Sports Grant funding announced

magicbastarder

smacl wrote: »

there are many single GAA clubs on that list that received more than double than the sum total awarded to all the cycling clubs in the country.

what's the participation level like in GAA compared to cycling as a sport?

brownian

OP - Louth WATCH got the most, according to the table. That's not in Mayo?

Beasty

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

List of unsuccessful applicants is here

Just to be clear - this is headed "invalid" applications. That to me suggests their applications did not meet all the requisite criteria. Do we know if anyone was turned down without "good reason"?

smacl

magicbastarder wrote: »

what's the participation level like in GAA compared to cycling as a sport?

No idea, and not knocking GAA, all for participation in any sport tbh. The point is more that cycling is underfunded for an increasingly popular sport. I'd imagine getting your kids geared up to enter into cycling as a sport could be expensive enough to be a barrier for many, I know getting even a reasonable commuter for my youngest wasn't cheap. The cost burden in larger more established sports seems to lie more with the club than the individual, cycling is the reverse.

Lumen

ford2600 wrote: »

That's promoting a positive bias toward poor areas not an exclusion for rich areas?

OK, perhaps you can tell me whether Blackrock College has a problem with participation in sports?

Their website would suggest not.

https://www.blackrockcollege.com/activities/sports/

ford2600

Lumen wrote: »

OK, perhaps you can tell me whether Blackrock College has a problem with participation in sports?

Their website would suggest not.

https://www.blackrockcollege.com/activities/sports/

I don't know the first thing about Blackrock.

The last thread and this is about cronyism/corruption the nod and wink culture etc.

The best practice solution is a fair open transparent system with no bias. Blackrock are entitled to apply, with a provision that disadvantaged areas get a positive bias.

Unless you can trawl through all awards and demonstrate with certainty that didn't happen you are just demonstrating your own personal bias?

Personally I wouldn't like to see grant money going to well off areas but that is just my bias.

You might outline the criteria you would suggest is fair to everyone all the time. HINT Google Abraham Lincoln's most famous quotes.

Hard to maintain outrage when the only colours are shades of grey

magicbastarder

ford2600 wrote: »

Blackrock are entitled to apply, with a provision that disadvantaged areas get a positive bias.

given the sums involved, i guess blackrock are possibly more likely to try to tap pastmen for the money rather than see their grant application being handled in a manner that makes success and failure a matter of public record.

spyderski

brownian wrote: »

OP - Louth WATCH got the most, according to the table. That's not in Mayo?

The most what? It's not a cycling club.

spyderski

No issue with Mayo.
No issue with promoting disabled cycling.
No issue with GAA clubs.
No issue with grant aiding sports of all kinds.
No issue with cycling clubs getting grants from the DTTAS - the more the merrier (and yes, more clubs should have applied).

Have an issue that the CYCLING CLUB, that last year got the joint-biggest grant ever awarded to any cycling club in this country, from a scheme it should have been ineligible to apply for, has again this year got BY FAR the highest grant of any CYCLING CLUB in the country. At least 2 other cycling clubs which also applied, got nothing.

spyderski

And re the posts on Blackrock ; in all fairness it's not Blackrock College that got the grant, It's Blackrock College RFC - the senior club which competes in the AIL. (I have no affiliation with Blackrock btw.).

Lumen

ford2600 wrote: »

The last thread and this is about cronyism/corruption the nod and wink culture etc.

The last thread was about cronyism/corruption the nod and wink culture.

The title of this thread is "Sports Grant funding announced". My comments about allocation of those grants are therefore on-topic.

I'm not accusing Blackrock College of corruption. An accusation of cronyism would be absurd since like most/all fee paying schools their selection criteria are intentionally and explicitly cronyist (or whatever the correct form of that word is).

Everyone with a deeply held belief is biased; accusations of bias in these matters imply that only those who believe in nothing should form policy.

ted1

Weepsie wrote: »

smacl wrote: »

Think your sums may be a bit out there, total funding was €55m.

(0.14/55)*100 = 0.254 or 0.25%

No of the total 140,000 awarded Cycling or triathlon cubs, only 7% of that was to a particular club.

You have to be specific when applying, and specify what amount you're applying for and for what purpose. More clubs should be applying and for more money.

The one that I've a bit of an issue with is Blackrock College getting 150 k for an all weather pitch and lights. It's a private school with 1000 pupils at a minimum of 6,500 per year. They should be looking for funding privately I would think.

It’s a semi private school. Not a private school, just as entitled to funding as any DEIS school

ted1

spyderski wrote: »

No issue with Mayo.
No issue with promoting disabled cycling.
No issue with GAA clubs.
No issue with grant aiding sports of all kinds.
No issue with cycling clubs getting grants from the DTTAS - the more the merrier (and yes, more clubs should have applied).

Have an issue that the CYCLING CLUB, that last year got the joint-biggest grant ever awarded to any cycling club in this country, from a scheme it should have been ineligible to apply for, has again this year got BY FAR the highest grant of any CYCLING CLUB in the country. At least 2 other cycling clubs which also applied, got nothing.

As some one who submits tenders and also evaluates them. You’d be surprised at the difference in quality of submissions for the sane job from reputable companies. So I’d say they put together a much better submission than clubs who have been rejected.

What I would say is that if you are in a club that was rejected is that you need to change the person who submits the application and even possible ask a successful club for guidance

brownian

spyderski wrote: »

The most what? It's not a cycling club.

Sorry, I conflated your post with Lumen's table, that shows a list of cycling clubs, plus two others that are not (inc. WATCH). My mistake. Comment withdrawn.

Beasty

brownian wrote: »

Sorry, I conflated your post with Lumen's table, that shows a list of cycling clubs, plus two others that are not (inc. WATCH). My mistake. Comment withdrawn.

Actually I think WATCH is a cycling club, even if not registered with CI

They are however a club that caters for blind and visually impaired cyclists and I don't think anyone will begrudge them a few quid to boost their fleet of tandems and some hi vis to make them a bit more visible to others

seanin4711

Did islandeady get 10k again???

nice_guy80

seanin4711 wrote: »

Did islandeady get 10k again???

yes
must be a great club

Eamonnator

Beasty wrote: »

Actually I think WATCH is a cycling club, even if not registered with CI

They are however a club that caters for blind and visually impaired cyclists and I don't think anyone will begrudge them a few quid to boost their fleet of tandems and some hi vis to make them a bit more visible to others

I agree.
W.A.T.C.H. had 6 tandems in The Great Dublin Bike Ride, each with a visually impaired person as stoker. I know a couple of the bike captains. I spoke to one them that day. He was on a Trek tandem, which was about 20 years old. It was well past it's sell by date. Most of their tandems are of similar vintage.
If W.A.T.C.H. spend their 18 grand on new tandems, it'll be money very well spent.

68 lost souls

I believe that part of the big issue was identified in that cycling clubs traditionally have no clubhouse and no where to store capital equipment.

I know a Triathlon club that have gone about resolving this by getting a different grant in order to purchase a 40’ container and negotiated storage of such with a third party so now that there is a storage facility they could on future potentially fit the criteria for this grant to buy capital equipment

Yes cyclists tend to buy their own gear but growing the sport at grass routes a club fund could be setup to purchase junior bikes of different sizes as the younger kids grow they will fit the bikes and pass on to the smaller kids removing a barrier to entry of the sport in terms of cost.

Turbo trainers for the club are always great too, as are any equipment towards race organisation or other methods of generating further funding.

The clubs need to get more hands on with ideas of how to grow better to get this funding

Trojan

ted1 wrote: »

As some one who submits tenders and also evaluates them. You’d be surprised at the difference in quality of submissions for the sane job from reputable companies. So I’d say they put together a much better submission than clubs who have been rejected.

What I would say is that if you are in a club that was rejected is that you need to change the person who submits the application and even possible ask a successful club for guidance

This x 100.

I evaluate applications for a different type of funding, and the lack of effort and adherence to basic submission guidelines is sadly not at surprising. But still, when you're applying for free money, put a bit of effort into writing a good submission.

Lumen

Trojan wrote: »

sadly not at surprising...put a bit of effort into writing

Muphry's Law!

spyderski

Those who are suggesting that experience or ability to draft grant applications is the sole reason for success are waving a big red herring at this one. I saw one of the unsuccessful submissions, prepared by people among whom have a PHD, an MBA and many years of professional experience. It was very well drafted and met all stated criteria.

The willingness among the general population in this country to bury heads in the sand in the face of overwhelming evidence of corruption in the way the country is run never ceases to amaze me.

I suppose these people have also convinced themselves that those Dept of Justice emails last week didn’t turn up until then due to a lack of qualifications, skill and experience in using the search function on an email program....

benneca1

spyderski wrote: »

Those who are suggesting that experience or ability to draft grant applications is the sole reason for success are waving a big red herring at this one. I saw one of the unsuccessful submissions, prepared by people among whom have a PHD, an MBA and many years of professional experience. It was very well drafted and met all stated criteria.

The willingness among the general population in this country to bury heads in the sand in the face of overwhelming evidence of corruption in the way the country is run never ceases to amaze me.

I suppose these people have also convinced themselves that those Dept of Justice emails last week didn’t turn up until then due to a lack of qualifications, skill and experience in using the search function on an email program....

You wont let this one go Spyderski. Regular one man crusade against corruption in cycling clubs. This has been done to death and is getting repetitive and tiresome at this stage.

Lusk_Doyle

Lumen wrote: »

Everyone with a deeply held belief is biased; accusations of bias in these matters imply that only those who believe in nothing should form policy.

That is a great point. Nicely put.

All My Stars Aligned

While cycling clubs may not have benefited from sports grants individual cyclists do benefit from state funding via the bike to work scheme. I am not aware of any other sports where your equipment is partly tax deductible.

Beasty

All My Stars Aligned wrote: »

While cycling clubs may not have benefited from sports grants individual cyclists do benefit from state funding via the bike to work scheme. I am not aware of any other sports where your equipment is partly tax deductible.

To be clear it's s subsidy for using bikes to commute - encouraging people to use environmentally friendly means of getting about, in the same way the tax system encourages environmentally-friendly motor vehicles

Similarly public transport is quite heavily subsidised by the taxpayer

ted1

All My Stars Aligned wrote: »

While cycling clubs may not have benefited from sports grants individual cyclists do benefit from state funding via the bike to work scheme. I am not aware of any other sports where your equipment is partly tax deductible.

You sign a declaration saying the bike is for commuting. Therefore not for sport, the max it’s worth is 104 Euro a year. A public bus travel pass entities people to ten time that (1,000 Euro ) on an ongoing basis and if your travel pass is stolen you can get it reissued.
EVs get VRT and other tax breaks of several thousand

Kaisr Sose

All My Stars Aligned wrote: »

While cycling clubs may not have benefited from sports grants individual cyclists do benefit from state funding via the bike to work scheme. I am not aware of any other sports where your equipment is partly tax deductible.

Only elite athletes get State funding, and under strict qualifying criteria.