Sports Grant funding announced

spyderski · 30-11-2017 11:51am #1

Well done to all the cycling and triathlon clubs who received grant funding in the DTTAS announcement yesterday.

Guess which cycling club received by far the most in the whole country ? (Over 25% of the total funding to all Cycling and Tri Clubs)

smacl · 30-11-2017 11:55am

spyderski wrote: »

Well done to all the cycling and triathlon clubs who received grant funding in the DTTAS announcement yesterday.

Guess which cycling club received by far the most in the whole country ?

Tell me its not a small club from Mayo.

spyderski · 30-11-2017 11:56am

smacl wrote: »

Tell me it not a small club from Mayo.

I cannot tell you that, I'm afraid.

terrydel · 30-11-2017 12:05pm

spyderski wrote: »

I cannot tell you that, I'm afraid.

Even on such comparitively minor issues, we live in a rotten, corrupt kip of a country.

Lumen · 30-11-2017 12:14pm

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 12:15pm

terrydel wrote: »

Even on such comparitively minor issues, we live in a rotten, corrupt kip of a country.

https://ourworldindata.org/corruption/

Throw a pin at map here and move to wherever it lands and you'll in all probabilty you'll end up somewhere worse.

Lots of other EU countries are worse, some are better.

Beasty · 30-11-2017 12:15pm

If it is spent on what they put in their application I have no issue. They are a Sports club like all Cycling clubs and are entitled to apply for such grants. It is slightly unusual in that most cycling clubs have little in the way of capital investment to consider. There are much bigger figures allocated to sports organisations that have a significant need for capital funding. I guess we do benefit whenever they re-lay a road, albeit that seems way to infrequent at present!

magicbastarder · 30-11-2017 1:32pm

i'm just bemused that one club listed hi-vis jackets as a cost - don't the RSA hand these out for free?

spyderski · 30-11-2017 1:33pm

I know for a fact of 2 clubs that applied and got nothing.

30-11-2017 1:41pm

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'm just bemused that one club listed hi-vis jackets as a cost - don't the RSA hand these out for free?

It's just the builders vest type ones, maybe the club wanted proper jackets for marshalling or something

Chips Lovell · 30-11-2017 1:44pm

List of unsuccessful applicants is here

smacl · 30-11-2017 1:59pm

Lumen wrote: »

Source: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/sport/english/sports-capital-programme-2017-local-allocations/2017-scp-list-grants-publication.pdf

Hmmm, so of the €55.8 million allocated in sports grants €57 thousand, or 0.1% if you prefer, got allocated to cycling clubs. Maybe instead of getting concerned about those few cycling clubs that may have got more than their due we should be looking at funding relative to other sports. For example, while GAA is popular, 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. Islandeady cycling club are hardly the real problem here. Only sayin'....

smacl · 30-11-2017 2:06pm

Weepsie wrote: »

Total funding to all Cycling and Triathlon clubs was 140,000. This is 7% of total funding.

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

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

Beasty · 30-11-2017 2:08pm

smacl wrote: »

Hmmm, so of the €55.8 million allocated in sports grants €57 thousand, or 0.1% if you prefer, got allocated to cycling clubs. Maybe instead of getting concerned about those few cycling clubs that may have got more than their due we should be looking at funding relative to other sports. For example, while GAA is popular, 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. Islandeady cycling club are hardly the real problem here. Only sayin'....

It's for capital spending. Most cyclists already own bikes. Few cycling clubs have anything substantial of a capital nature

Anyway, hopefully they are holding it all back for the velodrome.

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:15pm

smacl wrote: »

Hmmm, so of the €55.8 million allocated in sports grants €57 thousand, or 0.1% if you prefer, got allocated to cycling clubs. Maybe instead of getting concerned about those few cycling clubs that may have got more than their due we should be looking at funding relative to other sports. For example, while GAA is popular, 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. Islandeady cycling club are hardly the real problem here. Only sayin'....

Many GAA/Rugby clubs etc will have facilities where 100k will be a minor contribution to overall project costs whereas most cycling clubs have no clubhouse

More money in general for sports would be a good spending of tax money; it stays within economy and gets people active, great social outlet etc etc

On Ireland and corruption I recently had a Swiss friend and his wife visit; the planning scandal he told me of in his home town would make Haughey/Burke/Lalor and the rest embarrassed.

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:17pm

Weepsie wrote: »

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.

So paying a lot of tax disqualifies you from getting grants?

Lumen · 30-11-2017 2:22pm

ford2600 wrote: »

So paying a lot of tax disqualifies you from getting grants?

