FAI accepted 5 million over Henry

Dempsey

"When he gave me his hand, I did not give mine because I do not have two faces" - Giovanni Trapattoni on Sepp Blatter

Still a fiery character at least

Corholio

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

People just want to take a shot at Delaney regardless of the facts.

The facts of Delaney wanting to be entered into the cup as a 33rd team, or taking legal action about a ref's decision? The guy is a buffoon, a self serving, wealthy buffoon though. The €5 million was in no way solely as 'litigation' money, as shown by Traps comments today.

Benimar

Corholio wrote: »

The facts of Delaney wanting to be entered into the cup as a 33rd team, or taking legal action about a ref's decision? The guy is a buffoon, a self serving, wealthy buffoon though. The €5 million was in no way solely as 'litigation' money, as shown by Traps comments today.

So, you criticise Delaney for taking legal action where there was no case (he didn't take legal action BTW) and then criticise him for getting 5m out of it??

I think Fr Tod has hit the nail on the head here.

Corholio

Benimar wrote: »

So, you criticise Delaney for taking legal action where there was no case (he didn't take legal action BTW) and then criticise him for getting 5m out of it??

I think Fr Tod has hit the nail on the head here.

He's on record as saying legal action would have been a possibility, the very fact he would is the incompetence I was talking about. I also never criticised him for getting €5m out of it, there should have been no €5m though, that's my point. The F.A.I. were all part of this seedy process because of it.

Paz-CCFC

Not strictly related to FIFA and the 5M, but another money-related/lack of transparency thing with the FAI.

According to this article on the42.ie, the League of Ireland (men's and women's) provides €1M annually for the FAI. UEFA provide national associations with a grant of €250,000 a year to assist with the running of their national leagues. Clubs weren't even informed of this by the association, they found out from other clubs in other European leagues. A similar value grant is given to run licensing (which only affects teams in the national league) and disciplinary processes. These UEFA grants don't go towards prize money, because that is totally funded by clubs' entry fees (and then some). Add in money from the Airtricity sponsorship, which clubs also do not benefit from. They actually have to provide free advert space, by way of stadium hoardings and having not refer to sponsors, as opposed to generic titles (eg, League of Ireland, National League etc.), but they don't get a penny from it.

In the women's league, it is understood that €200,000 worth of grants are given by UEFA to fund the women's league. €180,000 of that is retained by the FAI for administrative fees. The WNL is a one tier, seven team league.

Clubs asked an external facilitator of the FAI to view the league's accounts at one meeting. He said that he would bring back that information from the association. At the next meeting, he said "I've reviewed them, they're fine".

So, what does the FAI do with all this money?

Fr Tod Umptious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

People just want to take a shot at Delaney regardless of the facts.

The facts are that he has dragged the FAI into the heart of the FIFA mess that is making international news. While, of course, presiding over dwindling returns for the national side in front of dwindling crowds and a domestic lesgue that struggles, with our top club getting less prize money than he earns annually.

But hey, he parties hard and he never tires of talking about his lovely girlfriend. The important stuff.

Right Turn Clyde

Sorry if this has been answered already but I haven't read through the entire thread.

What exactly were FIFA guilty of in the Henry case? What did they do wrong?

Benimar

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

Sorry if this has been answered already but I haven't read through the entire thread.

What exactly were FIFA guilty of in the Henry case? What did they do wrong?

According to the FAI statement it was Blatter mentioning that we wanted to be the 33rd team. The meeting where it was brought up was supposed to remain confidential.

Right Turn Clyde

Benimar wrote: »

According to the FAI statement it was Blatter mentioning that we wanted to be the 33rd team. The meeting where it was brought up was supposed to remain confidential.

Okay. But why did that warrant a payout?

By the way, what on earth were the FAI thinking with the 33rd team idea? Ireland were cheated out of a penalty shoot-out, nothing else. And one member of the France team was guilty, nobody else. Yet the FAI wanted to be allowed to compete in the World Cup? Outrageous.

Benimar

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

Okay. But why did that warrant a payout?

