More El embarrassment

KdjaCL

Lots and lots of El fun this week.


Shels want their game vs Bohs to be replayed after the EL told Bohs noone was suspended but seemingly Fenlon and Byrne knew he was (why didnt they do the sporting thing and tell Bohs???) SO as rules are rules and section 21.5 says a team can contest the result of a game if an illeglibe player plays. So they want a replay but they need €250 by tomorrow to appeal the game.

They also need €100,000 grand by wednesday or its bye bye Shels im sure they will get it from somewhere...... Due in Court on wednesday due to the winding up order issued by the revenue. So Irelands bestest club ever are possibly 2 days away from extinction.

And down in Cork Rico reckons he will sort out O Callaghans future in the next 2 weeks, but also runs the risk of another ban by blasting the EL for his side having no game for 3 weeks as they are out of the cup and due to play defunct Dublin City.....must be terrible 3 weeks without a game.....try 6.

Interesting week for the EL and bohs and rovers on tv on friday, will this be the best week ever in the EL?



kdjac

_blank_

Well, Shels released this about the winding up order. It will be sorted, so Shels are not :

possibly 2 days away from extinction.

Your hyperbole and scaremongering are reprehensible.

As for the Bohs situation, I can't see anything wrong with trying a claim for a replay. The only problem people are having with it is that it's Shels, and more likely Ollie, that is following this path. He is trying to get the rules changed to what he sees as a fairer situation. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that stance.

As for Rico, well you yourself have been moaning on here about lack of games. Nothing wrong with Rico doing the same. Only difference is that people take notice of him.

KdjaCL

seansouth wrote:

Your hyperbole and scaremongering are reprehensible.

So your not worried at all? Even tho the same website/person said this last time.

Shelbourne CEO Ollie Byrne said: “As promised, the tax bill will be discharged in full. It’s unfortunate that we ended up in this position, because it’s difficult enough to survive in Irish football, let alone make the great advances that we have achieved at Tolka Park in the past fifteen years. We need all the help we can get if we are to make the vital break-through at European level that the eircom League is capable of.”

He continued: “Now that this episode is closed”

Facts are facts you are in a very serious position one which could kill the club.

Rules are rules ...so when do Shels get relegated or docked points for breaking the licencing rules ala Rovers?


I moaned cos i had feck all else to do on a friday, not that the league is a joke that pro teams have to wait 3 weeks to play a game, he seems to forget we didnt play as HIS team was in Europe.

kdjac

John_C

seansouth wrote:

As for the Bohs situation, I can't see anything wrong with trying a claim for a replay. The only problem people are having with it is that it's Shels, and more likely Ollie, that is following this path. He is trying to get the rules changed to what he sees as a fairer situation. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with that stance.

The problem is that Shels are not entitled to a replay, the rules are very clear on this and no other team in the same situation has gotten a replay.

There's nothing wrong with wanting the rules changed but there is something wrong with wanting the change to be applied retrospectivly. Even if the rules are changed, Shels are not entitled to a replay.

The Cork complaint is just silly. They were knocked out of the cup so they have no game this weekend.

KdjaCL

John_C wrote:

There's nothing wrong with wanting the rules changed but there is something wrong with wanting the change to be applied retrospectivly. Even if the rules are changed, Shels are not entitled to a replay.
.

They want Bohs docked 3 points AND the game replayed according to rule 21.5 (no clue what that says but its that rule they using).


Does nobody else find it odd Fenlon and Byrne knew about McGuinness but chose to say nothing?


kdjac

Nuttzz

how can clubs not keep track of who is suspended and who isnt? the EL is being damaged by stupid administration between this, rovers getting docked, the marney affair its all balls and give the armchair epl fans a bigger stick to tbeat the EL with

KdjaCL

Nuttzz wrote:

the marney affair

Wonder what the odds on him scoring the winner on saturday are


kdjac

Töpher

KdjaCL wrote:

They want Bohs docked 3 points AND the game replayed according to rule 21.5 (no clue what that says but its that rule they using).


Does nobody else find it odd Fenlon and Byrne knew about McGuinness but chose to say nothing?


kdjac

I was in the stands in the rain, and I knew he was suspended... Does noone find it odd that Bohs supposedly didn't know?

Red in League Cup semi, knocked out, served in next game, and his ban that he was due to serve follows that - but he played. It was in the previews of the game online and in papers that they would be without McG due to suspension.

