Cup match vs $hell$ put back

**Counting Crow** · 08/07/2003, 9:30 PM

Rumour has it that the City - $hell$ cup match has been changed to the previous Thursday morning @ 10.00am.

The reason is that 4 of the backroom staff @ City are playing a friendly against The Turners Cross Tavern Inter Pub Team ( in preparation for their 2nd round Cup match ) - should be a good money spinner for the TC Tavern!!!!!!!!

Also, 3 of the first team had already planned to go to the pictures on the Friday night .............. and there's a good movie on BBC 1 @ 9.00 pm.

Absolutely no way the FAI will argue with this, going by the precendent they have now set with "other" postponments........!

On top of that we should make sure that none of the hotels in the City will put up these Dublin ***** thus forcing them to travel @ 4.00am in the morning for the early kick off.

It would be a laugh, wouldn't it?

**Casegrande** · 08/07/2003, 11:04 PM

Very good

The way those money-grabbing barstards are messing with Cork City FC, they can be sure of a very special "welcome" in Cork that Friday. See ya outside the Horseshoe Ollie.....

**Trax** · 09/07/2003, 8:34 AM

Only got to the end of the post before I realised you were pulling the proverbial

Very Funny,probably not too far off the mark either!

**The Sheliban** · 09/07/2003, 8:47 AM

Very sharp and satirical, and to be applauded. Nice one.

One thing though. Nobody has yet come back to say that Cork definitely did not agree to putting the league game back 24 hours.

As has been said on another thread, it seems ludicrous that there is a new rule in place, allowing home teams to change fixtures without consulting the away team. It leaves a lot of things open to abuse.

So was there consent from Cork, or not?

**tiktok** · 09/07/2003, 3:26 PM

haven't heard anything official yet

have to agree though that the home team having full control over fixture changes is a bad idea.

**�anna** · 09/07/2003, 6:32 PM

Originally posted by The Sheliban
Very sharp and satirical, and to be applauded. Nice one.

One thing though. Nobody has yet come back to say that Cork definitely did not agree to putting the league game back 24 hours.

As has been said on another thread, it seems ludicrous that there is a new rule in place, allowing home teams to change fixtures without consulting the away team. It leaves a lot of things open to abuse.

So was there consent from Cork, or not?

Given that Dolan is giving out stink about it, I doubt city consented. I mean surely he's not gonna say "yes we'll change the game" and then give out about it- that would be really really stupid. And you;re right on the other point, if thats the way this new rule is it's madness. The rule shoud be simple- teams designate a day for home matches at the start of the season and any change to that has to be with agreement from FAI and away club.

**Counting Crow** · 09/07/2003, 7:44 PM

I think I have heard it all now.

If what you are saying is true that "the home team can NOW change the date of a fixture without consulting the away team" ( it really is not beyond the bounds of the FAI to come up with a beaut like this ) - then I think I have a "cunning plan".......as Baldrick would say.

It's as follows -
- We change the date of the game to the night before, Thursday night.
- We don't tell $hell$.
- We turn up on Thursday night
- We are awarded the game as there is no opposition.

Simple, isn't it.

**The Sheliban** · 09/07/2003, 8:16 PM

Errm, its not what I'm saying!!!

I pointed out that surely the away team has to consent to change a fixture. I was told that no, there was a rule change to say that the away team needn't be consulted. I said, if this was true, it was totally stupid and open to abuse.

I have a source at Shels who tells me Cork were in fact contacted, and agreed to the switch of dates. Now, I hold up my hand, and admit I don't know how reliable my source is. Maybe he's just mouthing. That was why I was wondering if Cork had come out and said they had not agreed to the switch.

Strange as it may seem, I do not consider it beyond the bounds of possibility that Dolan is launching one of his "Shels and the FAI are a bunch of conniving *******s and we'd be top of the league if we had a level playing field" campaigns, while knowing that Cork agreed to the change. He has done it before, and not once.

But I reserve judgement on this one, until some more facts emerge.

**patsh** · 10/07/2003, 9:04 AM

Surely, Sheliban, with all the complaining Dolan has done, if Cork had agreed to a switch, $hels would have come and said so by now?

**liamon** · 10/07/2003, 9:08 AM

Originally posted by The Sheliban

Strange as it may seem, I do not consider it beyond the bounds of possibility that Dolan is launching one of his "Shels and the FAI are a bunch of conniving *******s and we'd be top of the league if we had a level playing field" campaigns, while knowing that Cork agreed to the change. He has done it before, and not once.

But I reserve judgement on this one, until some more facts emerge.

I was watching Dolan's interview after the Longford game on the local channel last night. He got really wound up over the games being switched and postponed. Huge anti Dub sentiment. Wasn't far off Kevin Keegan's "I would love it" outburst.

Only thing is, as i watching it, I couldn't help but feel he was playing up for the camera. Trying to build up a siege mentality within the club. It's not that unusual for managers to do this.
Did anyone else think that?
Maybe I'm wrong.

**Schumi** · 10/07/2003, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by The Sheliban
Strange as it may seem, I do not consider it beyond the bounds of possibility that Dolan is launching one of his "Shels and the FAI are a bunch of conniving *******s and we'd be top of the league if we had a level playing field" campaigns, while knowing that Cork agreed to the change. He has done it before, and not once.

I don't think it's impossible either.