FAI Licensing

**WeAreRovers** · 19/01/2006, 2:52 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

P35s, I assume you mean (although you've been handing out plenty of P45s of late!). For what it's worth, I am aware UCD submit an annual form P35. So the league isn't all bad!

It is a serious problem though - think it's been brought up before how few clubs do P60s, etc.

I did mean P45s, apparently we had to re-order them, we were using so many. Roddy's was framed and signed by all 470 of us.

We do of course submit a P35 but it was the individual P60s etc that I meant. The days of calling players independent contractors are over.

From what we've been told, the practice of issuing weekly payslips and P60s is almost non-existent in this league. Again, that has to change and clubs who are run well should not be penalised by the actions of others.*

KOH

* Yes, I'm well aware that Rovers were one of the worst offenders in this regard.

**Dodge** · 19/01/2006, 2:59 PM

Originally Posted by northside hoop

The sad thing is the people at other clubs are more concerned with saving face in internet point scoring matches than asking questions of their own clubs, questions that might provide uncomfortable answers if they looked hard enough.

In fairness, its an internet forum, I'd much prefer to try and score points of other fans that discuss the ins and outs of Pats' shambolic finances here. Never ever belive what you read on these things (except the sales figures for Pats' jersies, obviously)

Originally Posted by WeAreRovers

The sensitive among you have to remember that we (Rovers) have come to this, admittedly smug sounding, position through an unbelievable amount of pain and hard work. But we have come through it - albeit with relegation to contend with - and now we want other clubs to do the same, FOR THE GOOD OF THE LEAGUE.

No, you want it to be a level playing field, not for the good of the league but for the good of Rovers (and why shouldn't you?)

**** the league is my opinion...

**NY Hoop** · 19/01/2006, 3:22 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

No, you want it to be a level playing field, not for the good of the league but for the good of Rovers (and why shouldn't you?)

**** the league is my opinion...

Why bother even having a league then ffs??

A vibrant league means more publicity, money and better results in Europe. I too want the league overall to be healthy. Cant for the life of me understand people who dont

KOH

**Dodge** · 19/01/2006, 3:26 PM

Of course I want the league to be healthy BUT my first priority (and I suspect WAR's) is my club. If Pats are in ths ****s (which we are) I don't want anyone else doing well. I

**thomas** · 19/01/2006, 4:28 PM

Well to kick it off, pats a have a €0.5m hole and are trying to use grant money to pay it off....

**WeAreRovers** · 19/01/2006, 4:55 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Of course I want the league to be healthy BUT my first priority (and I suspect WAR's) is my club. If Pats are in ths ****s (which we are) I don't want anyone else doing well. I

Nah, I couldn't give a **** about Pats.

KOH

**Mr A** · 19/01/2006, 8:54 PM

Just for the record, Harps have issued payslips and proper P60's to all players for several years now.

**Dr.Nightdub** · 19/01/2006, 9:29 PM

Originally Posted by thomas

Well to kick it off, pats a have a �0.5m hole and are trying to use grant money to pay it off....

I just KNEW you couldn't give up on anger camps and muck-flinging for ever!

However, it's true that we did have several holes but we've been busy plugging them - through legit means. Our bank overdraft was cleared last year and a VERY large wad paid to the Revenue. I dunno if it cleared the backlog entirely so I won't claim we're entirely out of the woods but I'd imagine it should put us well down the Revenue's hit-list.

Nice try though. Now, back to pointing at Shels...

**thomas** · 20/01/2006, 9:07 AM

Originally Posted by Dr.Nightdub

I just KNEW you couldn't give up on anger camps and muck-flinging for ever!

However, it's true that we did have several holes but we've been busy plugging them - through legit means. Our bank overdraft was cleared last year and a VERY large wad paid to the Revenue. I dunno if it cleared the backlog entirely so I won't claim we're entirely out of the woods but I'd imagine it should put us well down the Revenue's hit-list.

Nice try though. Now, back to pointing at Shels...

Violence Camps! Ah, back in the day...

It does show that rovers are/were not the only serial abusers though. T'was yourself who first mentioned this stuff so its hardly having a pop just repeating it.

Directly on point, Rovers means of plugging holes were just as legit as any other legal mechanism of clearing debt.

**Schumi** · 20/01/2006, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by thomas

It does show that rovers are/were not the only serial abusers though.

I don't think anyone ever thought that they were. They just seemed to be worse at it than anyone else!

**pineapple stu** · 20/01/2006, 12:43 PM

Originally Posted by Dr.Nightdub

However, it's true that we did have several holes but we've been busy plugging them - through legit means.

Wasn't it Pat's who were paying off debts with capital grants a few years back? I think it was one of Brendan Dillon's many questions to the FAI which they failed completely to answer.

**Ronnie** · 20/01/2006, 1:13 PM

So is today the day. Very little press about it.

**Terry** · 20/01/2006, 1:22 PM

Originally Posted by Ronnie

So is today the day. Very little press about it.

next monday is the day of annoucements. Whats the odds that everyone will fail over small issues again and have to pay the charges for rechecking them again ?

**Dodge** · 20/01/2006, 1:56 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Wasn't it Pat's who were paying off debts with capital grants a few years back? I think it was one of Brendan Dillon's many questions to the FAI which they failed completely to answer.

No. We got a loan from the FAI to pay back some wages but we paid that loan back within 3 months. It was nothing to do with any grant

**pineapple stu** · 20/01/2006, 2:24 PM

Hmmm...There was something dodgy about the transaction...was only talking about it with someone there the other day. Still, it's in the past now.

**Dodge** · 20/01/2006, 2:48 PM

Well it was also a pay off for not going to court over the 15 points thing too so yeah, unbelieveably dodgy.

**pineapple stu** · 20/01/2006, 6:49 PM

I've read that post over and over and I can't decide if you're being sarcastic or not! Must refer back to your tone in the jerseys thread...

**Dodge** · 20/01/2006, 6:51 PM

I wish I was joking...

**Dr.Nightdub** · 20/01/2006, 8:31 PM

Stu, seriously, this is way beyond jersey sales figures, we were very VERY strongly "encouraged" to drop the court action over the points deduction.

If you remember, Roy Dooney's review of ALL clubs' registrations was leaked to the Herald but with the relevant teams' and players' names disguised as "Team A", "Player B", etc. Pats knew what was in the Herald was genuine, they even knew whose copy of the report had been leaked but unfortunately for us, Dooney got shafted and the report never saw the light of day. Parallel to that, we'd done our own trawl through the FAI files and there were anomalies as bad as ours all over the shop.

The club reckoned they'd good grounds for a court action but that it wasn't waterproof. If we'd gone the whole hog, lost and then had to pay the FAI's legal costs as well, we'd have gone bankrupt. Don't forget the levels of paranoia were through the roof at that point and in that (admittedly fuzzy) light an FAI stitch-up of some sort was entirely plausible.

So they basically made us an offer that we couldn't afford to refuse: lie down and be bought off or be ****ed entirely.

Dodge will remember the meeting where a very grey-faced Pats official put the alternatives to the Independent Saints committee. It wasn't exactly Michael Collins trying to sell the Treaty to the Dail but it wasn't far off.