Mrs Gill steps up to the plate

**Rossi** · 12/12/2006, 3:19 PM

tis great to be a drog!!!!!!

Looking good for next season and Dundalk in the graveyard!!!!

**marley** · 12/12/2006, 3:35 PM

Some Derry fans have short memories - 2 weeks ago the FAI couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery ( when it suits you) and now the process by the FAI is just great absolutely brilliant even though after clubs signed up to the ORIGINAL criteria that the gosh*tes in the FAI realised sh*t Kildare didn't exist in the Eircom League 5 years ago lets make it 4 years and sure if it fu*ks up a club so be it.

**dcfcsteve** · 12/12/2006, 3:49 PM

Originally Posted by marley

Some Derry fans have short memories - 2 weeks ago the FAI couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery ( when it suits you) and now the process by the FAI is just great absolutely brilliant even though after clubs signed up to the ORIGINAL criteria that the gosh*tes in the FAI realised sh*t Kildare didn't exist in the Eircom League 5 years ago lets make it 4 years and sure if it fu*ks up a club so be it.

You can't compare the IAG process with things like the McDermott affair, as they are clearly completely different events. There is zero justification for the handling of suspensions by the FAI this year - all involved have declared it a farce. There is plenty of justification for the IAG process - it's primarily those who got caught out by it appear to be criticising it. Whether you agree with the process or not, it can be justified. The numerous volte-faces with McDermott cannot be.

No-one is claiming the IAG process was perfect, and it was obvious that a process like that would ineviatbly aggrieve some club or other. But all signed-up to it at the start - and for a club to claim that they didn't really understand it when they did is pure pathetic. Surprise, surprise - those clubs that fell foul of the process are the aggrieved ones, whilst every other club is just getting on with it...

As for the 5 year time-scale - name me a fairer period they should've used, and justify it intelligently ?

**marley** · 12/12/2006, 3:56 PM

All clubs agreed to the previous 5 years it was after agreement changed to 4 years

**dcfcsteve** · 12/12/2006, 4:08 PM

Originally Posted by marley

All clubs agreed to the previous 5 years it was after agreement changed to 4 years

Firstly - they had to to ensure equal comparison. What part of that don't you get ??

Secondly - I don't remember a single club complaining about that minor change at the time, do you ?? Not even Dundalk...

Thirdly - it wouldn't have changed a thing for Dundalk. The fact that you're grasping at this in an attempt to discredit the process that lead to an outcome that would still have gone against you anyway suggests that you are low on alternative criticisms.

Finally - give me a fairer time-scale than that used, and justify it intellligently. If you can't, then don't criticise that which was used....

**Sheridan** · 12/12/2006, 4:24 PM

Originally Posted by mcgonigle

Says it all about your club really

Quite, the players involved would have been disciplined by any club with reputable owners, but monkey see, monkey do, I guess.

**Sheridan** · 12/12/2006, 4:26 PM

Originally Posted by wws

I've found Gill to be an affable sort in person

Giller is a sound and honourable man, he only gets a hammering on here because a sizeable body of posters happen to support clubs which were in direct competition with his this season (and are incapable of seeing further than their own allegiances, or of thinking for themselves.) I have limited sympathy for Dundalk - they signed up the process hoping to double their chances of promotion - but infinite sympathy for John Gill, a man who has devoted his entire adult life to Irish football, and from whom football has taken far more than he ever sought or received in return.

The playing field was tilted in his opponents' favour as soon as the process was devised. Shamrock Rovers knew a top-five finish would suffice, and so played without fear or pressure (just as Bernard Tapie fixed Marseille's final league fixture ahead of the European Cup final, except applied to an entire season.) Giller was asked to overhaul what amounted to an undeclared points deduction, with an inferior team (Trevor Vaughan FFS), then prepare his players for a two-legged game of indeterminate consequence against Premier Division opponents, and did all that was asked of him. He's entitled, as a genuine football man (a description which couldn't be applied to most posters here, judging from what I've read over the past 36 hours) to his bewilderment at a decision which offends the very essence of competitive sport.

**Schumi** · 12/12/2006, 4:36 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

It's obvious why neitehr 1 year nor 25yrs would've worked.

Why wouldn't 1 have worked? Whatever about the relevence of the off-field criteria, I can't see any reason why clubs' results from years ago should impact on their suitability for the new league. The only effect I see was to guarantee Rovers' place in the premier.

**passerrby** · 12/12/2006, 4:49 PM

giller does not give a monkies about dundalk and is only worried about himself and his comments yesterday about having to review his situation was putting himself back in the shop window and attempting to jump ship.

**dcfcsteve** · 12/12/2006, 4:49 PM

Originally Posted by Schumi

Why wouldn't 1 have worked? Whatever about the relevence of the off-field criteria, I can't see any reason why clubs' results from years ago should impact on their suitability for the new league. The only effect I see was to guarantee Rovers' place in the premier.

One year wouldn't have worked, as it would've opened the possibility for one-offs to have a disproportionate influence on the process. Taking the average of a medm-term period allows for a broader view of a club's abilities to be factored-in.

If the overall objective of the process was to determine which teams were best located, structured, funded and performing to operate at the highest level, then it makes perfect sense to use a timescale of more than 1 year.

1 year probably wouldn't have stopped Rovers getting in anyway, and certainly wouldn't have helped Dundalk.

Why - what's your rational arguement for a 1 year period to have been used ? And does anyone really think the results would've differed widely - if at all - under a different time-period ? On-the-pitch considerations didn't provide a majority of points.

**Calcio Jack** · 12/12/2006, 4:56 PM

Originally Posted by Sheridan

Quite, the players involved would have been disciplined by any club with reputable owners, but monkey see, monkey do, I guess.

Rubbish..let's bin this one. Are you accusing Rovers players of something...if so where's your proof etc. You see we are not in the business of disciplining players unless there is (1) a complaint against them ,that (2) has been proven.
As for your inference that Rovers doesn't have reputable owners...well as one of the owners ie a member of the 400 Club , let me assure you we are very reputable..but again if you wish to accuse us of not being so..then provide the proof, in other words either put up or shut up.

**Schumi** · 12/12/2006, 4:56 PM

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

what's your rational arguement for a 1 year period to have been used ? And does anyone really think the results would've differed widely - if at all - under a different time-period ? On-the-pitch considerations didn't provide a majority of points.

One year of results is what's always used in leagues to determine playing strength. I think this year's results are far more important than previous years.

**Sheridan** · 12/12/2006, 5:00 PM

Originally Posted by Calcio Jack

do they not have his mobile number since he recently changed it !!

Explain (honestly) what this alluded to and I'll delete my post.

**Sam Savic** · 12/12/2006, 5:09 PM

Originally Posted by Sheridan

Explain (honestly) what this alluded to and I'll delete my post.

Have a look at the roundy yoke after the two exclamation marks in his post.

**Sheridan** · 12/12/2006, 5:12 PM

It's interesting that Calcio Jack immediately made the connection with a particular club which wasn't named in my post.

**dcfcsteve** · 12/12/2006, 5:28 PM

Originally Posted by Schumi

One year of results is what's always used in leagues to determine playing strength. I think this year's results are far more important than previous years.

No. One year's results are what's used in league's to determine the playing strength of clubs in a one-off snap-shot. They are highly susceptible to flukes and anomalies. What if Bohs had been condemned to the First Division because of points deductions over the McGuinness Affair ? Or other clubs because of the Dublin City points affair ? That shows you the potential for problems when such a narrow time-frame is taken as being representative.

They're not used in Independent Assessments of which clubs are best equipped on and off the pitch to survive and grow at the highest level.

It doesn't help that we probably can't think of any other league that has had its own IAG process mid-operation.

Sure feck it - why not just take the last game every team played as the sole reflection of their abilities.....?

**ColinR** · 12/12/2006, 5:59 PM

Originally Posted by marley

All clubs agreed to the previous 5 years it was after agreement changed to 4 years

was the plan not meant to be the previous 5 seasons (not years). big difference, as craptown would need the previous six seasons to have their cup win included!

**pete** · 12/12/2006, 6:10 PM

Originally Posted by ColinR

was the plan not meant to be the previous 5 seasons (not years). big difference, as craptown would need the previous six seasons to have their cup win included!

So when the FAI mentioned last 5 years it seems neither the clubs or the FAI noticed this would sort of disadvantage Kildare County?

Moving on from that error what other possible course of action could the FAI undertake?

**Maynard** · 12/12/2006, 6:40 PM

Originally Posted by Sheridan

Giller is a sound and honourable man, he only gets a hammering on here because a sizeable body of posters happen to support clubs which were in direct competition with his this season (and are incapable of seeing further than their own allegiances, or of thinking for themselves.) I have limited sympathy for Dundalk - they signed up the process hoping to double their chances of promotion - but infinite sympathy for John Gill, a man who has devoted his entire adult life to Irish football, and from whom football has taken far more than he ever sought or received in return.

The playing field was tilted in his opponents' favour as soon as the process was devised. Shamrock Rovers knew a top-five finish would suffice, and so played without fear or pressure (just as Bernard Tapie fixed Marseille's final league fixture ahead of the European Cup final, except applied to an entire season.) Giller was asked to overhaul what amounted to an undeclared points deduction, with an inferior team (Trevor Vaughan FFS), then prepare his players for a two-legged game of indeterminate consequence against Premier Division opponents, and did all that was asked of him. He's entitled, as a genuine football man (a description which couldn't be applied to most posters here, judging from what I've read over the past 36 hours) to his bewilderment at a decision which offends the very essence of competitive sport.

Agree totally. Seeing the team that finishes behind you leap-frog you must've been bad enough, but it's the insistence of HAVING to play the play-off really sticks in the craw. Congrats to all the Dundalk players and officals on a very good season's work in 2006.

**Flawless** · 12/12/2006, 8:01 PM

Originally Posted by Calcio Jack

So for the last time Gill: The criteria were agreed to by your own and all the other clubs, if you didn't like them then you should of walked.

We agreed to a 5 Season Adjudication...

Don't understand why the club didnt put up more of a fight so that our Cup win would have been taken into account after the Kildare Fiasco.

Also someone mentioned our off-field criteria being a cause for us to lose points, that was our overall strength believe it or not!!,we actually scored more points than shels did in the off-field dept!!