Billy Walsh quits ** SEE MOD WARNING #643 BEFORE POSTING

efb

http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/boxing/sport-ireland-issue-statement-criticising-iaba-following-resignation-of-billy-walsh-34122472.html

Sport Ireland release a statement while the IABA circle the wagons...

Joe_ Public

efb wrote: »

Sport Ireland release a statement while the IABA circle the wagons...

Well, that's the six million dollar question. What were the terms of the contract that, according to Sport Ireland, wasn't put forward for ratification? Seems fair to assume it wasn't about money if they were going to pick up the slack for Billy's wages. Must have to do with picking teams, possible box-offs, selection of team managers etc etc...but we might never know for sure.

price690

Reading between the lines, I'd say a few of the suits (who rightly or wrongly see themselves as the real boxing folk in Ireland) quietly resent the mainstream praise Billy Walsh has gained from the success of the high performance unit. They obviously see him as simply being the tip of the iceberg in terms of the success enjoyed, rather than the main reason (which the media have portrayed him as).

And their attempts to show him his true place in the pecking order of Irish boxing have backfired.

And unfortunately for the IABA cronies, they neither have the brains nor subtlety to mask these true reasons, despite their inevitable guff that will come out about him wanting too much money. Although they will have to form a new plan of attack now that Sport Ireland have pretty much confirmed that money was never the issue.

It's a case of the green eyed monster I reckon, amongst IABA delegates who are probably jealous of seeing themselves constantly bypassed when credit for medals gets handed out.

section4

efb wrote: »

Do you not think the IABA should be answering these questions????

i had a season ticket at the stadium for years, then they put the price up during the recession from 100 e to 150 e, i emailed and said that they should not be doing that during the recession as it would stop people like me who had been going to the stadium for years through thick and thin being able to keep my season ticket as i was unemployed for a few years, i might as well have been talking to the wall,no contact back, phoned up the stadium talked to the secretary but could talk to no one else, managed to buy the season ticket for that year and while attending shows at the stadium tried to talk to a few of the committee about the hike in prices during the recession, waste of time, these people are out of touch with reality, needless to say i never renewed the ticket this last few years, so they lost some one who first went to the stadium in 1980 and done all i could to support them but after their attitude when putting the price up in the recession and the way they talked to me then, as if i wasnt important and this shambles today, i dont blame billy for going he is right, just as i was right to stop going to the stadium, if they dont appreciate their loyal fans and coaches then lets see how they get on from here on in.
I dont know about any power struggles within the iaba between Billy Walsh or Fergal Carruth, but i did have experience of Fergal Carruth who was involved in a football team i played for for a while, and lets just say their was a lot of nepotism.

efb

Very sorry to hear you were priced out of the stadium. When I was an R/J I was there a lot, you would see the familiar faces in the crowd, not club affiliated like the boxers teams, just fans with a passion for the sport. Sorry to hear you were priced out.

Nodin

walshb wrote: »

So, if you are so sure money has zero to do with it then maybe you can tell us what exactly it is about? Listening to Billy today he said it was never 'really' about money. Didn't sound all that convincing. I am not saying money is the only issue, but to be so certain, like you are, that it's nothing to do with money is naive at best. You've been hinting that you know what it's about, or have a good idea what it's about, but you have said nothing or shown nothing. I don't think this is only about management and autonomy.

It's been documented that the agreement which the board "failed to consider" and Walsh was happy with was for less money than the Americans were offering. The sticking points were with regards to authority. Precisely why you're claiming otherwise is beyond me.

The reason it never came before the board is that way they effectively shot it down without having officially done so, thus allowing them play pilate. Theres been tension there for many years, and, if I recall correctly, the "ko-mitt-ee" had some issues with his predecessor as well.

Nodin

Tobyglen wrote: »

Shambles, muppets in the IABA- wouldn't even go on newstalk when asked to explain the situation. Walsh has done an incredible job and is a honest bloke- give him everything he needs.

Better to say nothing than to deny something being the logic there presumably. The truth is that they are unwilling to budge and are happier with him gone.

walshb

Nodin wrote: »

It's been documented that the agreement which the board "failed to consider" and Walsh was happy with was for less money than the Americans were offering. The sticking points were with regards to authority. Precisely why you're claiming otherwise is beyond me.

