Eircom League votes on radical revamp

**R�iteoir** · 27/01/2006, 9:26 AM

Originally Posted by REVIP

When did the split take place?

I tried to find out the background one time and couldn't find much information.

Was it purely political?

The split happened in 1919 with the formation of the League of Ireland in 1921.

Unfortunately they made us take Shels with us as well

**thejollyrodger** · 27/01/2006, 9:32 AM

Originally Posted by R�iteoir

The split happened in 1919 with the formation of the League of Ireland in 1921.

Unfortunately they made us take Shels with us as well

Ya cheeky bastad !!

**LFC in Exile** · 28/01/2006, 4:29 PM

Question - what happens in 2008? Do the promotion/relegation or lack thereof continue to be based on an ill-defined principle of facilities or potential support? Or do we go back to football at that stage?

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2006, 7:44 PM

Originally Posted by LFC in Exile

Question - what happens in 2008? Do the promotion/relegation or lack thereof continue to be based on an ill-defined principle of facilities or potential support?

It would appear so. It's in the second Indo article at the very start of the thread. So the FAI can continue to decide who plays in their Premier Division.

**higgins** · 28/01/2006, 8:36 PM

Higgins,

If Shels win the title this year and then get told they are in Division 1 next year, are you seriously suggesting you'd just accept it and get on with it? If so you are an idiot. If you want Franchise football then go to America. I see absolutely no reason why any EL fan, who is a football fan at the end of the day, should accept franchise football.I think it will be the death of clubs. Much as I despise Shels & Rovers, dislike Pats as a rival club, I can still respect the true fans of these clubs because like me they support an EL team.

If they can state the reason and show where or how 10 other clubs came in ahead of Shels then yes. It wouldnt be nice but I want the league to progress and more importantly I want Shels to progress. If we are not doing something right behind the scenes then I dont think shels deserve a place in the new premier and hopefully it would force us into change and be a good thing in the long run.

The league is not going to be the same 10 teams every season. You are going to have a chace to prove you are good enough in the 2007 season.

I see it as a fresh start, all 22 clubs are looked at the 10/12 best placed to bring the league forward are put into the premier and from there on in you have very strict rules regarding entry into the premier.

As for the UCD fans complaining!! Look at belfield? Is that a ground you think should be in the new Premier? If you cant find 10 better ones then your welcome but what exactly are your plans for the future?

What is the long term goal of UCD??? Do you invest all profits back into your stadium and/or club?

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2006, 8:42 PM

Originally Posted by higgins

I see it as a fresh start, all 22 clubs are looked at the 10/12 best placed to bring the league forward are put into the premier and from there on in you have very strict rules regarding entry into the premier.

If, say, Limerick replace Bray, how is that good for the Premier? Surely the teams best placed to move the league forward are the ones already there? If other clubs were so well-placed to move the league forward, why can't they get into the Premier?

Originally Posted by higgins

As for the UCD fans complaining!! Look at belfield? Is that a ground you think should be in the new Premier? If you cant find 10 better ones then your welcome but what exactly are your plans for the future?

What is the long term goal of UCD??? Do you invest all profits back into your stadium and/or club?

I don't really think I should have to justify my club to you, but there is a new ground being built with 1,500 seats to comply with UEFA Licencing. In fact, Belfield Park would have been in about stage 2 of renovation had not the UCD President decided to bulldoze Belfield Park and move the club to the Belfield Bowl. The long-term goal of UCD is the same as any other club - to improve on and off the field. In particular, we provide an outlet for some of the league's brightest young stars. I don't think football clubs make much in the way of profits, so your last question isn't really relevant. Also, why should a ground be the criterion for playing in the Premier? I would have said the team on the pitch was more important. Look at Athlone? Is that a team you think should be in the new Premier? How could the Premier be any stronger than to have the top-12 UEFA Licence compliant clubs? In this case, what's the need for sucha radical change?

**higgins** · 28/01/2006, 8:59 PM

Well I was hoping that the new look premier would have extra requirements other then those already on the current A licence. I was also hoping that teams who play in grounds such as the one out in UCD would fail to meet the new requirements. As I stated if you get 10 teams who don�t have better grounds then of course UCD make the grade in terms of facilities.

I've posted before in another thread that I feel they can do all this through the current licensing scheme but for whatever reason they seem to want to bring it in separately. Maybe they are going to set grant money aside for the new 10 teams to bring their grounds up to the new standards? I don�t know..

And the question about what your plans are for your ground was genuine! I have never heard of any plans you have in this area. When will it be complete can you tell me or is it covered in another thread somewhere? I thought the college had little or no interest in UCD unless it was of benefit to them.

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2006, 9:22 PM

Originally Posted by higgins

Well I was hoping that the new look premier would have extra requirements other then those already on the current A licence. I was also hoping that teams who play in grounds such as the one out in UCD would fail to meet the new requirements. As I stated if you get 10 teams who don�t have better grounds then of course UCD make the grade in terms of facilities.

Obviously I agree eL grounds are cr@p. But grounds don't just spring up. Many clubs with poor grounds - Athlone, Drogheda, Harps, us - have plans for improvement. This was taken as good enough for UEFA Licencing last year, and quite correctly so.

But the key thing here is that the FAI have the power to relegate teams based on UEFA Licencing. So why do they feel the need to get clubs to re-apply and select a new Premier on various criteria? It can only be to hand-pick the teams in the Premier.

Originally Posted by higgins

And the question about what your plans are for your ground was genuine! I have never heard of any plans you have in this area. When will it be complete can you tell me or is it covered in another thread somewhere? I thought the college had little or no interest in UCD unless it was of benefit to them.

