cism-1.2021828

[DannyInvincible]

In fairness, I think the IFA and Northern Ireland fans have a right to be annoyed and offended. The FAI and Delaney knew it would cause offence and that it was bad press. That's why they acted that way. If they had of went about it the right way then this would have died down by now. But by covering it up and saying the matter is closed they have inadvertently said that the singing of Republican songs by its members is ok and that they aren't taken a serious hardline against bigorty and sectarianism.

We can debate until the cows come home about the song but that's not the issue. The FAI and Delaney have made this issue 100 times worse.

I think it would be going too far to say we can take from this that there is a tolerance of bigotry and sectarianism at the FAI. There's a difference between doing something that is ill-advised with the potential to brew a controversy and doing something that is bigoted and sectarian. John Delaney did the former and he and the association have demonstrated a terrible lack of judgment and awareness throughout; the singing of a rebel ballad isn't inherently the latter. Delaney and the FAI are fair game for criticism - they're guilty of bad judgment and a shameful cover-up - but there's no need to blow things out of proportion by suggesting they have time for bigotry and sectarianism. They dig the holes themselves without us having to tag on extra unfounded accusations.

[DannyInvincible]

'Joe McDonnell' set for Christmas number one?: http://balls.ie/football/irish-balla...t-good-reason/

Brian Warfield, Wolfe Tones’ singer and the author of Joe McDonnell, the song which John Delaney made his own in a south Dublin pub last month, says he owes the FAI chief a pint.

Delaney, whose own pint-buying exploits in the service of Irish away fans is the subject of much legend, blasted out a heartfelt but rather croaky rendition of ‘Joe McDonnell’ after Ireland’s 4-1 over the USA in November. The footage was caught on camera phone.

The ballad has been propelled to 7th in the download charts. It now looks distinctly possible that the song will become Christmas no.1 (d’you remember that race?)

Warfield wrote in the Irish Sun:

I definitely owe John Delaney a pint or two. It’s amazing and a wonderful reaction from the public. I think most people think John had a right to sing any song he wants.

The FAI later told a number of media outlets, including this one, that the man in question was not John Delaney.

John Delaney later admitted it was him and proceeded to construct the magnificently confusing sentence in the history of the English language when explaining why the Guardian was informed otherwise on the Monday after. No explanation has been offered as to why we were told it wasn’t him two day prior to this.

Many agreed with Warfield’s contention that Delaney should be free to sing what he wishes and that singing the song does not mean one marks oneself as a supporter of the Provisional IRA. After all, if someone sings ‘Do Ya Think I’m Sexy?’ it does not automatically mean they are asking a direct question to those around them.

However, others, including Irish Times journalist Emmet Malone, insisted that it was unprofessional and inappropriate for someone in Delaney’s position to be singing a potentially contentious song. They pointed to the sacking, in similar circumstances back in 1999, of Donald Findlay QC, the vice-chairman of Rangers, after he was caught on tape singing what was described as ‘an anti-Celtic song.’

Here’s Brian Warfield’s appeal to people to make the single Christmas no.1:

Warfield is suggesting the voice of the Wolfe Tones is being suppressed by an RTÉ/Irish media establishment campaign. Is this the case? Haven't the Wolfe Tones been regular guests on the Late Late Show in recent years and as lately as in March of this year?

I think Warfield misses the point. Nobody was trying to deprive Delaney of his civic right to sing rebel songs. People were suggesting that his public behaviour was inappropriate and unprofessional for a man in his position.