The reason it never came before the board is that way they effectively shot it down without having officially done so, thus allowing them play pilate. Theres been tension there for many years, and, if I recall correctly, the "ko-mitt-ee" had some issues with his predecessor as well.

If you bothered to read what I wrote then you'd see that I suggested that financials-packages were likley one of the reasons for this mess. One! To suggest otheriwise is baffling. Walsh himself yesterday may as well admitted that financials played a part.

The autonomy seems to be a big reason here. Reading between the lines it seems that Billy wanted more influence and power, and the IABA were not prepared to allow this. This is likley what tipped him over the edge.

Anyway, for me this is a storm in a teacup. Yesterday's news. He has gone. He served very well, and I was always a fan of Billy, the boxer. I don't know the man personally, but from listening to the boxers he seemed to have a rapport with them, allthough, people also can be diplomatic and nice for the sake of being nice. None of us really know exactly the feelings of all the HP boxers as regards Billy.

The lads will move on, and Billy will be replaced. Paddy Barnes seems confiden that this will be the case. The HP unit will still march on and all going well will still produce world class boxers.

I have sympathy for Walsh. But until I know the dealings, the real nitty gritty then I will not join the mob in castigating a whole organisation, when maybe, just maybe, it was one man trying to dictate to a whole organisation.

walshb

efb wrote: »

Walshb, you seem very defensive of the IABA, when all agree they dropped the ball on this one.
.

Because I am not jumping on the mob bandwagon attacking and slating the IABA does not mean I am very defensive of the IABA.

walshb

The IABA released a statement yesterday. http://www.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/boxing/iaba-release-statement-following-resignation-of-billy-walsh-34122547.html

Take from it what you will.

THE Irish Amateur Boxing Association has announced that it has accepted the resignation of Billy Walsh as Head Coach of the High Performance Unit ‘with regret’.

In a statement chief executive Fergal Carruth – a brother of 1992 Olympic gold medalist Michael Carruth – revealed that the IABA will make a further announcement over the coming days in relation to the succession plans for the High Performance Unit.

However, the statement fails to address why the IABA and Walsh could not reach agreement about his future. Carruth simply states that ‘Billy himself has made the decision to resign and take up a position with USA boxing.’

While the chief executive claims that the IABA did their utmost to retain Billy Walsh as head coach the overall tone of the statement suggests there is no possibility of reconciliation between the two parties.

The full statement from Fergal Carruth read: “The IABA has been in discussions with Billy following his approach to the organisation to seek improved terms and conditions after he stated that he had received an offer from USA Boxing.

“The IABA is deeply disappointed not to retain his valued services, and for the avoidance of any doubt, the IABA has done its utmost to retain Billy Walsh as Head Coach. However, Billy himself has made the decision to resign and take up a position with USA Boxing, and we wish him every success with this.”

Expressing gratitude to Billy Walsh for the great service he has given to boxing in Ireland, Fergal Carruth continued:

“Billy has been part of a team within the High Performance Unit since its inception in 2003. We would like to thank him for the tremendous hard work and dedication he has brought to the role and acknowledge his contribution to the great success of the Unit and its boxers.

“Along with the other coaching members and support staff of the High Performance Unit, the focus, professionalism and dedication brought by Billy to his role as Head Coach, has enabled the winning structures to be put in place, which has allowed our elite boxers reach their highest potential on the World and Olympic stages.

“On behalf of the IABA, I would like to reassure boxing fans that the exceptionally high skill levels of boxing being taught throughout the clubs of Ireland continue to nurture the rich talent required to succeed at the highest level.

“This conveyor belt of boxing talent will continue to be developed and coached by the dedicated High Performance Unit team, and the IABA is confident of the continuing success of our elite boxing athletes as they prepare for next year’s Olympic Games.”

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Because I am not jumping on the mob bandwagon attacking and slating the IABA does not mean I am very defensive of the IABA.

So to want to defend Billy Walsh and his record as HP director/head coach is to be part of a mob. Pretty stupid comment to be fair.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

So to want to defend Billy Walsh and his record as HP director/head coach is to be part of a mob. Pretty stupid comment to be fair.