By the way, what on earth were the FAI thinking with the 33rd team idea? Ireland were cheated out of a penalty shoot-out, nothing else. And one member of the France team was guilty, nobody else. Yet the FAI wanted to be allowed to compete in the World Cup? Outrageous.

If what the FAI says is true then Blatter was in breach of a confidentiality clause. That would warrant some form of redress. It's up to everyone to decide if it was worth 5m. Some on here think so, some think we should have got more, and one or two feel we shouldn't have taken anything.

The 33rd team was done to death in 2009 when it came out. I don't think anyone would deny it was crazy. The only 'benefit' I'd give the FAI is that it's not clear if this was their suggested solution or if they were just throwing out ideas at a meeting and Blatter used that one to show the FAI up.

Right Turn Clyde

Benimar wrote: »

If what the FAI says is true then Blatter was in breach of a confidentiality clause. That would warrant some form of redress.

Yes, but 'breach' and 'clause' are contract terms. What was the contract? And a legally-binding contract must be supported by consideration? So what was the consideration? Also, consideration must move from the promisee (the person to whom a promise is made). So who is the promisor (the person who makes the promise)? What was the 'promise'?

If FIFA paid the FAI €5m because they breached a confidentially clause, then what was the clause inserted into? Was it a contact, and if so, what was agreed upon? What was the consideration? What did each party agree to do, or agree not to do?

Fr Tod Umptious

Benimar wrote: »

If what the FAI says is true then Blatter was in breach of a confidentiality clause. That would warrant some form of redress. It's up to everyone to decide if it was worth 5m. Some on here think so, some think we should have got more, and one or two feel we shouldn't have taken anything.

The 33rd team was done to death in 2009 when it came out. I don't think anyone would deny it was crazy. The only 'benefit' I'd give the FAI is that it's not clear if this was their suggested solution or if they were just throwing out ideas at a meeting and Blatter used that one to show the FAI up.

I have always been of the believe that the 33rd team was never a serious suggestion by the FAI, rather something that was mentioned jokingly or in passing

The only knowledge we have of it is Blatter's mocking comment in 2009.

Benimar

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

Yes, but 'breach' and 'clause' are contract terms. What was the contract? And a legally-binding contract must be supported by consideration? So what was the consideration? Also, consideration must move from the promisee (the person to whom a promise is made). So who is the promisor (the person who makes the promise)? What was the 'promise'?

If FIFA paid the FAI €5m because they breached a confidentially clause, then what was the clause inserted into? Was it a contact, and if so, what was agreed upon? What was the consideration? What did each party agree to do, or not to do?

I used the terms loosely (basically because none of us know what, if any agreement was in place). The way I (a non law person) read it is that the FAI would claim that their reputation was damaged by release of information that was supposed to be confidential.

I would suspect that there was something in writing about confidentiality as Sepp folded like a cheap suit.

Right Turn Clyde

Benimar wrote: »

I used the terms loosely (basically because none of us know what, if any agreement was in place). The way I (a non law person) read it is that the FAI would claim that their reputation was damaged by release of information that was supposed to be confidential.

I would suspect that there was something in writing about confidentiality as Sepp folded like a cheap suit.

The term 'clause' has been thrown about a good bit lately, so I wasn't directing those questions at you specifically. I suspect a confidentially clause can be inserted into other types of agreements, not just legal contracts, but there would have to be an agreement that the disclosure was in breach of. I'd love to know what the agreement was! As you say, there must have been something, otherwise FIFA would have simply made a gratuitous payment of €5m, and while we know they're corrupt, they're not bloody stupid.

celt262

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

If FIFA paid the FAI €5m because they breached a confidentially clause, then what was the clause inserted into? Was it a contact, and if so, what was agreed upon? What was the consideration? What did each party agree to do, or agree not to do?

That would all be confidential.

Benimar

Right Turn Clyde wrote: »

The term 'clause' has been thrown about a good bit lately, so I wasn't directing those questions at you specifically. I suspect a confidentially clause can be inserted into other types of agreements, not just legal contracts, but there would have to be an agreement that the disclosure was in breach of. I'd love to know what the agreement was! As you say, there must have been something, otherwise FIFA would have simply made a gratuitous payment of €5m, and while we know they're corrupt, they're not bloody stupid.

