Celtic considering pulling out of Thomond Park Tournament

ArmaniJeanss

Helix wrote: »

do they have to sanction training matches?

sure they can just change a rule or 2, say make it perfectly ok for a player to pick the ball up, but tell the players they're not to do it. it wouldn't be association football any more, it'd be something else, and uefa, fifa and the fai would have no say

Why would the players of Celtic or Inter Milan do this in order to cater for some two-bit promotion company in the south of Ireland? When these clubs can doubtless organise plenty of lucrative friendlies under 'sanctioned' conditions.

Not to mention that as its no longer football and not a sanctioned match their expensive €10M insurance contracts may not be valid.

kippy

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Why would the players of Celtic or Inter Milan do this in order to cater for some two-bit promotion company in the south of Ireland? When these clubs can doubtless organise plenty of lucrative friendlies under 'sanctioned' conditions.

Not to mention that as its no longer football and not a sanctioned match their expensive €10M insurance contracts may not be valid.

The question is, why are the FAI not sanctioning this match, other posters may be trying to deflect from it.

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

Des wrote: »

What would it do for football in this country?

What damage would be caused by letting people who already support Celtic or Chelsea watch them play a game in the west of Ireland?

The FAI are supposed to promote our clubs. If one person goes to that game and ends up supporting Celtic or Chelsea who may instead have supported one of the Munster clubs, then the FAI are doing football in this country a disservice.

Celtic have the SFA and Chelsea the FA to promote them. If those clubs want to come promote themselves in Ireland they can do it by coming to play one of our clubs in an arrangement that benefits both parties.

CSF

Helix wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

Because the clubs involved are members of UEFA and FIFA meaning any football they play has to be sanctioned, and it falls under the FAI's jurisdiction who are right to look after the best interests of football in this country.

do they have to sanction training matches?

sure they can just change a rule or 2, say make it perfectly ok for a player to pick the ball up, but tell the players they're not to do it. it wouldn't be association football any more, it'd be something else, and uefa, fifa and the fai would have no say

You can't actually think they would get away with that?

kippy

CSF wrote: »

The FAI are supposed to promote our clubs. If one person goes to that game and ends up supporting Celtic or Chelsea who may instead have supported one of the Munster clubs, then the FAI are doing football in this country a disservice.

Celtic have the SFA and Chelsea the FA to promote them. If those clubs want to come promote themselves in Ireland they can do it by coming to play one of our clubs in an arrangement that benefits both parties.

This is just lunacy.....
The same types of arguments were put out there by GAA heads who were against the FAI and the IRFU using Croke Park and almost derided across the board.

CSF

kippy wrote: »

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Why would the players of Celtic or Inter Milan do this in order to cater for some two-bit promotion company in the south of Ireland? When these clubs can doubtless organise plenty of lucrative friendlies under 'sanctioned' conditions.

Not to mention that as its no longer football and not a sanctioned match their expensive €10M insurance contracts may not be valid.

The question is, why are the FAI not sanctioning this match, other posters may be trying to deflect from it.

Who is deflecting? The FAI are around to do what is in the best interests of Irish football, not what the general public would like to see.

Fr Tod Umptious

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Lads, let's not pretend that that is even the issue here. If this tournament was proposed for Lansdowne, the FAI would be all over it like a fly on 5h1t3 and we all know it.
But because it's in Thomond, and it won't go towards paying off a massive debt the FAI got themselves into, they're saying no. basically "if we can't have it, nobody can" mentality that is sickening.

it provides an opportunity for people who normally wouldn't get to see these teams to enjoy them. when you're the 5th sport in a country, you can't afford to be picky.

Did you not notice the world class stadium in Dublin 4 that is the reason for the debt?

Did you think it came for free and all the FAI debt is Delaney's salary, or some junket ?

Christ all mighty, on another thread people are whining that they did not dig below street level to facilitate more seats, spending more millions in the process, and here people are complaining that the FAI actually have the balls to try and pay back their share of the project cost..

leeroybrown

kippy wrote: »

The question is, why are the FAI not sanctioning this match, other posters may be trying to deflect from it.

Financial reasons. They don't want to endorse a tournament where they as a national association have no gain to be made. They're on record saying exactly the same thing when they blocked the Barca game.

Also, it's my understanding (open to correction here) that they entered into a commercial agreement when the Aviva was opened that all FAI sanctioned friendlies requiring a capacity of over 20,000 would be moved to the Aviva with the commercial agreements in play.

CSF

kippy wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

The FAI are supposed to promote our clubs. If one person goes to that game and ends up supporting Celtic or Chelsea who may instead have supported one of the Munster clubs, then the FAI are doing football in this country a disservice.

Celtic have the SFA and Chelsea the FA to promote them. If those clubs want to come promote themselves in Ireland they can do it by coming to play one of our clubs in an arrangement that benefits both parties.

This is just lunacy.....
The same types of arguments were put out there by GAA heads who were against the FAI and the IRFU using Croke Park and almost derided across the board.

No, completely different. The GAA made a fortune from those games and were only being stubborn going against something that was in their best interests.

Nothing is being brought to the table for the FAI or its members here.

kippy

leeroybrown wrote: »

Financial reasons. They don't want to endorse a tournament where they as a national association have no gain to be made. They're on record saying exactly the same thing when they blocked the Barca game.

Also, it's my understanding (open to correction here) that they entered into a commercial agreement when the Aviva was opened that all FAI sanctioned friendlies requiring a capacity of over 20,000 would be moved to the Aviva with the commercial agreements in play.

For financial reasons, why pay your CEO 400K per annum?

kippy

CSF wrote: »

No, completely different. The GAA made a fortune from those games and were only being stubborn going against something that was in their best interests.

Nothing is being brought to the table for the FAI or its members here.

You dont think that high profile soccer events don't directly benefit the FAI or it's members?

CSF

kippy wrote: »

leeroybrown wrote: »

Financial reasons. They don't want to endorse a tournament where they as a national association have no gain to be made. They're on record saying exactly the same thing when they blocked the Barca game.

Also, it's my understanding (open to correction here) that they entered into a commercial agreement when the Aviva was opened that all FAI sanctioned friendlies requiring a capacity of over 20,000 would be moved to the Aviva with the commercial agreements in play.

For financial reasons, why pay your CEO 400K per annum?

You're entering a whole separate argument here. Nobody is defending the FAI en masse, just their stance on this.

CSF

kippy wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

No, completely different. The GAA made a fortune from those games and were only being stubborn going against something that was in their best interests.

Nothing is being brought to the table for the FAI or its members here.

You dont think that high profile soccer events don't directly benefit the FAI or it's members?

Only when they involve said members. Celtic v Chelsea with the profit going to a private individual, and the stadium rent going to the rugby. This does nothing to help us.

If these parties want their interests looked after, they should have to look after ours.

Mal-Adjusted

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Did you not notice the world class stadium in Dublin 4 that is the reason for the debt?

Did you think it came for free and all the FAI debt is Delaney's salary, or some junket ?

Christ all mighty, on another thread people are whining that they did not dig below street level to facilitate more seats, spending more millions in the process, and here people are complaining that the FAI actually have to pay back their share for the project.

general rule of business tom, if you can't afford it, don't buy it. I see a world class rugby stadium that the IRFU somehow seem to manage paying off. funny that.

also, the aviva debts have been mentioned numerous times throughout this thread. how could you think someone would confuse that with a persons salery?

CSF

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Did you not notice the world class stadium in Dublin 4 that is the reason for the debt?

Did you think it came for free and all the FAI debt is Delaney's salary, or some junket ?

Christ all mighty, on another thread people are whining that they did not dig below street level to facilitate more seats, spending more millions in the process, and here people are complaining that the FAI actually have to pay back their share for the project.

general rule of business tom, if you can't afford it, don't buy it. I see a world class rugby stadium that the IRFU somehow seem to manage paying off. funny that.

also, the aviva debts have been mentioned numerous times throughout this thread. how could you think someone would confuse that with a persons salery?

People and organisations create debt to purchase property all the time.

Mal-Adjusted

not when they won't be in a reasonable position to pay it off.

CSF

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

not when they won't be in a reasonable position to pay it off.

It will be paid off though. Mostly with money made by itself.

osarusan

The FAI are responsible for the development of football in the ROI.

Now, for the FAI these days, that basically means coming up with money to pay off a bucketload of debt for the Aviva. This is why the 3rd party agreement was in place which meant Limerick couldn't play Barcelona in Thomond.

The amount of money fans will spend on tickets to these 'tournaments' is finite. The FAI are involved in setting up 'tournaments' to make money to put back into football in Ireland (or to the bank).