I'm not 100% on the rules myself, but papers today claimed Shels are entitled to request a replay. If true, where's the problem? It's just cuz it's Ollie, isn't it?

bohsman

I didnt see Dundalk requesting a replay after Rovers got docked 3 points for playing Shields. Besides we would have been far stronger with Caffo starting ahead of McGuinness

Töpher

bohsman wrote:

I didnt see Dundalk requesting a replay after Rovers got docked 3 points for playing Shields. Besides we would have been far stronger with Caffo starting ahead of McGuinness

Maybe Dundalk thought that a 3 point deduction for Rovers, aswell as gaining a point themselves (i.e: gaining 4 points over Rovers in the title race) made more sense than risking it all and possibly losing the game (which would see them lose 3 points to Rovers).

So, by my understanding, they could have risked 4 points (relative to Rovers) for the sake of earning 1 extra point (again, relative to Rovers) - great if it pays off, but huge potential for backfire!

They closed alot on the top of the table because of the decision, had they played a replay they could have lost and slipped back again. Wise choice in fairness.

// McGuiness setup your second goal, its not like he did nothing...

bohsman

He also handed you yours and tried to hand you a second

gimmick

John_C wrote:

The Cork complaint is just silly. They were knocked out of the cup so they have no game this weekend.

Its more a dig than a complaint. Its about the CHF fixture being cancelled, and how City tried to rearrange a postponed fixture for around this time, and were refused by the FAI.

Töpher

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/europe/5271612.stm wrote:

Bohs could be docked three points and order to replay the game against Shels.

.

Huggles

KdjaCL wrote:

Does nobody else find it odd Fenlon and Byrne knew about McGuinness but chose to say nothing?

Nope, I find it 110% typical...!

T-minus 2 days to extinction!!

Huggles

Einst&#252 wrote: »

Bohs could be docked three points and order to replay the game against Shels.

What Ollie wants, Ollie gets. Pathetic.

_blank_

KdjaCL wrote:

Does nobody else find it odd Fenlon and Byrne knew about McGuinness but chose to say nothing?


kdjac

TheGooner wrote:

Nope, I find it 110% typical...!

Why the bleedin' hell would Ollie or Nutsy tell the Bohs board or management how to run their club. Jesus H, if word got out that Ollie had had a word you would be on here accusing him of meddling in other clubs affairs.

And KdjaCL, you're leaving the 'L' out of your end of post re-iteration of your username.

KdjaCL

Its to remind me im not in work


kdjac

Töpher

TheGooner wrote:

What Ollie wants, Ollie gets. Pathetic.

"could"

Zebra3

TheGooner wrote:

What Ollie wants, Ollie gets. Pathetic.

Clubs cheating by playing suspended players. Pathetic.

therecklessone

TheGooner wrote:

What Ollie wants, Ollie gets. Pathetic.

Not bad for a man who'll have no club to run in two days...:rolleyes:

John_C

I'm starting to think that this is the most ridiculous season since I've started following the league. I thought the registration season was bad but at least that was only one big cac up. Not the cac-up-a-week we're getting now.

First, no promotion or relegation made the season meaningless for all but the top 6 clubs and now the top 6 are all rowing over who should get the most points out of the committee room. Even Shams have not been given a clean run at the first division title and we'll be lucky to finish the league with only one club fewer that we started.

That's all before we even consider the fact that Waterford are in the meaningless playoff position with 3 points and Bray are safe with ten.

Pigman II

Stephen Ward leaving for Norway now on top of all of this. Hadn't seen that coming. Not a great week overall.

Huggles

Pigman II wrote:

Stephen Ward leaving for Norway now on top of all of this. Hadn't seen that coming. Not a great week overall.

He turned it down and is staying put for the time being.

Was a very good deal for the club too.

[Jackass]

I find it odd how some of you would want/like to see the extinsion of one of the best embassedors for the league.

Also, Shelbourne may be entitled to a replay, if so, why wouldn't we request it? Any club in this position would. It's not bending the rules or cheating, playing a suspended player is.

Besides, there's a lot more money for EL teams now with increased exposure, FAI takeover of the league and increased prize fund and the setanta cup along with big european games hopefully in the future. Shels will be fine and if they maintain the progress made over the last few years they'll certainly take a nice chunk of the money on offer...hopefully starting with the league this year. (which a nice 'ould replay could go a long way to helping )

KdjaCL

Nick wrote:

I find it odd how some of you would want/like to see the extinsion of one of the best embassedors for the league.

Court case in which our mightly ambassadors who are great and the best club ever are in the process of being wound up by the revenue who feel they are not great. Yes they are great........



kdjac

_blank_

Reports are that Accolade got off on some kind of technicality, and that there is €600,000 outstanding. :eek:

Now I am worried, if this turns out to be true.

KdjaCL

seansouth wrote:

Reports are that Accolade got off on some kind of technicality, and that there is €600,000 outstanding. :eek:

Now I am worried, if this turns out to be true.

Sweet jesus!!! Just read that your forum, thats insane.

No offence but barring the sale of tolka your fcuked.


kdjac

_blank_

KdjaCL wrote:

Sweet jesus!!! Just read that your forum, thats insane.

Posted by a deranged UCD lunatic tbh.

We can't sell something we don't own, and the dog in the street knows that we've been living off the proceeds of the sale of the lease to the developers for at least a couple of years.

The only thing is that it's in the planning permission that they can't build on the Tolka site until we have somewhere else to play.

Any room in the stands in Inchicore. (I jest)

KdjaCL

seansouth wrote:

Any room in the stands in Inchicore. (I jest)

Vacate Tolka collect whatever else your owed for the lease, move to Inchicore till Santry is ready.....lo neighbourino.

Most likely scenario.


kdjac

KdjaCL

They owe €702,000 due back in 2nd of October.


According to radio(98fm 104fm) sports news.


:eek:


kdjac

Töpher

KdjaCL wrote:

Vacate Tolka collect whatever else your owed for the lease, move to Inchicore till Santry is ready.....lo neighbourino.

Most likely scenario.


kdjac

:eek: I really, really, can't see m/any alternatives! Very, very worried. Absolutely terrified, if the truth be known.

KdjaCL

Lucky they lying

http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=97198

Shelbourne football club has been given until the beginning of October to pay outstanding taxes to the Revenue Commissioners

Revenue took action to shut down the club after the company behind it failed to pay what it owed to the taxman.

The club has already paid €600,000 this year, but the High Court heard today €104,000 is still outstanding.

Mr Justice Thomas Smyth adjourned the matter until October 2nd and warned that the money owed should be organised by then or the club would have to face the consequences.

Speaking afterwards, Shelbourne owner Ollie Byrne said the money would be found as soon as further clarification was received from the Revenue about the club's exact liability.

Thats what they owed , you paid 600k now owe 102 , to be paid by 2nd of Oct.


kdjac

Töpher

Not as bad as €702K in one go! Still poor showing tho...

KdjaCL

Blues forced to play cup clash with no keeper
Wednesday, 23 August 2006 10:04



Limerick's first choice stopper Noel Mooney is one of three injured keepers

Limerick will have to play an outfield player in goal in Saturday's FAI Cup clash with UCD after the FAI yesterday turned down an appeal from the Shannonsiders to play goalkeeper Austin O'Neill.

The Blues appealed to the FAI to be allowed to play O'Neill, who was signed last Wednesday, which was outside the 14-day clearance rule to play in the cup.

However, the FAI confirmed that following careful consideration by their domestic committee that they had turned down the Shannonsiders' appeal.


O'Neill was signed to ease the goalkeeping crisis at the club with Noel Mooney (knee) and reserve keepers John Healy (back) and Seamus O'Regan (hip) all out injured.

The trio visited a doctor in Limerick on Monday night and medical certs confirming their injuries were supplied as part of Limerick's appeal.

But an FAI spokesman said that while they were aware of the exceptional nature of the appeal, that they could not facilitate Limerick's request.

He said: 'We were aware of the mitigating circumstances in this appeal by Limerick FC, but the rules must be upheld on this issue and that was the decision of our domestic committee.'

O'Neill, a former UCD keeper-made his debut for the Blues against Cobh Ramblers last weekend and saved a penalty inside the first five minutes.

Limerick may now play midfielder Tommy Barrett in goals against UCD. Barrett replaced Mooney between the sticks when the first choice keeper limped off against Kilkenny City 12 days ago.

Wtf, any other league and they would get approval.

Bet on UCD tbh.


kdjac

Zebra3

Well apparently Ollie wants confirmation of the €100k or so owed and why it´s owed. I always thought the Revenue hit you with a bill (in these circumstances) and it was up to you to disprove it.......

Töpher

Ah sure, nonsense happens to the 'best' too...

BBC wrote:

2104: Play resumes at Middlesbrough with Didier Drogba receiving an immediate booking for returning to the pitch after the restart - without permission from the officials. Surely they are supposed to count how many players are present before restarting the match?

MrJoeSoap

Einst&#252 wrote: »

Ah sure, nonsense happens to the 'best' too...

Certainly does. Southampton might be without John Viafara on Saturday as they only recently discovered his name is actually spelt Jhon. :rolleyes:

johnos

seansouth wrote:

Why the bleedin' hell would Ollie or Nutsy tell the Bohs board or management how to run their club. Jesus H, if word got out that Ollie had had a word you would be on here accusing him of meddling in other clubs affairs.

Presumably because they figured that playing McGuinness would give Bohs an unfair edge, which is the rather dubious basis of their current state of high dudgeon.
The fact that they knew and failed to lodge a protest until after they were beaten by Bohs totally undermines their position.