Sorry, I never said that. You have interpreted this incorrectly. No issue with anyone defending and praising Billy. I am one of these. My point was that I won't castigate and slag the IABA when I don't know the nitty gritty of this. You can defend Billy whilst not slagging the IABA. You do realise this? There is a section of people who are hell bent of slating the IABA, without knowing the facts. Blanket slagging.

JJN is now jumping on the bandwagon. Not just happy to applaud and praise Walsh. He felt the need to go on the attack about a whole organistaion, that you can bet served him very well during his time. It's about loyalty and class. His own amateur club had Dominic O'Rourke as IABA president until recently.

Until we know all the facts the rush to castigate is out of order.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Sorry, I never said that. You have interpreted this incorrectly. No issue with anyone defending and praising Billy. I am one of these. My point was that I won't castigate and slag the IABA when I don't know the nitty gritty of this. You can defend Billy whilst not slagging the IABA. You do realise this? There is a section of people who are hell bent of slating the IABA, without knowing the facts. Blanket slagging.

JJN is now jumping on the bandwagon. Not just happy to applaud and praise Walsh. He felt the need to go on the attack about a whole organistaion, that you can bet served him very well during his time. It's about loyalty and class. His own amateur club had Dominic O'Rourke as IABA president until recently.

Until we know all the facts the rush to castigate is out of order.

No that's fair enough. But your original comments did need the clarification. Of course we would all like to know the facts, and the papers over the next few days will probably carry some in-depth features on the whole mess. I will wager my life that every article will portray Billy Walsh and his part in the whole farrago in glowing terms, but then that will just be interpreted by some as Billy getting a hand from his media pals again.

I suppose what JJN says is just as relevant as what Paddy Barnes says, he's not out of it that long. Katie pretty much slammed it, so did Darren O'Neill, I take it as their true feelings, you can interpret it another way. Interesting that Gerry Hussey has pointed fingers at the Sports Council for its role. Either way, to lose a head coach midway through an Olympic cycle just isn't right. Maybe after Rio was time for Billy to be cut loose, I could accept that, but now? No way, you'd fight tooth and nail to keep him if there was even a doubt about it.

super_furry

Everything that's coming out sounds more and more damning for the IABA. John Treacy now claims that they twice backed out of an agreed deal to keep Billy - http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2015/1020/736099-john-treacy-iaba-backed-out-of-deal-to-keep-walsh/

Some really straight quotes from him too: "We probably had 20 to 30 interventions with the IABA to outline the urgency of this because Billy Walsh had an offer on the table. The Sports Council met with the IABA in July and we agreed that we’d bring Billy Walsh to the table and negotiate a deal. That happened two days late.

"Kieran Mulvey chaired that session and out of that, everyone shook hands. Billy Walsh was happy with the deal, the IABA appeared to be happy with the deal and we were happy with that deal. Finance was not going to be an issue. We got an email on the Monday to say they were taking it to the board and then we heard on the Tuesday a sub-committee on the IABA board decided not to bring it to the board."

"Then the Minister intervened and we had another session. The Sports Council was involved and another deal was hammered where Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects. He agreed to leave his full-time position in the IABA and become a contract worker. That’s a clear indication that Billy Walsh wanted to stay, we wanted to keep him. Money wasn’t the issue, it broke down on the non-financial aspects."

Still not a peep from the IABA outside of one very vague and woolly press statement.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

No that's fair enough. But your original comments did need the clarification. Of course we would all like to know the facts, and the papers over the next few days will probably carry some in-depth features on the whole mess. I will wager my life that every article will portray Billy Walsh and his part in the whole farrago in glowing terms, but then that will just be interpreted by some as Billy getting a hand from his media pals again.

I suppose what JJN says is just as relevant as what Paddy Barnes says, he's not out of it that long. Katie pretty much slammed it, so did Darren O'Neill, I take it as their true feelings, you can interpret it another way. Interesting that Gerry Hussey has pointed fingers at the Sports Council for its role. Either way, to lose a head coach midway through an Olympic cycle just isn't right. Maybe after Rio was time for Billy to be cut loose, I could accept that, but now? No way, you'd fight tooth and nail to keep him if there was even a doubt about it.

I listened to Katie and Paddy. I don't think they slammed it in the sense that they really had a go at the IABA. They came across as very sorry that Billy left. That is to be expected. But they didn't slate the IABA in the process.

