A wide-ranging and all-powerful Participation Agreement, if you likeOriginally Posted by pineapple stu
only a court can decide that. are you privy to the entry forms / contracts that competing teams enter into with FIFA?
That's the one I was thinking of!A wide-ranging and all-powerful Participation Agreement, if you like
No, common sense can work out quite a lot of stuff.
Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.Mr Delaney did not respond to calls for comment.
The seeding was only plucked out of thin air as an issue (in order to give the impression of a stronger case) by Delaney late on in a verbal, televised interview with RTÉ after the suggestion that the hand-ball would have warranted the legal pay-out was widely ridiculed. Clearly he was making it up as he went along considering the seeding issue was not mentioned at all in the primary document released in the FAI's second statement on the matter; this was the document Delaney was holding (pointing to) and spoke of when he told RTÉ viewers that the "reputational damage" and seeding claims were covered in it. There was no mention of these later claims, introduced after the fact, in the document at all. The only complaint listed was the referee's missing of the handball.
Also, as I wrote here:
I further wrote:Surely, by happily participating in and completing the qualifying play-off without prior objection, it would have fatally undermined any potential future claim against the format by which the opponents were decided anyhow?
One would also have to imagine that FIFA, with their very capable and exceptionally well-paid legal department, would have reserved certain rights for themselves in internal documents exchanged between themselves and all participating associations with regard to deciding the format of the entire qualification process, including the play-off games, or potentially tweaking the format between qualification stages. Such would have completely nullified any validity in an FAI claim on this particular matter.
Was the seeding for the 2014 play-offs introduced late in the day too? Or was it part of the rules from the outset? This article, published in October of 2013, is worded as if it's breaking news and would suggest the announcement was indeed late on: http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/world...y-off-seeding/If FIFA supposedly understood then (on the claimed basis that the FAI’s legal case was strong) that the late introduction of seeding for the play-offs was a breach of competition rules, why was seeding introduced again for the UEFA play-offs for qualification for the 2014 World Cup?
I've been led to beleive this may not be correct though and can't recall for certainty. I've had great difficulty trying to track down the regulations specific to UEFA qualifying for the 2014 World Cup. Can't find them. Could anyone help?
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 11/06/2015 at 3:54 PM.
From memory, it was an open issue at the start of the campaign, and only clarified late on.
So at the start, it was known that it was unknown.
From memory, as I say. Could well be wrong.
It appears that the Oireachtas committee's decision not to summon Delaney was a U-turn after Delaney contacted personally by phone at least eight of its members on either Monday or Tuesday: http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...-31294133.html
Is there a theme here? Those reluctant to scrutinise Delaney after his personal pleas not to intervene are cut from the same darker green strain of Irish nationalism that JD himself proclaims to be cut from? Wolfe Toney type Irish versus 21st century Irish?
Surely in any normal democracy any marginal decision whether to scrutinise a guy in (quasi) public office should be accelerated if the same guy contacts the responsible politicians and asks them to butt out? Effing banana republic.
Not sure about the sharing-of-ideology/politics theory. I suppose it's a possibility, but are nationalists and republicans known to favour Delaney more than, say, Fine Gaelers, post-nationalists or whoever. (Is that the distinction you're making or are you distinguishing between Wolfe Tone's completely civic-secular republicanism and the popular modern-day, ethnic-tinged republicanism of a Gaelic hue?) Is there a pattern? I think one would have to be an idiot if they allowed the sharing with him of just one particular political aspiration (albeit a significant one in Irish history) to cloud their overall judgment of the man. He's a complete gombeen. For an elected public servant acting as part of an impartial body to allow their personal biases take priority would be a complete dereliction of democratic duty.
I wholeheartedly agree with your second point though. His asking of them to postpone it (as if he had some sort of right to a say in their decisions) because there was a match on this weekend was utterly brazen. To actually ring them up personally was similarly galling. What a brass neck. That it may have influenced the committee is outrageous.
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 11/06/2015 at 10:14 PM.
Can you explain the bit between brackets please? A bit too complicated for me!
I just think a rural, dark-green Irish gombeen (and a self-admitted potential FF candidate) getting let off the hook by FF / SF types plays neatly into this 1990s urban Irish emigrant's political pigeon holes.
What are the grounds for some td asking Delaney on behalf of the FAI, to answer questions about a dangerous precedent?
They make public their prejudiced judgement, that not only is this a precedent but that this precedent is dangerous.
What morons are there in the Dail?
http://www.oireachtas.ie/members-his...um=31&disp=mem
That's a bit too literal Charlie
but I see or read that the "dangerous precedent" reference was about the supposition that Delaney somehow wangled his way out of appearing in front of these self important overpaid asses.
What was the dangerous precedent that was about to set, that Delaney offered them a 10 year ticket? what grubby quid pro quo are they implying that Delaney supposedly engineered to wangle himself out of this high powered, Garth Brooks public concern type tribunal?
Yet another devious and dastardly blow was deftly struck by the likes of Delaney against the warriors who are only out to protect the public interest from all dangerous precedents.
Ha, I think I was just needlessly complicating what you'd said and reading more meaning into it that you intended.
I wasn't sure if, by "Wolfe Toney type Irish", you meant simply nationalists and republicans as a whole or whether you meant only those nationalists and republicans who, like Wolfe Tone did, advocate a purely civic and secular form of republican politics in keeping their cultural identity - be it Anglo-Irish, Gaelic, Catholic, Protestant or whatever - strictly separate. I think you kind of meant something else altogether though; would “Charlie Haughey types” be an appropriate label for who you were referring to?
And then by "21st century Irish", I wasn't sure if you were referring to 21st century mainstream Irish republicanism, which is generally associated with one ethno-religious group - the culturally Catholic and Gaelic - (as opposed to Wolfe Tone's classical version) or whether you were referring to modern, more-diverse and transparent Ireland generally. I think you were referring to the latter.
I was uncertain of the meaning you intended in your use of the noble and mythologised Wolfe Tone's name. I wasn't sure of the gist of what you were saying as his name is most often used in a reverential sort of sense but you were employing it with a negative connotation. I gather it was to refer to the small-time myopic gombeens who may eulogise him in folk songs and the like but who, in reality, probably share very little in common with him and his ideals?
Last edited by DannyInvincible; 12/06/2015 at 2:11 AM.
Not post-Nationalism... that phrase Danny, that phrase! The horror!
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
As you kind of spotted Danny, I was referring to the band, not the political figure! I was crudely pigeon holing all people who sing political songs in pubs as FF/SF types. CJH types might indeed have been more descriptive.
If you have an even worse phrase to inflict upon them, I'm all ears!
SFA chief applauds his own association for keeping their heads down and remaining quiet whilst doing things the right way by loudly and publicly mouthing off to the media his issues with Delaney and the FAI: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...-takes-5854226
He does make fair points though otherwise in relation to the FAI's supposed "legal claim" against FIFA and the show Delaney made of himself last time the sides met. Delaney's bleating in November was embarrassing, and then to shun the customary official function hosted by the SFA the night before the game when the SFA were not even remotely in the wrong... Jesus.
I do. But it would be stopped by the bad word man. Rhymes with runts.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
Hunt grunts, punts? Sounds more like MON's tactics.
Hello, hello? What's going on? What's all this shouting, we'll have no trouble here!
- E Tattsyrup.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks