Quotewhat have they been doing if you need to mandate them to talk to shels? passing notes?Originally Posted by chippie0001
Wow a full house at Dalymount???????????
what have they been doing if you need to mandate them to talk to shels? passing notes?
Take your blinkers off. If AIB are merging with BOI, do they talk to the shareholders. NO, first they have negotiations and see if the proposal is viable, then they go public and continue discussing. Lastly when the deal is done, both sets of shareholders Vote. This is all that is happening here.
In such a scenario both boards would have to approve the initial discussions for them to start.
Exactly and both boards have. The vote does not come until the deal is final.
so the bohs board hold talks with shels, then if there is talks to be had approach you for permission to start talks? and i have blinkers on....
you can understand the outside worlds confusion.
I fail to see the confusion, the board can do what they like, can talk to anyone they want on the ground. Without a vote they can go no further. What they want at the AGM is an idea if members are in favour, if not they may as well stop now. Simple really. Put simply they don't need permission to talk, but will be wasting their time if they have no chance.
[QUOTE=WeAreRovers]If they have any sense. IMO both Bohs and Pats have a big fight ahead of them. Those clubs have the most to lose under the new proposals.
I have no doubt that a) Pats will be forced into a groundshare with us /QUOTE]
Pats shouldn't let themselves be bullied by Delaney, or anyone else over this. We have our own ground, and that's where we should stay, regardless of any promises/threats made by ANYONE. We don't need to groundshare. The talk in the papers has been of using the sale of Richmond to finance Pats part of the ground in Tallaght. So we end up with no more money, in a new ground well away from our traditional support base. Can someone tell me how that benefits Pats ? I don't like John Delaney one little bit, and I don't trust him with the future of our clubs or our league.
Shels have clearly got a sweet deal with the FAI going on due to Ollie-Delaney relationship.
As an outsiders view this is how i see it
- Bohs have strong history in Phibsboro & own most of their own ground (only so much you can sell off) but attendances have been poor in last 2 years & were not great even when winning the league. Movement to Abbotstown on their own would be best move.
- Shels have no local support in Drumcondra, poor support but are due cut of sale of tolka. However when tolka is sold will be homeless & need at least temp home for 3-4 years. FAI will help them out by encourages Bohs to share.
- Pats have best community link as feels like locals actually go to games. Least commercial opportunities & worse ground make opprtunity to stay & develop or move to greenfield site difficult.
- Rovers best future in the long term if they get into Tallaght. Won't want Pats sharing as will dilute local support especially if Pats playing in the Premier & they still in the first division.
The only ground share that makes sense is Bohs-Shels but its Bohgs decision as they own the ground.
Thats ablout the size of it but I reckon within 3 years BOhs and Shels will be playing at Abbotstown and Pats and Rovers playing in Tallaght.
And I won't be going to the games...
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
We all know the officially-desired scenario (or think we do, anyway). But either way, it'll take at least three or four years for it to come together - they'll need that much time to build Abbotstown and finish Tallaght and for us to get ourselves in a position to sell Richmond.
In the short term, I reckon the Bohs fans are the best chance that Pats and Rovers have for avoiding a groundshare. My gut feeling is that the majority of both clubs' fans would sooner not have to, although among both, there's also a sense of hopeless inevitability about the prospects.
Bohs have the most to lose by letting Shels into Dalymount. At worst, they'd be sharing with their nearest geographical rivals and rivals who, in the short term at least, are likely to be more successful on the pitch - that'd be some sickener for Bohs fans to swallow. At best, they'd be cutting Shels in for half the re-sale value of the place. We saw last year how much opposition there was to letting Rovers in as tenants, can you imagine the hostility if the deal on offer was Shels as co-owners?
Both clubs moving to Abbotstown might soften the blow but it'd mean Bohs giving up their spiritual home, the same as us moving to Tallaght would. The difference is that Bohs would be giving up a ground they own. I'd be interested in hearing Bohs fans' feelings on such a scenario, but I can't exactly see it being warmly regarded.
As I understand it, because of the membership structure, neither sharing nor selling Dalymount could go ahead without Bohs fans' consent. Unless there's an enormous carrot waved, I can see them resisting either course of action, though I'd imagine resistance to letting Shels into Dalymount would be far more intense.
A "Phibsboro Says No" outcome would throw the whole groundsharing of two Dublin stadiums project right off the rails. If Shels going to Tallaght was floated as a response, it'd immediately block the FAI moving us out there and the two-grounds objective would be stymied, so that wouldn't really be a long-term option.
That leaves only the status quo, which neither the FAI / government nor Shels want. They could always plough on ahead with Abbotstown and move Shels out there as sole tenants in say, three years' time, then starve us and Bohs into groundsharing, but by then you'd be looking five or six years down the line and I just don't see the FAI suddenly developing the kind of capacity for long-term planning which that would require.
In the meanwhile, the pressure for an All-Ireland League will be growing and what are they gonna do, try and persuade Linfield and Glentoran to groundshare as well? I could see Gerry Adams playing centre forward for Linfield sooner than that happening.
It all hinges on the attitude of Bohs fans - if they insist on staying in Dalymount as sole owners, the whole project unravels. Ain't democracy wonderful? Of course, as either TonyD or Jerry the Saint said on the Pats MB, a change in government in next year's election could upset the applecart as well.
Last edited by Dr.Nightdub; 09/02/2006 at 12:29 AM.
Revenge for 2002
Pete,
In my mind, Bohs moving to Abbotstown would be like Cork's move to Bishopstown. It would kill the club and remove us from the centre of the city. Abbotstown is only really reachable if you drive and quite a lot of Bohs fans dont drive to matches as they would remain in the bars afterwards. Abbnotstown would kill the social aspect of the club.
The year Shels won the league from Pats, Bohs beat Cork twice in Turners Cross in front of 1500 fans on each occasion. Cork's crowds have only turned up in the past few years with success on the field. Our potential in Dalymount is massive if it was tapped into and the club marketed properly. The Kids go free showed a glimpse of what might be possible in October/November 2002 with consistant crowds of 4000, 6000 and 4000 against Pats, Shels and UCD. Our crowds can go from one extreme to the other depending on how well the team are doing and if the marketing is done with any degree of competency.
Moving to a 'greenfield' site on the outskirts didnt work for Cork so why do you think it would work for Bohs? Moving to a site surrounded by industrial estates and with limited public transport makes absolutely no sense.
I also fail to see why Bohs-Shels groundshare makes sense. I am not against the idea but the current proposal on the table makes absolutely no sense. I also think it wont get planning permission and that the FAI know this and are just using it to eventually force the two clubs to Abbotstown.
Roverstilidie,
Our board can talk to Shels, agree a deal with Shels, but they cannot sign it without the backing of the members. The reason being is that the members own the club. They can agree terms for groundsharing etc, but unless they get a majority of members to agree with the proposal they cannot sign it. Hence we will be getting a vote and the board will then know if they should waste time on this idea or concentrate on more important matters closer to home.
What do you not understand about this? If you are selling something which belongs to you would you expect to be the one to mkae the decision or someone else?
Provisional wing? at Bohs? more like the Royal Black Preceptory
That's why it's imperative that the "Provisional" wing (for want of a better word) of Bohs membership get up off their arses now
KOH
Without going off topic too much there would not too much opposition to such a move now. When we originally moved to Bishopstown the city bus route stopped 1/2 a mile down the road & was very poor access (possibly similar to proposed shels move to north dublin). If we moved now wouild be next to the Greyhound stadium (loads of parking) & have slip road from the ring road 200m away. You will find that vast majority of City support are looking towards a future possible municipal stadium sharing with other sports on city outskirts.
that was my understanding of it, but chippie threw in the line that the board need the nod from the membership to even talk to shels. i asked what they had been doing so far. talks about talks was the answer.
Au contraire, as part of the merger with the FAI every Premier Division club will be required to have a casino. The Department of Sport will offer assistance to each club by supplying them with monkey butlers to work in the casino. How many monkey butlers will there be?One at first, but he'll train others.
SIGNATURESCOPE
I don't see why pats would want to move? I've been led to believe a lot of the land is leased but Dr.ND also claims pats own some of it aswell. If they cash in on that then we (Rovers) would be competing against a club with plenty of cash in the Tallaght area which is something No Rovers fan wants. I presume pats would also prefer to develop their ground and communuty links where they are and take Grant monies they are Legally Entitled to to develop Richmond Pk.
To be honest if we get our 40 dates is as much as any pitch can take, once the council realise that they wont be so keen to have a groundshare, especially if Rovers end up offering to finish off the project on the usual 33%-66% sports funding basis, thus costing the council no more than the price of cleaning up the mess they started.
You're not the only one who reckons that, including people in positions of power.
Doc - great post but as Dodge says the plan is to bounce all 4 clubs into these groundshares no matter what opposition there is. Of the 4 we have no choice and most of us would happily share with Pats if it meant we finally got a home.
Shels/Ollie too would be happy with any groundshare (inc. Tallaght) but Bohs and Pats are a different story. There's a battle coming, make no mistake.
KOH
No One Likes Us, We Don't Care
Since it's at Dalymount, any winnings a customer leaves with could be easily recouped if you get my drift...
I'd love to invent a time machine then go back in time and win the lottery, buy new players and a stadium. Time machines are brilliant aren't they- Ian Holloway
How about a big stick instead? Say, for example, a suggestion that their "potential" and "marketability" would be better if they let Shels in.
We're not arrogant, we're just better.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks