John Delaney at the FAI Thread - (Mod Notes in OP)

jay0109

Chancer3001 wrote: »

My own guess was they needed the 100k and he ponied it up so as they wouldn't have to pay interest to the bank. Maybe they had to pay a bill that would jave incurred expenses if not paid asap also...

Handier and quicker this way when the fai had money coming in 40 or so days

Are you serious

Chancer3001

So you thinl he decided to defraud them of 100k?

Even tho theyvw released a statement saying he lent 100k and they repaid it 2 months later.

And they've got an auditing firm lookimg into the books now?

You think he actually lent 100k and expects 200 back?

Jesus. Im taking a break from this thread for a while. People haven't 2 brain cells to rub together.

Its like holding hands with a blind baby deer with an inner ear infection who stumbles through an argument.

jay0109

Chancer3001 wrote: »

So you thinl he decided to defraud them of 100k?

Even tho theyvw released a statement saying he lent 100k and they repaid it 2 months later.

And they've got an auditing firm lookimg into the books now?

You think he actually lent 100k and expects 200 back?

Jesus. Im taking a break from this thread for a while. People haven't 2 brain cells to rub together.

Its like holding hands with a blind baby deer with an inner ear infection who stumbles through an argument.

I didn't say any of that or even allude to it. I simply pointed out that your explanation was childish and very embarrassing. But your user name probably explains a lot

The hiding it during a divorce stuff is utter nonsense.

It is standard to exchange a year or 2 of bank statements. And Affidavits of Means. Along with copies of payslips.

Whoever came up with it must still be laughing at just how gullible people are.

Irishmale0399

Chancer3001 wrote: »

So you thinl he decided to defraud them of 100k?

Even tho theyvw released a statement saying he lent 100k and they repaid it 2 months later.

And they've got an auditing firm lookimg into the books now?

You think he actually lent 100k and expects 200 back?

Jesus. Im taking a break from this thread for a while. People haven't 2 brain cells to rub together.

Its like holding hands with a blind baby deer with an inner ear infection who stumbles through an argument.

Do you believe a word JD says???

Again do you think we would know anything about this had it not been exposed??
Can you prove he wasnt planning to extract more than he loaned to them??
Would the auditing firm be there if it wasnt exposed??


Ever heard of companies cooking books????

Necro

DeanAustin wrote: »

This really is getting ridiculous on here.

There is no way Delaney would have been repaid twice for money he loaned once. The man is not that stupid. He'd never get away with it.

Delaney apparently declared the 100k in divorce proceedings so he wasn't trying to hide money or, if he was, he's needs basic lessons on how to do it.

It's become nasty in here. Someone throws out an accusation based on "proof" that's completely out of context and other posters take it as fact and run with it. The juvenile shouting down of anyone who defends Delaney as "an FAI employee" is also nasty and is stifling the conversation.

I'm not a Delaney fan. I think he should go for a number of reasons. And I think there's probably something about the 100k that he doesn't want the public to know. But he's entitled to a defence before being hung, drawn and quartered.

Thing is Dean, the FAI are simply burying their heads in the sand over this which gives rise (rightly) as to why they aren't simply clearing it up.

And also begs the question of why it wasn't released in their audited accounts.

If there's nothing unscrupulous about this bridging loan to a multi-million euro organisation receiving taxpayer money, why hide it at all?

It stinks of corruption, and is indicative of the culture within the organisation.

Richard Hillman

If the FAI had cash flow issues for 2 months, I do not understand why they did not ask the bank for an increased overdraft. The FAI had international games on the horizon, so they knew income was forcoming.

Importantly though, if you lent your company money because of cash flow issues, why would you leave your role as CEO? It was a simple loan, nothing wrong apparently, why leave the CEO position? Surely you'd only do that if you have done something wrong?

Also, why did the John Delaneys solicitors attempt the proposed injunction by stating that it was a family court issue? Mark Tighe said on the second captains podcast that he was told it was a family court issue. Why would loaning a company 100k be a family court issue? Why would you want to block your extremely charitable loan from being reported in the media?

If there was no wrong doing, why are they acting so guilty?

GLaDOS

I'd be surprised if JD has done anything illegal. He's not stupid, and he's an expert at looking after his own skin.

Don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a standard higher than "not technically illegal" though.

There's a reason they wanted to hide this. Even if it's not illegal, it looks terrible. Delaney moving posts is essentially an admission of guilt, hoping it would placate people.

DeanAustin

Necro wrote: »

Thing is Dean, the FAI are simply burying their heads in the sand over this which gives rise (rightly) as to why they aren't simply clearing it up.

And also begs the question of why it wasn't released in their audited accounts.

If there's nothing unscrupulous about this bridging loan to a multi-million euro organisation receiving taxpayer money, why hide it at all?

It stinks of corruption, and is indicative of the culture within the organisation.

Aren’t they before the Oireachtas Committee in a few weeks and have an investigation going on? That’s the place for them to respond. As it stands, they said that the loan was made and the loan was repaid. It’s crazy, for a whole host of reasons, to think Delaney tried to get repaid twice. He is not that stupid to leave himself so wide open on an amount which, to him, is obviously relatively small.

I believe there is something that stinks about the 100k. The fact he tried to get an injunction and the fact the FAI turns over 50 mill and needed a small, short term loan from its CEO doesn’t make sense. But neither do the accusations that he was trying to hide it as part of a divorce case or that he was trying to get double paid by the FAI.

D14Rugby

Chancer3001 wrote: »

So you thinl he decided to defraud them of 100k?

Even tho theyvw released a statement saying he lent 100k and they repaid it 2 months later.

And they've got an auditing firm lookimg into the books now?

You think he actually lent 100k and expects 200 back?

Jesus. Im taking a break from this thread for a while. People haven't 2 brain cells to rub together.

Its like holding hands with a blind baby deer with an inner ear infection who stumbles through an argument.

Calling people thick is a bit rich from someone who assumed ferrycarrig park had multiple full sized astros and couldn't think to use Google maps to have a look.

DeanAustin

Richard Hillman wrote: »

If the FAI had cash flow issues for 2 months, I do not understand why they did not ask the bank for an increased overdraft. The FAI had international games on the horizon, so they knew income was forcoming.

Importantly though, if you lent your company money because of cash flow issues, why would you leave your role as CEO? It was a simple loan, nothing wrong apparently, why leave the CEO position? Surely you'd only do that if you have done something wrong?

Also, why did the John Delaneys solicitors attempt the proposed injunction by stating that it was a family court issue? Mark Tighe said on the second captains podcast that he was told it was a family court issue. Why would loaning a company 100k be a family court issue? Why would you want to block your extremely charitable loan from being reported in the media?

If there was no wrong doing, why are they acting so guilty?

He'd have to declare his financial affairs, in their entirety, for a family law case. That's why he'd be even more stupid to try and get paid twice for a loan he made once.

mugsymugsy

If there is nothing wrong by Delaney then ok fine but be open and transparent.

Things that have happened under his watch that he hasn't been exactly open about

The 100k short term loan
The 5m from UEFA for henrys handball
The 3k per month for rent
Extension of fai directors tenure beyond gov recommendations

Other things and if nothing is wrong then should be simple enough to answer...

What are the level of his expenses and for what are they for?
Why 3 Oman friendlies in between 2012 - 2016?
Clarification of what happens to salary from UEFA and how this is accounted for?

These are just a few that could be looked into

DeanAustin

mugsymugsy wrote: »

If there is nothing wrong by Delaney then ok fine but be open and transparent.

Things that have happened under his watch that he hasn't been exactly open about

The 100k short term loan
The 5m from UEFA for henrys handball
The 3k per month for rent
Extension of fai directors tenure beyond gov recommendations

Other things and if nothing is wrong then should be simple enough to answer...

What are the level of his expenses and for what are they for?
Why 3 Oman friendlies in between 2012 - 2016?
Clarification of what happens to salary from UEFA and how this is accounted for?

These are just a few that could be looked into

All reasonable questions and none/some/all of them might have reasonable answers.

The_Kew_Tour

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Stephen Kenny made a good start as under 21 coach, without one or two of his best players, and Keith Andrews has been a positive addition to the 21s coaching staff. I know how good he is as a coach and he enjoys that side of the game, as well as the punditry, which bodes well.

The under 19s qualified for their finals with three wins, including one in Russia with a weakened team, and the under 17s enjoyed their games against Finland as preparations for the finals which will be held across Ireland in six weeks. The UEFA under 17 championships are a major coup for our country and a practice run and opportunity to show that we can stage major tournaments through the age groups to the seniors.

Quote from the article. Seems solid enough.

Hunt really wants delaney to stay involved. I must have logged in as him too

The u17s enjoyed a defeat the other night hahaha.

Give the man 5m a year. You're the problem with this country if you can't see the wrongs here

kippy

Chancer3001 wrote: »

The fai already released info on the 100k. He wasnt paid twice nor is he still owed

He lent the cash. Got it back fairly quickly after.

Job done.

People are grasping at straws.

Nobody knows what actually happened or why it happened. That's the primary issue here.

Dots1982

A lot of Delaney out posters here, given Delaneys clear popularity with the grassroots it makes me suspicious that it’s one poster posting under multiple accounts.

Possibly Delaney’s estranged ex wife trying to get revenge.

Brock Turnpike

DeanAustin wrote: »

Aren’t they before the Oireachtas Committee in a few weeks and have an investigation going on? That’s the place for them to respond. As it stands, they said that the loan was made and the loan was repaid. It’s crazy, for a whole host of reasons, to think Delaney tried to get repaid twice. He is not that stupid to leave himself so wide open on an amount which, to him, is obviously relatively small.

I believe there is something that stinks about the 100k. The fact he tried to get an injunction and the fact the FAI turns over 50 mill and needed a small, short term loan from its CEO doesn’t make sense. But neither do the accusations that he was trying to hide it as part of a divorce case or that he was trying to get double paid by the FAI.

People are massively, massively overestimating this upcoming Oireachtas Committee. The way they are carried out is not conducive to getting to the bottom of issues. You'll have several questions in quick succession and time restrictions in place. So it will be very easy for the FAI goons to skirt around questions by simply not acknowledging whichever ones they don't want to answer

Corholio

The thing about this whole 'It's not proven he did anything illegal' spiel is that without all this stuff that's crept up about him, he was hugely failing in his position as CEO anyway.

- A national league scrapping and fighting for it's life year after year, not helped by the FAI's registration fees, utterly stupid fixture scheduling and just a general contempt for the league.

- A national team that, quality wise' is at it's lowest for quite some time. Players not being good enough coming through are ultimately the association's failings. They forget that all the back slapping they do about money for facilities and visiting to cut ribbons, is that the actual development of players is also their responsibility. You know......actual football things.

- An utter lack of transparency and communication from the board and CEO in general. He hasn't given an interview in something like 8 years+ (?) The board happy to be stale and well paid without any structural change for years, while the football standards decline around them.

givyjoe

Dots1982 wrote: »

A lot of Delaney out posters here, given Delaneys clear popularity with the grassroots it makes me suspicious that it’s one poster posting under multiple accounts.

Possibly Delaney’s estranged ex wife trying to get revenge.

Ha, that is absolute hilarious spoofing nonsense.. clear grassroots support?! Are you referring to the statements released (at the weekend) by league officials that didn't have ANY grassroots support?!

kippy

Dots1982 wrote: »

A lot of Delaney out posters here, given Delaneys clear popularity with the grassroots it makes me suspicious that it’s one poster posting under multiple accounts.

Possibly Delaney’s estranged ex wife trying to get revenge.

Yep,
That's plausible in fairness.

Well, it's as plausible as some of the stuff posted by yourself and Chancer (and others) on this thread.

Irishmale0399

Dots1982 wrote: »

A lot of Delaney out posters here, given Delaneys clear popularity with the grassroots it makes me suspicious that it’s one poster posting under multiple accounts.

Possibly Delaney’s estranged ex wife trying to get revenge.

John is that you???:rolleyes::rolleyes:


If so off you go and read the twitter pages of the named grassroot support letters. MDL (Ardee Celtic have distanced themselves from the statement made) & DDSL issued statements that clubs were not asked about nor were board members informed.



This is worse than Brexit....

The Talking Bread

Dots1982 wrote: »

A lot of Delaney out posters here, given Delaneys clear popularity with the grassroots it makes me suspicious that it’s one poster posting under multiple accounts.

Possibly Delaney’s estranged ex wife trying to get revenge.

You fully well know there is no clear popularity with the grassroot football community. The statements backing him were laughable and sickening propaganda exercises delivered by well paid provincial executives and were widely dismissed by those underneatyh.

You are either really stupid or just conceding defeat and tr**ling now. Your silly childish posts the last few days would suggest either or.

Dots1982

The Talking Bread wrote: »

You fully well know there is no clear popularity with the grassroot football community. The statements backing him were laughable and sickening propaganda exercises delivered by well paid provincial executives and were widely dismissed by those underneatyh.

You are either really stupid or just conceding defeat and tr**ling now. Your silly childish posts the last few days would suggest either or.

Now Mrs. Delaney or should I see ex Mrs Delaney there’s no need to get snappy with me just because John left you for a younger model. John is a handsome charismatic older man with superb teeth and you should just be thankful for the time you had together.

kippy

Dots1982 wrote: »

Now Mrs. Delaney or should I see ex Mrs Delaney there’s no need to get snappy with me just because John left you for a younger model. John is a handsome charismatic older man with superb teeth and you should just be thankful for the time you had together.

This is just bizzare.

The Talking Bread

Dots1982 wrote: »

Now Mrs. Delaney or should I see ex Mrs Delaney there’s no need to get snappy with me just because John left you for a younger model. John is a handsome charismatic older man with superb teeth and you should just be thankful for the time you had together.

Exhibit 1. To think you wasted hours defending him and trying to make yourself appear that you have a serious case to make and now you have just receded into wierdo mode.

Dots1982

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Exhibit 1. To think you wasted hours defending him and trying to make yourself appear that you have a serious case to make and now you have just receded into wierdo mode.

But I thought we were all pretending to be neutral when actually we all secretly worked for the FAI. I’ve just caught the bug from the weirdos on your side and what they’ve been saying for 80 plus pages. That everyone who isn’t rabidly anti Delaney is

1- working for the FAI
2- part of a club that got financial help from the FAI
3- John Delaney

I’m the same now. I tried to make serious points and actually pushed the debate to a constructive place where improvements to the game here got discussed. What a waste of time that was. This thread has been a complete car crash from the off. Delaney has been libeled at various occasions off a complete dearth of evidence.

The amount of times gombeens have come in here saying that the loan was setup to hide money in the divorce settlement when it was the bloody divorce proceedings where the loan was disclosed shows the- “I’ll believe anything I read on WhatsApp” nature of the posters posting here.

Delaney and the board should be going after a fixed term and that should have been the way for decades but not one of the empty vessels around here will force this to happen because their arguments cant hold any water and all they mostly show is cognitive dissonance.

The Talking Bread

noone is going to take you seriously anymore, you have shown what your motives here are, just to antagonise for the sake of it. Your points were ridiculed before, now you have descended into a parody, it is a pity people humoured you so long!

So waste your time if you will.

Chancer3001

Dots1982 wrote: »

But I thought we were all pretending to be neutral when actually we all secretly worked for the FAI. I’ve just caught the bug from the weirdos on your side and what they’ve been saying for 80 plus pages. That everyone who isn’t rabidly anti Delaney is

1- working for the FAI
2- part of a club that got financial help from the FAI
3- John Delaney

I’m the same now. I tried to make serious points and actually pushed the debate to a constructive place where improvements to the game here got discussed. What a waste of time that was. This thread has been a complete car crash from the off. Delaney has been libeled at various occasions off a complete dearth of evidence.

The amount of times gombeens have come in here saying that the loan was setup to hide money in the divorce settlement when it was the bloody divorce proceedings where the loan was disclosed shows the- “I’ll believe anything I read on WhatsApp” nature of the posters posting here.

Delaney and the board should be going after a fixed term and that should have been the way for decades but not one of the empty vessels around here will force this to happen because their arguments cant hold any water and all they mostly show is cognitive dissonance.

I would thank that post 1000 times if i could

Chancer3001

Every time some dope replied "john is that you " to my post, i felt like replying "corky from life goes on, is that you"

People seem to think im pro-delaney. Im not. Im just trying to see the logical arguments to booting him out. Where there definitely isnt enough evidence to warrant that at this stage.

Completely agree it should be fixed term with fixed salary with an election of some kind.

Dots1982

The Talking Bread wrote: »

noone is going to take you seriously anymore, you have shown what your motives here are, just to antagonise for the sake of it. Your points were ridiculed before, now you have descended into a parody, it is a pity people humoured you so long!

So waste your time if you will.

I’ve resorted to this because the parody on this thread started at post 1 when Delaney was accused of “being root and cause of a large percentage of what is wrong with Irish football.”

Anyone with any knowledge of football in this country knew that the sestemic problems with football in this country began before Delaney was born. The GAA and the willingness of Irish people to travel overseas to watch live football is what make us a third world football nation. Our local game pleads poverty while our people fill the coffers of Celtic, Man Utd and Liverpool etc.

People are free to spend money wherever they like but let’s not pretend John Delaney can hold a candle to the damage that it causes to the local game.