Why are Cork City not being deducted points?

[Dodge]

Its very unlikely that Cork will be punished in a severe manner

They were not in excess of the 65% - the only problem was that Arkaga decided to cease their backing

The simple fact of the matter is that the FAI took a guarantee from Arkaga that was not binding - this is completely the fault of the FAI - as it was they who insisted upon it to meet with the salary protocal - so they onus was on them to make sure it was worth the paper it was handwritten on

The fai decided to take the guarantee without seeking legal advice as to whether it would be enforceable or not

Here's that paragraph again;

• The FAI Club Licensing Committee has the power to withdraw any licence or apply any sanction during a season if the Licensee:
o no longer satisfies any single criteria for issuing the licence;
o violates any of its obligations, duties, confirmations or undertakings under this Manual, Contract or Confidentiality Agreement
o Is involved in a bankruptcy, receivership, examinership or liquidation process, or is struck off the Companies' Register

The highlighted points clearly allow for Cork to be hit with severe sanctions given recent statements by the league and Arkaga. The beauty of the license is that whether the undertaking Arkaga signed is legally binding or not is immaterial to the sporting sanctions that the FAi can impose. It may not help Cork's creditors but it absolutely allows the FAI to act

[OneRedArmy]

A) The Licensing Manual gives the FAI (through the various Licensing & Appeals Committees) scope to apply any sanction it sees fit.

B) Anything related to projections (eg attendence, revenues etc.) is unenforceable.

C) Ditto management accounts. Not worth the spreadsheet they are written on. That holds true in any company, but especially true in a league where the audited accounts have, historically, been filed under the fiction section.

D) Failure by the parent company to abide by a guarantee (if the guarantee is legally enforceable) may be the stick to beat Cork. But it sounds like its hypothetical at this stage.

Best wait and see what develops.

[pete]

Here's that paragraph again;

• The FAI Club Licensing Committee has the power to withdraw any licence or apply any sanction during a season if the Licensee:
o no longer satisfies any single criteria for issuing the licence;
o violates any of its obligations, duties, confirmations or undertakings under this Manual, Contract or Confidentiality Agreement
o Is involved in a bankruptcy, receivership, examinership or liquidation process, or is struck off the Companies' Register

The highlighted points clearly allow for Cork to be hit with severe sanctions given recent statements by the league and Arkaga. The beauty of the license is that whether the undertaking Arkaga signed is legally binding or not is immaterial to the sporting sanctions that the FAi can impose. It may not help Cork's creditors but it absolutely allows the FAI to act

I don't think "any sanction" is a good way to run a league. The FAI should have set guidelines. Points deductions is the least of our worries anyway.

Fran Gavins "it is the Licencing Committees decision" line is worthy of a government Minister passing the buck to his quango.

[Dodge]

I don't think "any sanction" is a good way to run a league. The FAI should have set guidelines. Points deductions is the least of our worries anyway.

Fran Gavins "it is the Licencing Committees decision" line is worthy of a government Minister passing the buck to his quango.

Agree on all counts. The FAI even give themselves this little get ou of jail free card to use

"The withdrawal of a licence or imposition of a sanction is not mandatory and the FAI Licensing Committee will have discretion to exercise this power or not."

[Dodge]

BTW this is the form of letter that Arkaga (and others no doubt) have had to sign
---
Financial Statements for the Year ended 30th November 20XX

I/We refer to your request that I/we provide you with comfort in respect of the provision of financial support to you from name(s) to assist you in meeting your liabilities as and `when they fall due.

In addition, I/we confirm that I/we have no intention of demanding repayment of any loans or other payables for the foreseeable future other than in the normal course of business.

I/we confirm that I/we will continue to provide the financial support to XXXXXXXX F.C. Limited as outlined above for a period at least to 30 November 20XX to enable it to continue as a going concern and to meet its financial obligations as they arise.

---

Pretty ****ing wishy/washy

[higgins]

People are getting confused between the 65% and the letters each club had to sign saying they are liable for debts built up over the course of the season.

ALL clubs signed these. Somebody at each club has given a written guarantee that they are responsible for the debts should they go unpaid.

This in no way allows you to spend more than 65%

As Corks debts are rising there is no way they could be under the 65% limit. As they showed no signs of getting rid of players during the last transfer window then they have nobody but themselves to blame.

I find it funny the way there's a separation between Cork and Arkaga when people talk about this Cork ARE Arkaga. If they messed up then Cork messed up. There seems to be this theory that it was Arkaga messing up and not really the people at Cork. You made the decision to sell to these clowns and while it's not the fans that made the decisions you have to pay the price.

The Arkaga of Shels was Ollie Byrne. He had nothing to do with the club when we were punished. It was clear to everyone in the FAI that Ollie was a very sick man at the time and would no longer play a part in the future of the club.

Still didn't change their decision.

Cork will be punished on two fronts I bet.
For breaking the 65% and for going into examinership.
Depends how the FAI are feeling on the day they punish you !!

[SMorgan]

Whatever the FAI decide to do, one would like to think that the sanction would be the exact same for Cork Coty as it would be had Monaghan United, Kildare County or anyother club broken the rules.

[OneRedArmy]

Whatever the FAI decide to do, one would like to think that the sanction would be the exact same for Cork Coty as it would be had Monaghan United, Kildare County or anyother club broken the rules.

You would hope so but
1) thats not the way the FAI work
but more importantly
2) that would require two clubs going under having the same set of circumstances and the same set of rules applying, which given that previous troubled clubs(Shels and Rovers) had different circumstances in addition to the fact the rules seem to change annually, is unlikely.

[pete]

Cork will be punished on two fronts I bet.
For breaking the 65% and for going into examinership.
Depends how the FAI are feeling on the day they punish you !!

I don't see us breaking the 65% rule. We still have turnover of X amount we just haven't paid our bills.

The only reason players are being off loaded is because Arkaga decided not to pay excess on revenue. It is debatable if they ever paid the excess given the size of the debt.

City fans are guilty of believing Arkaga when they told us last year they would pay the difference between revenue & expenditure. PR campaign of recent days suggests this was out of their control when in fact they had 100% control. The list of excuses would be embarrassing to any business person.

[eamo1]

I started this thread so that i could have an answer for my mother who asked me that qs last night while we were watching the Pats Sligo game.However after 3 pages of this thread im still confused and still dont have a concrete answer,maybe because there isnt any.Its ok though,thanks lads for the input.

[passerrby]

Whatever the FAI decide to do, one would like to think that the sanction would be the exact same for Cork Coty as it would be had Monaghan United, Kildare County or anyother club broken the rules.

I too would love to think so but dont expect it to be the same

[OneRedArmy]

I started this thread so that i could have an answer for my mother who asked me that qs last night while we were watching the Pats Sligo game.However after 3 pages of this thread im still confused and still dont have a concrete answer,maybe because there isnt any.Its ok though,thanks lads for the input.

Its fairly simple.
1) What Cork have done to date is not necessarily a breach of licensing; and
2) even if it was, a points deduction isn't mandatory.

[Martinho II]

tbh lads wexford youths beating cork city in the league cup final tonight is sufficient punishement as cork miss out on a great gate at home plus setanta tv rights..:

I would leave them alone...

[Dodge]

Its fairly simple.
1) What Cork have done to date is not necessarily a breach of licensing; and
2) even if it was, a points deduction isn't mandatory.

Going into examinership is a breach of licensing.

[Candystripe]

tbh lads wexford youths beating cork city in the league cup final tonight is sufficient punishement as cork miss out on a great gate at home plus setanta tv rights..:

Do you not mean they missed out on a 50/50 chance of a home gate in the final After all the toss of a coin IS a 50/50 chance!

[Dodge]

Do you not mean they missed out on a 50/50 chance of a home gate in the final After all the toss of a coin IS a 50/50 chance!

Tey money is split anyway. Whether at Brandywell or Turners Cross, a great crowd was to be expected

[charliesboots]

He had nothing to do with the club when we were punished. It was clear to everyone in the FAI that Ollie was a very sick man at the time and would no longer play a part in the future of the club.

Still didn't change their decision.

What decision? What punishment?

Shels were refused a Premier Division license and awarded a first division license (with conditions) by the licensing committe.

Sorry for going off-topic but Shels were very lucky to get any license at all.

[derm]

City were not in breach of the 65% rule or any other licensing issue. The agreement signed by Arkaga ensured compliance as far as the FAI were concerned.

However, now that Arkaga have reneged on that agreement it seems the club is in breach because of going into examinership. It is also likely that we will be in breach of the 65% rule unless investors come in who will take on the debt and buy-out Arkaga's agreement with the FAI.

Whatever happens, Arkaga have shown up the FAI's wage cap scheme as literally not worth the paper it's written on. It has exposed the club to sanctions rather than investigating ways to cut costs and remain in compliance with the license. It has lied repeatedly to the fans and those running Cork City FC (a mere subsidiary of Arkaga).

Whatever sactions the club get I hope that the FAI bans Arkaga or any of its subsidiaries from ever again being involved with a club in this country.

[pineapple stu]

I'd say the most likely outcome of all this is that Cork will have breached the 65% rule at the end of the season and be punished with whatever the FAI feel like at the time.

I'd say they'll be docked (however many points will get them relegated) - 1.

Here's that paragraph again;

• The FAI Club Licensing Committee has the power to withdraw any licence or apply any sanction during a season if the Licensee:

What's the punishment for getting your licence withdrawn? In previous years, it was a range of sanctions which may include relegation, but didn't have to. Another loop hole.

[GUISAUltra]

i was just on the cork city supporters forum and they are saying that they are gone

http://www.ccfcforum.com/forum/Club-...ml#entry501863