I'm pretty sure the FAI statement said that the contents of the meeting were to remain confidential (it was essentially exploratory talks with a follow up meeting planned).

If the 33rd team suggestion was only made at that meeting (highly likely) then Sepp breached that agreement. I don't reckon there was a 'fixed penalty' as such but 5m was the agreed outcome in the end to avoid any sort of bad publicity/possible court case.

Right Turn Clyde

celt262 wrote: »

That would all be confidential.

Well, exactly. I'm not suggesting that we should be told, but the existence of an agreement/confidentiality-clause raises questions. That's all I'm saying. This isn't going to go away simply because two organisations (initially) agreed to keep it quiet.

Right Turn Clyde

Benimar wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the FAI statement said that the contents of the meeting were to remain confidential (it was essentially exploratory talks with a follow up meeting planned).

If the 33rd team suggestion was only made at that meeting (highly likely) then Sepp breached that agreement. I don't reckon there was a 'fixed penalty' as such but 5m was the agreed outcome in the end to avoid any sort of bad publicity/possible court case.

Yeah that would make more sense alright.

Edit: And if that is the case, then fair play to John Delaney.

DeanAustin

I'd bet money that if Delaney went on the radio the other day saying FIFA offered him 5 million and he turned it down on a point of principle, he'd be getting lambasted by the same people on this thread who are saying he shouldn't have taken it.

I despise people who try to hold others to a higher standard than they expect of themselves. This thread is full of them.

Think what you want of Delaney but he was doing what he believed to be the best thing for the FAI in this case.

seligehgit

DeanAustin wrote: »

I'd bet money that if Delaney went on the radio the other day saying FIFA offered him 5 million and he turned it down on a point of principle, he'd be getting lambasted by the same people on this thread who are saying he shouldn't have taken it.

I despise people who try to hold others to a higher standard than they expect of themselves. This thread is full of them.

Think what you want of Delaney but he was doing what he believed to be the best thing for the FAI in this case.

No this thread has a number of people who would hold themselves to a high standard and have the same expectations of others.

DeanAustin

seligehgit wrote: »

No this thread has a number of people who would hold themselves to a high standard and have the same expectations of others.

Sure it does. All those lads on here that would turn down 5 million on a point of principle. Behave yourself ffs.

K-9

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Not strictly related to FIFA and the 5M, but another money-related/lack of transparency thing with the FAI.

According to this article on the42.ie, the League of Ireland (men's and women's) provides €1M annually for the FAI. UEFA provide national associations with a grant of €250,000 a year to assist with the running of their national leagues. Clubs weren't even informed of this by the association, they found out from other clubs in other European leagues. A similar value grant is given to run licensing (which only affects teams in the national league) and disciplinary processes. These UEFA grants don't go towards prize money, because that is totally funded by clubs' entry fees (and then some). Add in money from the Airtricity sponsorship, which clubs also do not benefit from. They actually have to provide free advert space, by way of stadium hoardings and having not refer to sponsors, as opposed to generic titles (eg, League of Ireland, National League etc.), but they don't get a penny from it.

In the women's league, it is understood that €200,000 worth of grants are given by UEFA to fund the women's league. €180,000 of that is retained by the FAI for administrative fees. The WNL is a one tier, seven team league.

Clubs asked an external facilitator of the FAI to view the league's accounts at one meeting. He said that he would bring back that information from the association. At the next meeting, he said "I've reviewed them, they're fine".

So, what does the FAI do with all this money?

Good stuff. It's almost as if the women's league is just to get 200k from FIFA.

Delaney's open and transparent comments don't stand up to any scrutiny.

Corholio

DeanAustin wrote: »

I'd bet money that if Delaney went on the radio the other day saying FIFA offered him 5 million and he turned it down on a point of principle, he'd be getting lambasted by the same people on this thread who are saying he shouldn't have taken it.

I despise people who try to hold others to a higher standard than they expect of themselves. This thread is full of them.

Think what you want of Delaney but he was doing what he believed to be the best thing for the FAI in this case.

It's not much of a point to make to 'guess' what other people would do and then proceed to have a blanket opinion on anyone who didnt think this was all nice and rosy. Best thing for the F.A.I. eh? So best thing for the organisation that he is head of? Take a bow John.

Despise is a strong word, so dislike....I dislike anyone who tries roll everyone's opposite arguments all into one same argument and guess what they might say.

DeanAustin

Corholio wrote: »

It's not much of a point to make to 'guess' what other people would do and then proceed to have a blanket opinion on anyone who didnt think this was all nice and rosy. Best thing for the F.A.I. eh? So best thing for the organisation that he is head of? Take a bow John.

Despise is a strong word, so dislike....I dislike anyone who tries roll everyone's opposite arguments all into one same argument and guess what they might say.

Despise is what I meant.

You think he got the best deal for the FAI?

Corholio

DeanAustin wrote: »

Despise is what I meant.

You think he got the best deal for the FAI?

Of course getting €5 million from anyone is a great 'deal'. Is that all you are arguing? That receiving 5 million from someone is good for someone else?

newballsplease

I still pis5 myself laughing at the fact the FAI asked to be the 33rd team at the world cup ! Such a bunch of buffs

Kidchameleon

newballsplease wrote: »

I still pis5 myself laughing at the fact the FAI asked to be the 33rd team at the world cup ! Such a bunch of buffs

You have no idea of the context of that conversation. You only have the word of a man who is probably the most famous lier in the world at the moment.

DeanAustin

DeanAustin wrote: »

I despise people who try to hold others to a higher standard than they expect of themselves. This thread is full of them.

I don't think, for his 300k a year, complaining about the national side sinking down seedings while clubs here fold under his watch is holding him to very high standard.

I also think objecting to his antics, going on the tear and singing like a clown for any fans who laugh at him, crying about how much he loves his girlfriend to every rag that gives them a photo shoot, isn't holding him to some very high standard.

I just wish he were half competent and not such an obvious clown. It's not too big a demand.

Aidric

I just watched that 'John The Baptist' piece now. What sort of surrealist propaganda is this? Delaney seems to think he is some sort of visionary.

Fair enough that contemptible clown Barry Egan is behind it but this is ridiculous.

newballsplease

Kidchameleon wrote: »

You have no idea of the context of that conversation. You only have the word of a man who is probably the most famous lier in the world at the moment.

I actually believe our organisation are thick enough to have asked it.

Billy86

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't think, for his 300k a year, complaining about the national side sinking down seedings while clubs here fold under his watch is holding him to very high standard.

I also think objecting to his antics, going on the tear and singing like a clown for any fans who laugh at him, crying about how much he loves his girlfriend to every rag that gives them a photo shoot, isn't holding him to some very high standard.

I just wish he were half competent and not such an obvious clown. It's not too big a demand.

And how much of his getting so high up so fast in the first place (an FAI director at age 29 or 30, in 1999) was down to his dad being FAI treasurer up until just three years previous and having to step down over infamously paying a ticket tout £100,000.

That said, despte how embarrassing the whole debacle was, he did do well to get €5mn. But I would love to know where that money went, because I have a funny feeling very little of it actually made it to the leagues, players, grassroots organisations, or anything really even related to the game.

Fr Tod Umptious

Billy86 wrote: »

And how much of his getting so high up so fast in the first place (an FAI director at age 29 or 30, in 1999) was down to his dad being FAI treasurer up until just three years previous and having to step down over infamously paying a ticket tout £100,000.

That said, despte how embarrassing the whole debacle was, he did do well to get €5mn. But I would love to know where that money went, because I have a funny feeling very little of it actually made it to the leagues, players, grassroots organisations, or anything really even related to the game.

It went to paying off the new stadium debt, that has been made quite clear over the last week.

Fr Tod Umptious

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It went to paying off the new stadium debt, that has been made quite clear over the last week.

Ah yes, the FAI making things clear.

It's a whole new era in transparency, apparently. One might almost forget that this is the organisation that just refuse to answer questions about its accounts when it suits them.

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/soccer/national-league/fai-cancels-press-conference-at-cagey-agm-1.1470487

Antrim_Man

Simple question. Do you trust the FAI are not corrupt?

DeanAustin

Antrim_Man wrote: »

Simple question. Do you trust the FAI are not corrupt?

Define corrupt.

Kidchameleon

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It went to paying off the new stadium debt, that has been made quite clear over the last week.

Ah yes the FAI said it so it must be true

weldoninhio

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Ah yes the FAI said it so it must be true

Where do you think the money to pay off the stadium came from??

Fr Tod Umptious

I think a good number of folks are a bit disappointed that there is documented evidence of the 5m being deposited in the FAI bank account, rather than it being missing and presumed to be in Delaney's pocket.

homerjay2005

Antrim_Man wrote: »

Simple question. Do you trust the FAI are not corrupt?

football is rotten to the core, across the world. i wouldnt call the FAI corrupt as such as they cant get away with much these days and this episode proves that, but football is a cowboy business, which is run by cowboys motivated by money.

even at local level its cut-throat and its like that is almost every country. our FA are tame compared to dozens more out there though and i would call them incompetent more than anything else.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I think a good number of folks are a bit disappointed that there is documented evidence of the 5m being deposited in the FAI bank account, rather than it being missing and presumed to be in Delaney's pocket.

its laughable anytime John Delaney is mentioned, the first replies by the same people year after year are about his salary. the man is dislike-able, but the obsession that some have for him is based on nothing but jealousy.

i wonder how many of those people complaining about his Salary would take the massive wage cuts they are looking for, if they job went to themselves tomorrow morning?

DeanAustin

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Ah yes the FAI said it so it must be true

Where do you think the money went?

Kidchameleon

weldoninhio wrote: »

Where do you think the money to pay off the stadium came from??

You think some French dude handeling a football was part of some pre determined business strategy? The bank would have loved that one!

DeanAustin wrote: »

Where do you think the money went?

Into the stadium.... While a couple of million offset funds went into somebodys back pocket.

DeanAustin

Kidchameleon wrote: »

You think some French dude handeling a football was part of some pre determined business strategy? The bank would have loved that one!



Into the stadium.... While a couple of million offset funds went into somebodys back pocket.

Anything to base that on?

Kidchameleon

DeanAustin wrote: »

Anything to base that on?

Its a wild conspiracy theory

DeanAustin

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its a wild conspiracy theory

Certainly is. "Tin foil hat brigade" level of wild.

Kidchameleon

DeanAustin wrote: »

Certainly is. "Tin foil hat brigade" level of wild.

Given the current circumstances with world football, people taking bribes etc etc... I don't need my tinfoil hat today

weldoninhio

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Given the current circumstances with world football, people taking bribes etc etc... I don't need my tinfoil hat today

You do know that all the FAI accounts are independently audited. Or are they in on the conspiracy.

irishgeo

weldoninhio wrote: »

You do know that all the FAI accounts are independently audited. Or are they in on the conspiracy.

So are FIFA accounts with questions now being asked of the auditors.

doncarlos

homerjay2005 wrote: »

its laughable anytime John Delaney is mentioned, the first replies by the same people year after year are about his salary. the man is dislike-able, but the obsession that some have for him is based on nothing but jealousy.

Seriously?? Jealousy?? You really are buying in to the whole propaganda machine. Do people honestly believe he's doing a great job and we all don't like him because he has a good job and a good looking girlfriend. Jesus Christ the naivety of people on here (and in the general populace) is shocking.

K-9

weldoninhio wrote: »

You do know that all the FAI accounts are independently audited. Or are they in on the conspiracy.

Sure banks here had independent auditors...............

For me it's a matter that the paynent was treated openly, consistently and properly in the accounts ie. nobody got mislead.

If it was treated as a loan fair enough, just that isn't what Delaney said a couple of days ago. My supicion is a deal was reached between the FAI and FIFA but the true nature couldn't be revealed at the time, so somebody had to be economical with the truth!

doncarlos

K-9 wrote: »

For me it's a matter that the paynent was treated openly, consistently and properly in the accounts ie. nobody got mislead

But it wasn't. This "loan" happened at the same time prize money to the LOI was slashed and a number of FAI coaches were sacked.