No, being a bunch of famously entitled pricks ought to disqualify them from getting handouts from my taxes which I'd rather were spent on poor people.

[Ross O'Carroll Kelly] recounts a tale about getting the Dart in 1997, “and a kid put his hand on my chest as the doors opened and he said ‘sorry dude, this is a Rock carriage’”.

07Lapierre · 30-11-2017 2:22pm

Maybe every cycling club should apply next year and request a velodrome?

smacl · 30-11-2017 2:24pm

Beasty wrote: »

It's for capital spending. Most cyclists already own bikes. Few cycling clubs have anything substantial of a capital nature

Anyway, hopefully they are holding it all back for the velodrome.

Fair enough, but not much point in calling foul when one club gets a decent grant when so few others even applied. I counted just three cycling clubs on the failed list. There's certainly significant money being spent by club cyclists on cycling equipment leading it to be an expensive enough sports activity to take part in.

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:26pm

Lumen wrote: »

No, being a bunch of famously entitled pricks ought to disqualify them from getting handouts from my taxes which I'd rather were spent on poor people.

The premise of this thread and previous has been lack of transparency and a compliance with criteria.

On that basis what is justification for denying Blackrock or any other "pricks"

If you are that bothered by poor kids cut a cheque and claim the relief?

Lumen · 30-11-2017 2:33pm

ford2600 wrote: »

The premise of this thread and previous has been lack of transparency and a compliance with criteria.

On that basis what is justification for denying Blackrock or any other "pricks"

If you are that bothered by poor kids cut a cheque and claim the relief?

You're expecting me to make extra contributions to the poor because my taxes are being frittered away on posh kids?

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:38pm

Lumen wrote: »

You're expecting me to make extra contributions to the poor because my taxes are being frittered away on posh kids?

That, point out where they didn't comply with grant criteria, get criteria changed seem to be your only options given your concern for poor kids?

The benefit of relief next November along with the smiles on childrens faces will be your reward.

Lumen · 30-11-2017 2:41pm

ford2600 wrote: »

That, point out where they didn't comply with grant criteria, get criteria changed seem to be your only options given your concern for poor kids?

Why are you attempting to stifle a moral debate?

Did you go to Blackrock College?

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:47pm

Lumen wrote: »

Why are you attempting to stifle a moral debate?

Did you go to Blackrock College?

CBS High School. Youngest of 7 in a 1000sq ft house after an extension!

The last thread was a thank fest with outrage over failure to comply with criteria and still get money.

Blackrock qualify or they don't. There is no exclusion for being rich picks insofar as I know.

Lumen · 30-11-2017 2:53pm

ford2600 wrote: »

Blackrock qualify or they don't. There is no exclusion for being rich picks insofar as I know.

http://www.dttas.ie/sport/english/sports-capital-programme

In particular, its objectives are to:
- assist voluntary and community organisations, national governing bodies (NGBs) of sport, local authorities and in some cases VECs and schools to develop high quality, safe, well-designed, sustainable facilities in appropriate locations and to provide appropriate equipment to help maximise participation in sport and physical recreation
- prioritise the needs of disadvantaged areas in the provision of sports facilities
- encourage the multi-purpose use of local, regional and national sports facilities by clubs, community organisations and national governing bodies of sport

ford2600 · 30-11-2017 2:54pm

Lumen wrote: »

http://www.dttas.ie/sport/english/sports-capital-programme

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

magicbastarder · 30-11-2017 3:01pm

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 · 30-11-2017 3:22pm

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

Beasty · 30-11-2017 3:36pm

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 · 30-11-2017 3:39pm

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 · 30-11-2017 3:58pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:12pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:35pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:48pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:55pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:57pm

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 · 30-11-2017 4:57pm

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 · 30-11-2017 7:13pm

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 · 30-11-2017 7:16pm

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 · 30-11-2017 7:27pm

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 · 30-11-2017 7:34pm

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 · 30-11-2017 10:48pm

Did islandeady get 10k again???

nice_guy80 · 30-11-2017 11:01pm

seanin4711 wrote: »

Did islandeady get 10k again???

yes
must be a great club

Eamonnator · 30-11-2017 11:22pm

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 · 30-11-2017 11:44pm

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 · 01-12-2017 12:17am

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 · 01-12-2017 5:55am

Trojan wrote: »

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

Muphry's Law!

spyderski · 01-12-2017 8:27am

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 · 01-12-2017 1:34pm

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 · 01-12-2017 3:17pm

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 · 02-12-2017 9:15pm

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.

Sports Grant funding announced

Comments