Barnes was actually very measured, and I took it that the loss, while regrettable, and sad, was not of any major concern. Paddy has a lot of praise for Zaur.

The IABA is made up of people. I am sure some are very decent and honorbale people. The way some are posting here they are really sullying the name of these people. OTT venom.

walshb

super_furry wrote: »

Everything that's coming out sounds more and more damning for the IABA. John Treacy now claims that they twice backed out of an agreed deal to keep Billy - http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2015/1020/736099-john-treacy-iaba-backed-out-of-deal-to-keep-walsh/

Some really damning quotes from him too: "We probably had 20 to 30 interventions with the IABA to outline the urgency of this because Billy Walsh had an offer on the table. The Sports Council met with the IABA in July and we agreed that we’d bring Billy Walsh to the table and negotiate a deal. That happened two days late.

"Kieran Mulvey chaired that session and out of that, everyone shook hands. Billy Walsh was happy with the deal, the IABA appeared to be happy with the deal and we were happy with that deal. Finance was not going to be an issue. We got an email on the Monday to say they were taking it to the board and then we heard on the Tuesday a sub-committee on the IABA board decided not to bring it to the board."

"Then the Minister intervened and we had another session. The Sports Council was involved and another deal was hammered where Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects. He agreed to leave his full-time position in the IABA and become a contract worker. That’s a clear indication that Billy Walsh wanted to stay, we wanted to keep him. Money wasn’t the issue, it broke down on the non-financial aspects."

Still not a peep from the IABA outside of one very vague and woolly press statement.

So without a doubt money and financials played a role. They seemd to iron that part out, seemed. Now it seems that it was down to autonomy and management within the HP set up. Again, let's hear the details on this side.

super_furry

walshb wrote: »

So without a doubt money and financials played a role.

Very strange conclusion to draw. From that report......

"Finance was not going to be an issue."

"Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects."

"Money wasn’t the issue, it broke down on the non-financial aspects."

I absolutely look forward to hearing the IABA speak out, but doubt very much whether they will. Where is Fergal Carruth in all this?

walshb

super_furry wrote: »

Very strange conclusion to draw. From that report......

"Finance was not going to be an issue."

"Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects."

"Money wasn’t the issue, it broke down on the non-financial aspects."

I absolutely look forward to hearing the IABA speak out, but doubt very much whether they will. Where is Fergal Carruth in all this?

The fact that financials are mentioned so frequently leads me to believe that it was an issue, and no amount of trying to say it was not an issue makes it so. It had to be some issue.

This: "Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects."

That is damning. And, maybe the IABA were the ones who were out of order as regards the financials. I am not laying the blame on Billy's door. I am saying that financials was/were an issue.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

I listened to Katie and Paddy. I don't think they slammed it in the sense that they really had a go at the IABA. They came across as very sorry that Billy left. That is to be expected. But they didn't slate the IABA in the process.

Barnes was actually very measured, and I took it that the loss, while regrettable, and sad, was not of any major concern. Paddy has a lot of praise for Zaur.

The IABA is made up of people. I am sure some are very decent and honorbale people. The way some are posting here they are really sullying the name of these people. OTT venom.

And I appreciate where you're coming from, but excuse me if I chuckle a little at Paddy being suddenly considered the voice of reason. Among the boxers there's been no more consistently virulent critic of the IABA over the years than Paddy himself so I'd be left wondering as to the nature of this late Damascene conversion.

Also, I think we should clarify what is meant in this instance by the IABA. It's not the people in clubs, or even people on committees, it seems to be just a clique of people at the head of the organisation who wield most of the power. In the same way people hammering the FAI really only mean a couple of all-powerful individuals in the top chairs.

And of course, everybody knows and appreciates Zaur's quality and what he has brought. He was head of Georgian boxing for several years, so it wouldn't be entirely a new position for him. My own thoughts on this are that he is the only realistic candidate for the role there, but if they tried to parachute somebody in over him, then there's a solid chance he'll up sticks and head west too.

I note according to Irish Indo, Billy appears to be heading up the USA men's team too? Not heard that suggested anywhere before, doesn't in fairness say much about the state of amateur boxing over there, but they must be scratching their heads as to how a small country would let a man like that go so close to the Olympics.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

The fact that financials are mentioned so frequently leads me to believe that it was an issue, and no amount of trying to say it was not an issue makes it so. It had to be some issue.