From this perspective, there is no sense in them allowing another organisation (promotion company, whatever) to set up a tournament and walk away with whatever profit there is.

Whether they should have the right to refuse sanction on this kind of event is the real issue (if indeed, they have that right at all - when it was obvious Limerick really intended to take the matter to court, the FAI stopped looking for a public apology from the club and allowed them to hold one big friendly a year - I wonder if the fact that there are no FAI member clubs having their interests harmed this time makes a legal difference).

leeroybrown

kippy wrote: »

For financial reasons, why pay your CEO 400K per annum?

I don't think the FAI should be paying a CEO €400k/year but it's a separate issue. I'm no fan of the FAI's organisation/management and I'd be quite happy to see Munster Rugby get the rental income given it's my preferred sport but it still doesn't make them wrong for blocking a deal that they doesn't suit their funding interests. By the sounds of it they were right to.

Also, if I'm correct about the 3rd party sponsorship exclusivity deal they signed putting all friendlies above 20,000 in the Aviva then they also entered into a pretty stupid deal (as usual), even if they do need the money, which again was as a result of their own greed and stupidity.

CSF

osarusan wrote: »

The FAI are responsible for the development of football in the ROI.

Now, for the FAI these days, that basically means coming up with money to pay off a bucketload of debt for the Aviva. This is why the 3rd party agreement was in place which meant Limerick couldn't play Barcelona in Thomond.

The amount of money fans will spend on tickets to these 'tournaments' is finite. The FAI are involved in setting up 'tournaments' to make money to put back into football in Ireland (or to the bank).

From this perspective, there is no sense in them allowing another organisation (promotion company, whatever) to set up a tournament and walk away with whatever profit there is.

Whether they should have the right to refuse sanction on this kind of event is the real issue (if indeed, they have that right at all - when it was obvious Limerick really intended to take the matter to court, the FAI stopped looking for a public apology from the club and allowed them to hold one big friendly a year - I wonder if the fact that there are no FAI member clubs having their interests harmed this time makes a legal difference).

Pretty sure the FAI have the rights to sanction or refuse any game they choose. Was the Limerick v Barca profits going to Limerick or a third party?

Bob the Seducer

leeroybrown wrote: »

Also, it's my understanding (open to correction here) that they entered into a commercial agreement when the Aviva was opened that all FAI sanctioned friendlies requiring a capacity of over 20,000 would be moved to the Aviva with the commercial agreements in play.

As far as I can tell, that exclusivity clause was part of the 10 year Endemol contract which was bought out by Endemol for €1m after the failure (financially) of the Dublin Super Cup last year.

The FAI made a claim earlier this year that they had done a deal with Iconic (the organisers of the Limerick tournament) to replace the Super Cup with another pre season tournament organised by them. The guy who runs Iconic denies any deal was signed and says the FAI priced Lansdowne/the Aviva out of viability.

The rumour doing the rounds now is that the FAI is attempting to attract a Premier League team over (possibly Liverpool) in order to orchestrate a fixture clash which will justify turning down permission to hold this tournament.

osarusan

CSF wrote: »

Pretty sure the FAI have the rights to sanction or refuse any game they choose. Was the Limerick v Barca profits going to Limerick or a third party?

Whatever profit there was would have gone to Limerick FC.

As I said on another website, regarding the Barcelona friendly:

The FAI were going to lose the case due to (if I remember correctly) a legal conflict of interests - being an organisation trying to make a profit though football games while also being the organisation with the power of sanction over football games organised by other organisations (or something like that).

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

leeroybrown wrote: »

Also, it's my understanding (open to correction here) that they entered into a commercial agreement when the Aviva was opened that all FAI sanctioned friendlies requiring a capacity of over 20,000 would be moved to the Aviva with the commercial agreements in play.

As far as I can tell, that exclusivity clause was part of the 10 year Endemol contract which was bought out by Endemol for €1m after the failure (financially) of the Dublin Super Cup last year.

The FAI made a claim earlier this year that they had done a deal with Iconic (the organisers of the Limerick tournament) to replace the Super Cup with another pre season tournament organised by them. The guy who runs Iconic denies any deal was signed and says the FAI priced Lansdowne/the Aviva out of viability.

The rumour doing the rounds now is that the FAI is attempting to attract a Premier League team over (possibly Liverpool) in order to orchestrate a fixture clash which will justify turning down permission to hold this tournament.