It's probably in the UCD section somewhere alright. We're being moved out to Belfield Bowl - the rugby ground out by the Sports Centre. The plan is for a 1,500 seater ground by 2007, I think. Some work has been done out there on the likes of dressing rooms, etc. If you were at Belfield Park last season, you'll have noticed a lot of building work going on. That's the start of the new flats wihch will ultimately go up on the ground.

The club runs itself with a bit of support from the college (nowhere near as much as smoe people believe), but by and large, they're happy to ignore us largely. However, the college does own our ground, so they're ultimately entitled to level it and relocate us.

**Student Mullet** · 29/01/2006, 10:32 AM

Just to correct Pineapple Stu slightly,
It's not apartments being built on Belfield Park but a Biotechnology Research Centre. The soccer club originally had plans and planning permission ready to go to build a new 1,500 stand but this was put on hold when UCD won a 70 million grant from the government for the Biotechnonogy Centre. This grant, AFAIK, included money to relocate the stadium. Once the final go ahead is given for the research centre the money for the new soccer ground will be released.

On a more general point, Belfield Park should not be in compliance with the licencing. The fact that it is shows how weak the licencing requirements are. I would have no major objection if UCD were relegated and told, for example, that we're entitled to challenge for promotion when we have a stadium of a certain size, so long as every other club had to meet the same requirement. That's what licenceing was supposed to be all about. There's a big difference between that and being told we don't have the correct 'potential support' or 'marketability'.

To answer the question, "what does UCD do with it's profits". The answer is that the club is a not-for-profit organisation. Any money is reinvested either in fielding more teams or in facilities. For example, last year we built 6 5-a-side astro pitches and one full sized pitch. The full sized pitch can take much more games than a grass pitch and has allowed us to increase the number of teams in our 11-a-side super league.

**Poor Student** · 29/01/2006, 2:17 PM

Originally Posted by Student Mullet

The full sized pitch can take much more games than a grass pitch and has allowed us to increase the number of teams in our 11-a-side super league.

Which in turn produces funding for the club. Yes, gasp, horror, UCD actually raises most of its own funds.

Mullet, does the licencing actually state full detailed ground criteria e.g. capacity, no. of covered seats, clearly stated required facilities and a deadline by which this should be met? What clubs actually meet those standards if they're clearly defined?

**Student Mullet** · 29/01/2006, 3:48 PM

Originally Posted by Poor Student

Which in turn produces funding for the club. Yes, gasp, horror, UCD actually raises most of its own funds.

Mullet, does the licencing actually state full detailed ground criteria e.g. capacity, no. of covered seats, clearly stated required facilities and a deadline by which this should be met? What clubs actually meet those standards if they're clearly defined?

It did in the first year. You might remember that only Derry met the requirements that year. The rules were 1,500 covered seats in the premier and 800 in the first. The other two years this requirement was changed to having a viable plan in place to improve your stadium within 5 years. There were no details specified for the plan. Just that is had to be agreed with the FAI licencing dept.

**higgins** · 29/01/2006, 5:14 PM

On a more general point, Belfield Park should not be in compliance with the licencing. The fact that it is shows how weak the licencing requirements are. I would have no major objection if UCD were relegated and told, for example, that we're entitled to challenge for promotion when we have a stadium of a certain size, so long as every other club had to meet the same requirement. That's what licenceing was supposed to be all about. There's a big difference between that and being told we don't have the correct 'potential support' or 'marketability'.

Very well put!

That is my problem exactly!.. Teams such as UCD are allowed into the Premier with grounds that will not attract new fans to our league. Of course there may not be 10 better grounds in the league and therefore your entitled to your place. I had no idea of your plans for a move to a new stadium, so sorry about that. If it goes ahead and makes UCD a plesent place to go watch a game of soccer then I would welcome you into any premier division but until then I would support any move that rules UCD out of the Premier for the ground reason alone.

It was my understanding too that licensing could solve all our problems and Im not fully sure why the FAI have to hand pick the 10 teams who will start us off in this new look league but I am still hopeful there will be clear reasons stated as to why you didnt make the grade, an example being, Your grounds sh!t

or whatever..

From reports today it does appear we are looking at 10 teams in this division and 6 of them being from Dublin plus Bray would be a little foolish dont you think. They probably dont see any realistic way they could sell a product like that.

It would be my hope that regardless of how they pick the initial 10 teams that from then on there is a list of things you need to have in order to get into the premier.

**Cosmo** · 29/01/2006, 5:21 PM

Originally Posted by higgins

are allowed into the Premier with grounds that will not attract new fans to our league.

Don't care what anyone says - improved grounds don't mean that you will get improved attendances - can give many examples of this both in ireland and all around the world.

Why the f**k do people always think this

**Battery Rover** · 29/01/2006, 6:45 PM

Also, why should a ground be the criterion for playing in the Premier? I would have said the team on the pitch was more important. Look at Athlone? Is that a team you think should be in the new Premier? How could the Premier be any stronger than to have the top-12 UEFA Licence compliant clubs? In this case, what's the need for sucha radical change?

When our new ground is ready in August this will give us a premier licence and seeing as we are the only team from the midlands plus having a huge catchment area from what I am reading throughout this topic is that this will alledgely get us a place in the new division.

Crowds should get back near the 1000 mark this season fingers crossed with a very local based set up

While it would be great to be back I would rather see us get there on merit and be able to challenge not be whipped every week.

**pineapple stu** · 29/01/2006, 8:03 PM

Should point out I don't intend to knock the effort going in at Athlone to get their new structure up and running. Your last paragraph is exactly my point.