This: "Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects."

That is damning. And, maybe the IABA were the ones who were ouit of order as regards the financials. I am not laying the blame on Billy's door. I am saying that financials was an issue.

One of the lines from the papers that really stood out for me was: Walsh has never had a pension or any medical insurance. I mean, strewth, in this day and age! That really beggars belief as far as I'm concerned.

average_runner

walshb wrote: »

The fact that financials are mentioned so frequently leads me to believe that it was an issue, and no amount of trying to say it was not an issue makes it so. It had to be some issue.

This: "Billy Walsh showed incredible flexibility around the financial aspects."

That is damning. And, maybe the IABA were the ones who were out of order as regards the financials. I am not laying the blame on Billy's door. I am saying that financials was/were an issue.

Sorry but your so wrong on this one. Money was never the thing with this man. This is a man that loves boxing, loves the people he coached. The support he gave these guys was definitely not for the money.

IABA board should be all sacked asap. Billy had to get permission from the IABA before the talked to the media, who to those the IABA think they are.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

One of the lines from the papers that really stood out for me was: Walsh has never had a pension or any medical insurance. I mean, strewth, in this day and age! That really beggars belief as far as I'm concerned.

Indeed, and it is why the financials were very important. Now, which side were the "baddies" as regards the financial end of things?

K3v

walshb wrote: »

So without a doubt money and financials played a role.

You seem very fixated on the financial aspect of this whole sorry saga. The fact that the Irish Sports Council was footing the bill for his salary makes the financials a non issue for the IABA.

The dog on the street can see that it came down to control over Elite Performance Unit, Billy wanted autonomy, the IABA did not want to relinquish control over.

walshb

average_runner wrote: »

S Money was never the thing with this man. T

That is just incorrect. Money and financials played a part (possible past tense at this stage, but played a part nonetheless) in the discussions. That's a fact. Whether or not it was ironed out and agreed on is what is up for debate.

Juts to clarify on this: I am not having a go at Walsh for wanting to better himself or maybe get a better deal/package. If he felt that he was not being compenasted enough for his efforts then it is his right to look for something better from the IABA. But, it is their right to refuse, or to play hard ball. That's life. That's employment. That's profit and loss and expenses. If they ironed that out, great.

walshb

K3v wrote: »

You seem very fixated on the financial aspect of this whole sorry saga. The fact that the Irish Sports Council was footing the bill for his salary makes the financials a non issue for the IABA.

The dog on the street can see that it came down to control over Elite Performance Unit, Billy wanted autonomy, the IABA did not want to relinquish conrtol over.

Not fixated. Just pointing out that it played a role. Some here are saying it did not, or are really playing it down.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Indeed, and it is why the financials were very important. Now, which side were the "baddies" as regards the financial end of things?

Ah, no. As I said, I respect your position re the IABA, but now you seem to be implying Billy Walsh was some kind of mercenary making outrageous financial demands. Of course money is important, why wouldn't it be, but it doesn't seem to have been the decisive factor. It's not why Billy Walsh walked. I don't know whether by accident or design but you are creating a straw man here.

average_runner

walshb wrote: »

That is just incorrect. Money and financials played a part (possible past tense at this stage, but played a part nonetheless) in the discussions. That's a fact. Whether or not it was ironed out and agreed on is what is up for debate.

Juts to clarify on this: I am not having a go at Walsh for wanting to better himself or maybe get a better deal/package. If he felt that he was not being compenasted enough for his efforts then it is his right to look for something better from the IABA. But, it is their right to refuse, or to play hard ball. That's life. That's employment. That's profit and loss and expenses. If they ironed that out, great.

But the IABA weren't funding any of the package

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Ah, no. As I said, I respect your position re the IABA, but now you seem to be implying Billy Walsh was some kind of mercenary making outrageous financial demands. Of course money is important, why wouldn't it be, but it doesn't seem to have been the decisive factor. It's not why Billy Walsh walked. I don't know whether by accident or design but you are creating a straw man here.

I am not implying that at all. Read my previous post in reponses to average runner. I put the word baddies in inverted commas.

Two/three sides discussing financials/employment. They cannot agree. It stands to reason that maybe one side was pushing too much, or one side wasn't budging enough.

Why is it so wrong to maybe think that it's possible that those within the IABA are playing fair or are as honorable and obliging as Walsh?

Is it not possible that Billy maybe demanded a little too much as regards a finacial package, and a little too much as regards his managemnet role within the HP team?

The view here so far is Billy the saint, IABA the devils. This view being perpetuated based off Billy's statements and some other views from people.

K3v

walshb wrote: »

Not fixated. Just pointing out that it played a role. Some here are saying it did not, or are really playing it down.

I know, I mean, who is John Treacy to say that money was not an issue in this debacle. Not as if his organisation was paying Billy's salary. :rolleyes:

walshb

average_runner wrote: »

But the IABA weren't funding any of the package

The financial aspect may be done and dusted. It seems the autonomy issue was a major concern.

There's more to a finacial package than we think. To suggest that the IABA were not funding (or losing out on anything) may be off. There is also the employment status issue to consider. How Billy was going to be employed within the IABA etc. A lot to discuss and think about before judging.

case885

Tune into radio 1, Sean o Rourke is talking to the President of the Connacht branch.
He believes its due to picking the team that Billy was upset about not pay and a clashing with a senior member of the IABA

gordongekko

walshb wrote: »

Not fixated. Just pointing out that it played a role. Some here are saying it did not, or are really playing it down.

A deal was agreed but the iaba didn't follow through with their part of the agreement so clearly money wasn't the issue

walshb

gordongekko wrote: »

A deal was agreed but the iaba didn't follow through with their part of the agreement so clearly money wasn't the issue

We have done the finacial issue to death.

The other issue is the autonomy.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

I am not implying that at all. Read my previous post in reponses to average runner. I put the word baddies in inverted commas.

Two/three sides discussing financials/employment. They cannot agree. It stands to reason that maybe one side was pushing too much, or one side wasn't budging enough.

Why is it so wrong to maybe think that it's possible that those within the IABA are playing fair or are as honorable and obliging as Walsh?

Is it not possible that Billy maybe demanded a little too much as regards a finacial package, and a little too much as regards his managemnet role within the HP team?

The view here so far is Billy the saint, IABA the devils. This view being perpetuated based off Billy's statements and some other views from people.

Honestly, I believe you're getting bogged down in the financial niceties and in trying to counter the perceived Billy love-in here. I think most of us here feel able to start from the position that when Walsh says quite emphatically that money wasn't a key factor we trust him and then look for the pertinent questions elsewhere. Are you suggesting he's lying when he says that?

This is the statement from Walsh that I'd like to see fleshed out. He may well have faults, but has never come across as anything other than a genuine, honest and, yes, humble individual to me:

"For me, it's just that there are simple things like dignity and respect with your role.

"And they've been dismantled over the last year."

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Honestly, I believe you're getting bogged down in the financial niceties and in trying to counter the perceived Billy love-in here. I think most of us here feel able to start from the position that when Walsh says quite emphatically that money wasn't a key factor we trust him and then look for the pertinent questions elsewhere. Are you suggesting he's lying when he says that?

This is the statement from Walsh that I'd like to see fleshed out. He may well have faults, but has never come across as anything other than a genuine, honest and, yes, humble individual to me:

"For me, it's just that there are simple things like dignity and respect with your role.

"And they've been dismantled over the last year."

We have discussed the finacial issue. Billy says it was never really about the finacials. That's his side.

Now, the other issue is the management within the HP team. I am not sure of the ins and outs of this side, other than Walsh maybe wanting more freedom and autonomy in the HP team. Was what he was wanting reasonable and fair? I don't know, and nor do the posters here. We can't make a call on that without details from the negotiations.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

We have discussed the finacial issue. Billy says it was never really about the finacials. That's his side.

Now, the other issue is the management within the HP team. I am not sure of the ins and outs of this side, other than Walsh maybe wanting more freedom and autonomy in the HP team. Was what he was wanting reasonable and fair? I don't know, and nor do the posters here. We can't make a call on that without details from the negotiations.

Last thing I'll - quite happily - say about the financials. Billy says it wasn't about money, that's the only side there. There's no other side to what Billy says was HIS motivation. You choose to believe him or you don't.

Of course, we don't know the ins and outs. We can deduce that Walsh was happy in his role up to the end of 2014, but things began to change soon after and the approach of USA Boxing brought these changes to a head. Seems there's enough media attention out there that we might get an in-depth analysis that is fair to all sides in one of the papers. But then if there's no input from the IABA in it, it'll just be dismissed as another Billy love-in.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Last thing I'll - quite happily - say about the financials. Billy says it wasn't about money, that's the only side there. There's no other side to what Billy says was HIS motivation. You choose to believe him or you don't.

Of course, we don't know the ins and outs. We can deduce that Walsh was happy in his role up to the end of 2014, but things began to change soon after and the approach of USA Boxing brought these changes to a head. Seems there's enough media attention out there that we might get an in-depth analysis that is fair to all sides in one of the papers. But then if there's no input from the IABA in it, it'll just be dismissed as another Billy love-in.

The Billy praise, or love-in as you describe it is fine. No issue there. It's that, combined with the vitriol being thrown at the IABA which is wrong.

Anyway, this will be yesterday's news in no time. Personally I feel it's being oversensationalized. He's one man in a cog. Important? Sure. Irreplaceable? No!

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

The Billy praise, or love-in as you describe it is fine. No issue there. It's that, combined with the vitriol being thrown at the IABA which is wrong.

Anyway, this will be yesterday's news in no time. Personally I feel it's being oversensationalized. He's one man in a cog. Important? Sure. Irreplaceable? No!

Over-sensationalised? Really? The most decorated coach in Irish Olympic history, a hugely popular and much-loved figure, quits his post in highly controversial circumstances and it shouldn't cause a fuss? Ok, it's arguable whether it should be leading the news headlines, but better than it being ignored which is the more frequent complaint when it comes to Irish amateur boxing.

I think what you're missing is the pattern here which is bigger than Billy Walsh himself. Gary Keegan, Jim Moore before him, both were treated disgracefully by the IABA and, if you take issue with that, I'll just shake my head and walk away. Same with Katie and Pete Taylor, the struggled they had with elements of their own association over the years is well documented. And going back, wonder how much thanks Nicholas Cruz ever got for steering the ship through some pretty bad times?

And let's remember: the IABA came in for some stern criticism in the wake of the London Games, by the independent consultants who conducted the debriefing. One of the recommendations was that power over the team be ceded to the HP head coach. Was this even ever considered? You referred to Dominic O'Rourke earlier. Remember when they tried to parachute him in over the head of Walsh a few years back? How did that work out exactly?

K3v

walshb wrote: »

We have discussed the finacial issue. Billy says it was never really about the finacials. That's his side.

You are correct, that is his stance, It is also the stance of John Treacy & Minister Michael Ring. There is more that just Billy's side and the IABA's side to this.

When you have the head of the Irish Sports Council come out and say they will have to be a review of the IABA actions, you have have to question the judgement of the IABA.

You say we are calling Billy a saint & the IABA are devils because we are only hearing one side of the story.

You have to realise there are 3 sides to this story; Billy Walsh, Irish Sports Council & the IABA. I don't think it is in the interests of a government run organisation to be castigating the IABA unless it is seriously warranted.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Over-sensationalised? Really? The most decorated coach in Irish Olympic history, a hugely popular and much-loved figure, quits his post in highly controversial circumstances and it shouldn't cause a fuss? Ok, it's arguable whether it should be leading the news headlines, but better than it being ignored which is the more frequent complaint when it comes to Irish amateur boxing.

I think what you're missing is the pattern here which is bigger than Billy Walsh himself. Gary Keegan, Jim Moore before him, both were treated disgracefully by the IABA and, if you take issue with that, I'll just shake my head and walk away. Same with Katie and Pete Taylor, the struggled they had with elements of their own association over the years is well documented. And going back, wonder how much thanks Nicholas Cruz ever got for steering the ship through some pretty bad times?

And let's remember: the IABA came in for some stern criticism in the wake of the London Games, by the independent consultants who conducted the debriefing. One of the recommendations was that power over the team be ceded to the HP head coach. Was this even ever considered? You referred to Dominic O'Rourke earlier. Remember when they tried to parachute him in over the head of Walsh a few years back? How did that work out exactly?