As if the FAI wouldn't want such fixtures anyway. Hardly a petty gesture.

CSF

osarusan wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

Pretty sure the FAI have the rights to sanction or refuse any game they choose. Was the Limerick v Barca profits going to Limerick or a third party?

Whatever profit there was would have gone to Limerick FC.

As I said on another website, regarding the Barcelona friendly:

The FAI were going to lose the case due to (if I remember correctly) a legal conflict of interests - being an organisation trying to make a profit though football games while also being the organisation with the power of sanction over football games organised by other organisations (or something like that).

Disgrace that Limerick weren't allowed have that friendly.

Bob the Seducer

CSF wrote: »

As if the FAI wouldn't want such fixtures anyway. Hardly a petty gesture.

They announced in February that they had done a deal with Iconic to continue the Super Cup.

the FAI has reached a new and similar agreement with one of the principals involved in last year's competition, Iconic Worldwide Events, to host a similar tournament in Dublin. Iconic Worldwide Events is run by Damien O'Brien, and is the company that created the successful televised show, Football's Next Star.

The Iconic run tournament will continue to host top named British and European clubs and details will be announced by Iconic and the Football Association of Ireland in the coming period

http://www.fai.ie/fai/commercial-marketing/102341-statement-in-relation-to-the-dublin-super-cup.html

Iconic say no deal was done with the FAI and have taken their tournament to Limerick. By all accounts Iconic have Celtic and Chelsea lined up already with two other European teams to be added.

The FAI have nothing officially lined up at this moment in time, they appear to be trying to prevent this tournament from going ahead solely because the organisers wouldn't cut them a fat check for the Aviva. It seems quite petty to me.

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

CSF wrote: »

As if the FAI wouldn't want such fixtures anyway. Hardly a petty gesture.

They announced in February that they had done a deal with Iconic to continue the Super Cup.

the FAI has reached a new and similar agreement with one of the principals involved in last year's competition, Iconic Worldwide Events, to host a similar tournament in Dublin. Iconic Worldwide Events is run by Damien O'Brien, and is the company that created the successful televised show, Football's Next Star.

The Iconic run tournament will continue to host top named British and European clubs and details will be announced by Iconic and the Football Association of Ireland in the coming period

http://www.fai.ie/fai/commercial-marketing/102341-statement-in-relation-to-the-dublin-super-cup.html

Iconic say no deal was done with the FAI and have taken their tournament to Limerick. By all accounts Iconic have Celtic and Chelsea lined up already with two other European teams to be added.

The FAI have nothing officially lined up at this moment in time, they appear to be trying to prevent this tournament from going ahead solely because the organisers wouldn't cut them a fat check for the Aviva. It seems quite petty to me.

How is that petty? The organisers are offering nothing to football in this country.

And the FAI aren't trying to prevent it from going ahead, they decide whether it does.

Mal-Adjusted

CSF wrote: »

It will be paid off though. Mostly with money made by itself.

That's very possible, but it won't be anything to do with the FAI or soccer matches.

CSF

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

That's very possible, but it won't be anything to do with the FAI or soccer matches.

You've absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.

Bob the Seducer

CSF wrote: »

How is that petty? The organisers are offering nothing to football in this country.

And the FAI aren't trying to prevent it from going ahead, they decide whether it does.

The organisers weren't offering any more to football in this country when the tournament was touted for hosting in the Aviva, nor are they obliged to - they're business people. The FAI didn't have a problem with it then because they thought they were getting a €500,000 cheque for stadium rental.

If the FAI is going to execute a monopoly on the organisation of pre-season friendly tournaments then they run the risk of legal challenges. If they have a legitimate reason for refusing to sanction a pre-season tournament like this then they should give it, clashing with the Madonna concert in the Aviva isn't one. If they scramble to organise a competing tournament or series of friendlies which deliberately clash with this event, it's petty. If they want to get paid, set up a clear process for the hosting of these tournaments and charge a licensing fee based on capacity/ticket sales - waive the fee for matches in the Aviva.

Assuming there is no clash with domestic fixtures, a stadium is suitable for purpose, licensed match officials are appointed and all relevant health and safety issues are handled I see no reason why something like this shouldn't go ahead.

It's a sporting event, the FAI is the governing body of the sport in this country, their role in relation to events such as this should solely be as a sanctioning body. There is a conflict of interest if the FAI (as sanctioning body) is intending to compete with events management companies for revenue through tournaments like this. There's a monopoly in play if they refuse to sanction any tournament where they are not the primary financial beneficiary.

I would hazard a guess that the FAI's budget plan for paying back the Aviva Stadium debt includes yearly revenue from the hosting of tournaments such as this. I'd also guess they can't publicly say this due to the position it would put them in.

Mal-Adjusted

CSF wrote: »

You've absolutely no idea of what you're talking about.

that's a great way to rebut a comment without actually doing so. the underwhelming attendances speak for themselves.

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

The organisers weren't offering any more to football in this country when the tournament was touted for hosting in the Aviva, nor are they obliged to - they're business people. The FAI didn't have a problem with it then because they thought they were getting a €500,000 cheque for stadium rental.

If the FAI is going to execute a monopoly on the organisation of pre-season friendly tournaments then they run the risk of legal challenges. If they have a legitimate reason for refusing to sanction a pre-season tournament like this then they should give it, clashing with the Madonna concert in the Aviva isn't one. If they scramble to organise a competing tournament or series of friendlies which deliberately clash with this event, it's petty. If they want to get paid, set up a clear process for the hosting of these tournaments and charge a licensing fee based on capacity/ticket sales - waive the fee for matches in the Aviva.

Assuming there is no clash with domestic fixtures, a stadium is suitable for purpose, licensed match officials are appointed and all relevant health and safety issues are handled I see no reason why something like this shouldn't go ahead.

It's a sporting event, the FAI is the governing body of the sport in this country, their role in relation to events such as this should solely be as a sanctioning body. There is a conflict of interest if the FAI (as sanctioning body) is intending to compete with events management companies for revenue through tournaments like this. There's a monopoly in play if they refuse to sanction any tournament where they are not the primary financial beneficiary.

I would hazard a guess that the FAI's budget plan for paying back the Aviva Stadium debt includes yearly revenue from the hosting of tournaments such as this. I'd also guess they can't publicly say this due to the position it would put them in.

Well yeah like, the 500 thousand would actually be of benefit to football in this country.

The FAI should run a monopoly on football in this country in general with the exception of situations like the Limerick one, member clubs should be allowed organise whatever friendlies they want. This is the only situation where the conflict of interest comes into play. Companies bringing over foreign clubs to play against each other should not be allowed happen.

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

that's a great way to rebut a comment without actually doing so. the underwhelming attendances speak for themselves.

It wasn't a rebuttal, it was a dismissal.

Mal-Adjusted

CSF wrote: »

Well yeah like, the 500 thousand would actually be of benefit to football in this country.

The FAI should run a monopoly on football in this country in general with the exception of situations like the Limerick one, member clubs should be allowed organise whatever friendlies they want. This is the only situation where the conflict of interest comes into play. Companies bringing over foreign clubs to play against each other should not be allowed happen.

why not?

CSF wrote: »

It wasn't a rebuttal, it was a dismissal.

what a skilled debater you must be :rolleyes:

CiaranC

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

The organisers weren't offering any more to football in this country when the tournament was touted for hosting in the Aviva, nor are they obliged to - they're business people. The FAI didn't have a problem with it then because they thought they were getting a €500,000 cheque for stadium rental.

If the FAI is going to execute a monopoly on the organisation of pre-season friendly tournaments then they run the risk of legal challenges. If they have a legitimate reason for refusing to sanction a pre-season tournament like this then they should give it

This is way I am starting to hate this forum. It is populated by Irish people who have no interest in the progression of Irish football, outside of jumping on the national team bandwagon once a decade.

Nobody should be allowed to set up football tournaments in this country which do not directly benefit the FAI and its members, either financially or through publicity. That is not difficult to comprehend.

Sanctioning a private company to contract mega clubs to come here, play in a rugby stadium and keep the profit is totally contrary to the stated aims of the FAI as an association. There is limited interest from daytrippers here to see one or two of these matches a year, the FAI need to protect this income stream and by extension protect football at every level in Ireland.

Xavi6

CSF wrote: »

Only when they involve said members. Celtic v Chelsea with the profit going to a private individual, and the stadium rent going to the rugby. This does nothing to help us.

If these parties want their interests looked after, they should have to look after ours.

This sums it up perfectly. The FAI are spot on in this one, as much as it pains to say it.

dan1895

I'm all for a good FAI bashing but can't fault them on this. The right call was made.

osarusan

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

If the FAI is going to execute a monopoly on the organisation of pre-season friendly tournaments then they run the risk of legal challenges. If they have a legitimate reason for refusing to sanction a pre-season tournament like this then they should give it, clashing with the Madonna concert in the Aviva isn't one. If they scramble to organise a competing tournament or series of friendlies which deliberately clash with this event, it's petty. If they want to get paid, set up a clear process for the hosting of these tournaments and charge a licensing fee based on capacity/ticket sales - waive the fee for matches in the Aviva.

Assuming there is no clash with domestic fixtures, a stadium is suitable for purpose, licensed match officials are appointed and all relevant health and safety issues are handled I see no reason why something like this shouldn't go ahead.

It's a sporting event, the FAI is the governing body of the sport in this country, their role in relation to events such as this should solely be as a sanctioning body. There is a conflict of interest if the FAI (as sanctioning body) is intending to compete with events management companies for revenue through tournaments like this. There's a monopoly in play if they refuse to sanction any tournament where they are not the primary financial beneficiary.

I would hazard a guess that the FAI's budget plan for paying back the Aviva Stadium debt includes yearly revenue from the hosting of tournaments such as this. I'd also guess they can't publicly say this due to the position it would put them in.

The FAI is the governing body for football in this country, and is responsible for the development of the sport.

Their decision not to sanction the Thomond tournament or any other match should be judged solely on whether or not the decision is in the best interests of the FAI and its members.

It's hard for me to see that there is any benefit for Irish football at all from a tournament involving only foreign teams in which none of the profit stays within Irish football.

The fact that the FAI have handled the situation with their customary spectacular incompetence doesn't change my view that in this instance, they made the right decision.

If people have issues with the FAI abusing their power or having a conflict of interests as both sanctioning body and commercial enterprise, surely their complaints should be directed elsewhere - who gave the turkeys the power to veto Christmas?

As I said earlier in the thread, in the Barcelona friendly fiasco, Limerick FC were claiming an FAI conflict of interests, and as soon as it was clear that Limerick genuinely intended to go through the courts, the FAI backed down and sought a compromise allowing Limerick one 'glamour' friendly a year. So some legal precedent might have been set, but the fact that this time, there are no member clubs involved in the Thomond event might be a key legal difference. Or it might make no difference.

Bob the Seducer

CiaranC wrote: »

This is way I am starting to hate this forum. It is populated by Irish people who have no interest in the progression of Irish football, outside of jumping on the national team bandwagon once a decade.

Never knew the board of the FAI were posting on here...

The only thing the FAI are concerned with is ringfencing as much income from "glamour" ties as possible to service their stadium debt. When they were offering League of Ireland players €300 (later increased to a collective 8 to 10k) and no shower facilities for the honour of participating in last year's Super Cup they displayed their huge respect and admiration for the players of our national league. I mean, the association was only pocketing €1m after all.

Contributing €750,000 towards the national team manager's wages, paying their C.E.O. €400,000 and providing the princely sum of €100,000 for winning the league ranks their priorities quite clearly.
Licensing Galway to do what they wanted until they went bust, leaving Cobh out of the league and screwing Limerick out of that Barcelona friendly further emphasised their commitment to development of the game nationally.

All hail the FAI, factoring in the regression from full time football due to unsustainable wage levels, static attendance figures everywhere except Tallaght and Sligo and the lack of investment in facilities at many clubs (even during boom times) they're doing a wonderful job in terms of development.

I've said it before, put a process in place, charge a licensing fee and make a commitment to put that money directly back into the national league. You can make the rules as restrictive as you want, a maximum of two tournaments per year, no fixture clashes - whatever you want. Don't just take the ball home because the big kids won't play in your back garden, that's what the FAI appear to be doing right now.

CiaranC

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

I've said it before, put a process in place

There is a process in place, Endemol and Sky Sports signed up to it. Thats the only show in town until 2014 Im afraid.

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

CiaranC wrote: »

This is way I am starting to hate this forum. It is populated by Irish people who have no interest in the progression of Irish football, outside of jumping on the national team bandwagon once a decade.

Never knew the board of the FAI were posting on here...

The only thing the FAI are concerned with is ringfencing as much income from "glamour" ties as possible to service their stadium debt. When they were offering League of Ireland players €300 (later increased to a collective 8 to 10k) and no shower facilities for the honour of participating in last year's Super Cup they displayed their huge respect and admiration for the players of our national league. I mean, the association was only pocketing €1m after all.

Contributing €750,000 towards the national team manager's wages, paying their C.E.O. €400,000 and providing the princely sum of €100,000 for winning the league ranks their priorities quite clearly.
Licensing Galway to do what they wanted until they went bust, leaving Cobh out of the league and screwing Limerick out of that Barcelona friendly further emphasised their commitment to development of the game nationally.

All hail the FAI, factoring in the regression from full time football due to unsustainable wage levels, static attendance figures everywhere except Tallaght and Sligo and the lack of investment in facilities at many clubs (even during boom times) they're doing a wonderful job in terms of development.

I've said it before, put a process in place, charge a licensing fee and make a commitment to put that money directly back into the national league. You can make the rules as restrictive as you want, a maximum of two tournaments per year, no fixture clashes - whatever you want. Don't just take the ball home because the big kids won't play in your back garden, that's what the FAI appear to be doing right now.

Except it is not in Irish football's best interest to do this unless the fee was huge.

cournioni

I agree with that, there shouldn't be a friendly match or preseason tournament played in this country without an Irish team participating. Unlike the decision to not allow the Barca match in Limerick, this was the right call.

bohsfan

Would the IRFU be in the wrong to veto an event management company trying to set up a friendly match between South Africa and New Zealand in Croke Park?

Would the GAA be in the wrong to stop an event management company setting up a hurling tournament in Thomond Park between Kilkenny, Cork, Dublin and Tipperary?

Of course not. While those examples are pretty far-fetched, they serve to illustrate my point. The FAI has the right to be involved in the establishment of any football related activity in this country.

Event management companies coming out and saying that they can get this team and that team to play here are only stirring s***e. They know it's easy to tap into the general mistrust people have of the FAI.

I'm not a fan of how the FAI goes about some matters, but I find it hard to believe that they could do anything other than not sanction a tournament of this kind run without their involvement.

stovelid

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

and providing the princely sum of €100,000 for winning the league ranks their priorities quite clearly..

Like you care.

Bob the Seducer

CiaranC wrote: »

There is a process in place, Endemol and Sky Sports signed up to it. Thats the only show in town until 2014 Im afraid.

Not since Endemol bought their way out earlier this year;

The Football Association of Ireland (FAI) has signed a partnership with Iconic Worldwide Events after confirming it has reached a “mutually agreeable” settlement with Endemol Sport in relation to the Dublin Super Cup.

The settlement sees Endemol end its involvement in the pre-season competition

http://www.soccerex.com/industry-news/fai-signs-iconic-deal-following-endemols-departure/


I assume that settlement torpedoes the tv deal Endemol signed with Sky too.

CSF wrote: »

Except it is not in Irish football's best interest to do this unless the fee was huge.

Considering LoI players benefited to the tune of €10k collectively from last year's Super Cup I don't think the fee needs to be that huge. €100,000 would double the league winners prize money.

I'm not a million miles away from the 'against' side here, I want to see a tangible benefit for LoI clubs in return for signing off on this type of tournament. The FAI can still run their own in the Aviva if they want (and they can get the right teams to make it financially viable).
I'm not overly concerned with Irish involvement in these multi game pre-season jaunts because we're in the middle of our season and our best domestic teams and players are (hopefully) tied up with European competition. If clubs want to run individual friendlies between their reserves and foreign sides to boost their income, that's fine - and completely separate to this sort of thing.

My biggest problem with this latest FAI run in is that the official reasons for the refusal are about as clear as ditch water. This tournament, if held in the Aviva would have got the go ahead no problem, Irish involvement or not. (the announced 'agreement' with Iconic proved that)
The reason the same tournament isn't being approved now, is because it's not being held in their ground and I don't think that's good enough. The FAI don't have any suitable grounds outside of Dublin for hosting this sort of event, does that mean that nothing like this should ever be held outside the capital as a result?

leeroybrown

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

Considering LoI players benefited to the tune of €10k collectively from last year's Super Cup I don't think the fee needs to be that huge. €100,000 would double the league winners prize money.

I'm not a million miles away from the 'against' side here, I want to see a tangible benefit for LoI clubs in return for signing off on this type of tournament. The FAI can still run their own in the Aviva if they want (and they can get the right teams to make it financially viable).

Forget the LoI rubbish. The FAI have an entire layer of underfunded an underdeveloped soccer to look after below that. That's the real life blood of the sport in Ireland. That's where money from these kinds of events should be going.

CSF

leeroybrown wrote: »

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

Considering LoI players benefited to the tune of €10k collectively from last year's Super Cup I don't think the fee needs to be that huge. €100,000 would double the league winners prize money.

I'm not a million miles away from the 'against' side here, I want to see a tangible benefit for LoI clubs in return for signing off on this type of tournament. The FAI can still run their own in the Aviva if they want (and they can get the right teams to make it financially viable).

Forget the LoI rubbish. The FAI have an entire layer of underfunded an underdeveloped soccer to look after below that. That's the real life blood of the sport in Ireland. That's where money from these kinds of events should be going.

You think schoolboy football here is underfunded? The only problem I can see here is a lack of big clubs with money to set up their own academy. The leagues and coach education here are generally well-run.

CSF

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

CiaranC wrote: »

There is a process in place, Endemol and Sky Sports signed up to it. Thats the only show in town until 2014 Im afraid.

Not since Endemol bought their way out earlier this year;

The Football Association of Ireland (FAI) has signed a partnership with Iconic Worldwide Events after confirming it has reached a “mutually agreeable” settlement with Endemol Sport in relation to the Dublin Super Cup.

The settlement sees Endemol end its involvement in the pre-season competition

http://www.soccerex.com/industry-news/fai-signs-iconic-deal-following-endemols-departure/


I assume that settlement torpedoes the tv deal Endemol signed with Sky too.

CSF wrote: »

Except it is not in Irish football's best interest to do this unless the fee was huge.

Considering LoI players benefited to the tune of €10k collectively from last year's Super Cup I don't think the fee needs to be that huge. €100,000 would double the league winners prize money.

I'm not a million miles away from the 'against' side here, I want to see a tangible benefit for LoI clubs in return for signing off on this type of tournament. The FAI can still run their own in the Aviva if they want (and they can get the right teams to make it financially viable).
I'm not overly concerned with Irish involvement in these multi game pre-season jaunts because we're in the middle of our season and our best domestic teams and players are (hopefully) tied up with European competition. If clubs want to run individual friendlies between their reserves and foreign sides to boost their income, that's fine - and completely separate to this sort of thing.

My biggest problem with this latest FAI run in is that the official reasons for the refusal are about as clear as ditch water. This tournament, if held in the Aviva would have got the go ahead no problem, Irish involvement or not. (the announced 'agreement' with Iconic proved that)
The reason the same tournament isn't being approved now, is because it's not being held in their ground and I don't think that's good enough. The FAI don't have any suitable grounds outside of Dublin for hosting this sort of event, does that mean that nothing like this should ever be held outside the capital as a result?

Friendlies should be held outside the Aviva, but not by companies who aren't stakeholders in Irish football, renting stadiums from organisations who aren't stakeholders in Irish football.

If these companies were planning on renting Dalymount or the Showgrounds, and wanted to include Bohs or Sligo, and the FAI were vetoing it, we would be all up in arms too. But they are right to say no to companies who offer nothing.

Bob the Seducer

stovelid wrote: »

Like you care.

It's not like I can change the FAI's priorities from the outside.

And honestly, I'd still prefer to finish 2nd in the league and win the cup for the first time since 61 - but hey, that's just me.

leeroybrown

CSF wrote: »

You think schoolboy football here is underfunded? The only problem I can see here is a lack of big clubs with money to set up their own academy. The leagues and coach education here are generally well-run.

Not schoolboys. There's an awful lot of football that doesn't involved the 22 teams from the League of Ireland.

stovelid

Bob the Seducer wrote: »

It's not like I can change the FAI's priorities from the outside.

And honestly, I'd still prefer to finish 2nd in the league and win the cup for the first time since 61 - but hey, that's just me.

What I mean is that most - if not all - of the people agreeing with what the FAI are doing here would not agree with the size of the league title prize or Delaney's wages so it's a red herring.

kippy

stovelid wrote: »

What I mean is that most - if not all - of the people agreeing with what the FAI are doing here would not agree with the size of the league title prize or Delaney's wages so it's a red herring.

This is purely a financial issue, so I don't see how the wages paid to the FAI/Title prize money is not related or cannot be brought into the debate.