More trouble for Shels?

**Mr A** · 25/08/2007, 4:26 PM

But surely there'd be a significant amount of that taken up by tax credits and lower rate tax, or would that not count in the case that the payments had been hidden?

**Mr A** · 25/08/2007, 5:51 PM

Not doubting stu at all, here, just asking questions because I'm unclear on what's going on

**pete** · 25/08/2007, 6:18 PM

Originally Posted by Mr A

But surely there'd be a significant amount of that taken up by tax credits and lower rate tax, or would that not count in the case that the payments had been hidden?

Its likely this was extra "under the counter money" so the players would already have used up all their tax credits etc... on the legitimate payments.

**pineapple stu** · 25/08/2007, 9:09 PM

Originally Posted by pete

Its likely this was extra "under the counter money" so the players would already have used up all their tax credits etc... on the legitimate payments.

Exactly.

robbiesdrogs - cheques wouldn't be "lost cash". That'd be cash you could see coming in and going out. This sounds more like the auditors trying to do verification work on, say, gate receipts compared to bank lodgements, and realising that there's no way all the gate receipts have been lodged. In that case, everything would be cash, not cheques.

**OneRedArmy** · 25/08/2007, 9:30 PM

Ties up with the famous rumours about players being paid in loose notes and coins from time to time a few years back.

**incident** · 26/08/2007, 8:46 AM

Originally Posted by Mr A

But surely there'd be a significant amount of that taken up by tax credits and lower rate tax, or would that not count in the case that the payments had been hidden?

Tax credits, lower rates etc aren't really relevant - if the destination of the money can't be accounted for, then naturally it gets charged at the highest applicable rate.

If Shels were able to prove exactly where the cash had gone, then it'd be a different story.

**The Man Himself** · 26/08/2007, 9:20 AM

Originally Posted by Theskinloyal

They are the current Eircom League Champions. Or do you not follow the domestic game?

They have won the Eircom League 13 times and the Cup 7 times. One of the most successful and oldest clubs in the League of Ireland. Unlike teams from Cork once the finances go bit a rye (to say the least) they don't fold, dissapear and start up a new club a la Cork Hibernians, Cork United, Cork Celtic etc.

totally agree. they had more teams then henry the eight got his hole

**Poor Student** · 26/08/2007, 9:35 AM

I don't think it's inconceivable that Shels could cease to exist in the near future. According to the article they're dependent on Kilkenny's money to survive yet for some insane reason they seem to have increased their expenditure for the second half of this season in spite of being out of both cups and the promotion race in the First Division. They have old debts and current expenditure to pay while being on life support from a developer. The only asset they have they can't release its equity except in drips and drabs and who knows what's left of it for them by this stage anyway.

**pineapple stu** · 26/08/2007, 4:45 PM

In today's Sindo (via the Rovers forum) that Home Farm have refused to allow Shels groundshare.

**Mr A** · 26/08/2007, 5:14 PM

Direct linky- http://www.independent.ie/sport/socc...a-1066262.html

**pete** · 26/08/2007, 5:22 PM

Have not Shels brought in a lot of new players for the 2nd half of the current season?

I thought the crowds were decent enough. Surely enough to pay weekly wages?

**John83** · 27/08/2007, 1:19 PM

Originally Posted by pete

I thought the crowds were decent enough. Surely enough to pay weekly wages?

No one in the league is paying their players entirely through gate receipts. If Shels are getting in 1000 punters at full price each week, that's ~ a quarter million. Their expenditure seems to be far, far beyond that.