Whatever happened with Keegan and Moore should not be used to investigate/extrapolate to this separate issue. That's in the past. It can be very unfair to use past events to bolster views on current ones. I understand the obvious wanting to do this, but the Billy Walsh situation is its own situation. It should be looked at and analysed and decided upon based off its own merits.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Whatever happened with Keegan and Moore should not be used to investigate/extrapolate to this separate issue. That's in the past. It can be very unfair to use past events to bolster views on current ones. I understand the obvious wanting to do this, but the Billy Walsh situation is its own situation. It should be looked at and analysed and decided upon based of its own merits.

Judge: The issue before the court today is solely whether this man did viciously beat his wife as alleged.

Prosecutor: The court should bear in mind the accused has a history of violent assault against this woman and threatened to kill her on two previous occasions.

Judge: Out of order. The current matter should be looked upon on its own merits. Please strike those remarks from the record.

We'll have to fundamentally disagree here. My view would be the Billy Walsh situation should be parsed, analysed and summarily judged and then added to the record of history of strife and hostility that has reigned between the IABA and its HP wing since the very start in which the only constant is the management board of the IABA itself.

walshb

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Judge: The issue before the court today is solely whether this man did viciously beat his wife as alleged.

Prosecutor: The court should bear in mind the accused has a history of violent assault against this woman and threatened to kill her on two previous occasions.

Judge: Out of order. The current matter should be looked upon on its own merits. Please strike those remarks from the record.

We'll have to fundamentally disagree here. My view would be the Billy Walsh situation should be parsed, analysed and summarily judged and then added to the record of history of strife and hostility that has reigned between the IABA and its HP wing since the very start in which the only constant is the management board of the IABA itself.

Like I said, it's human nature to use past events against people to judge current ones. It can be misleasding, and it can lead to a false sense of what is right and wrong in the present.

Just because someone does something wrong in the past does not mean that what they did, or are doing in the now is wrong.

We are getting way off base here. Let's judge this issue on its merits.

Joe_ Public

walshb wrote: »

Like I said, it's human nature to use past events against people to judge current ones. It can be misleasding, and it can lead to a false sense of what is right and wrong in the present.

Just because someone does something wrong in the past does not mean that what they did, or are doing in the now is wrong.

We are getting way off base here. Let's judge this issue on its merits.

Fair enough. And like I said, we can agree to disagree. I certainly believe past history is interesting and relevant here without automatically prejudicing our views against one of the parties. And I don't disagree with your last statement. Let's see what comes out in the wash and then look with fresh eyes. And the Sports Council is under the microscope too. History tells us they're not beyond a bit of spin either and that's very relevant too.

efb

Walshb argument reminds me a lot of the no side in the Marref

Surrogacy!!!
-It's not about surrogacy
Why are people bringing it up?
- you are no one else is, and time is wasted


It's a diversionary tactic

walshb

efb wrote: »

Walshb argument reminds me a lot of the no side in the Marref

Surrogacy!!!
-It's not about surrogacy
Why are people bringing it up?
- you are no one else is, and time is wasted


It's a diversionary tactic

Well, still waiting to hear your inside information?

You arguments to date consist of Billy's right and the IABA are wrong!

efb

walshb wrote: »

Well, still waiting to hear your inside information?

I don't have inside information I said my dealings from being involved with the IABA

What is your position wifhin the IABA

efb

Oh so I don't take you up wrongly Walshb-- am I part of this 'mob' you speak of???

efb

walshb wrote: »

Well, still waiting to hear your inside information?

You arguments to date consist of Billy's right and the IABA are wrong!

Not as simplistic as that- the IABA agreed on a deal brokered by Independent arbitrators then went back on it without explanation leading to the resignation of our most successful sports manager

walshb

efb wrote: »

I don't have inside information I said my dealings from being involved with the IABA

What is your position wifhin the IABA

Ok, so you have no real evidence (on this situation) to be so sure that Walsh is right and the IABA are wrong. Grand! Unless your past-current dealings have led you to this conclusion?

walshb

efb wrote: »

Not as simplistic as that- the IABA agreed on a deal brokered by Independent arbitrators then went back on it without explanation leading to the resignation of our most successful sports manager

That's as much as anyone of us really have.