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

kippy wrote: »

Again, the mind boggles.
What do you suggest?
Let the FAI investigate themselves and believe what we're being told?

kippy wrote:

1. Neded a 100K cheque in the first instance.

Mismanagement but nothing illegal

kippy wrote:

2. Why it couldn't raise the funds elsewhere.

Again nothing illegal.

kippy wrote:

3. Why it wasn't reported in any accounts for the organisation.

Others have said that it was not required to be reported

kippy wrote:

4. Why the FAI covered up the transaction in the first instance.

What did they cover up if the transaction did not have to be reported ?

kippy wrote:

5. Why the FAI attempted to gag reporters on reporting the story.

I'd like to know this myself.

kippy wrote:

6. How JD treated this transaction (Revenue/Interest)

His tax affairs are none of our business.

Unless a whistleblower comes forward with solid allegations of financial wrongdoing you just cannot investigate an organization about it's affairs just because you don't like the way it's run or the people running it.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Mismanagement but nothing illegal

Again nothing illegal.

Others have said that it was not required to be reported

What did they cover up if the transaction did not have to be reported ?

I'd like to know this myself.

His tax affairs are none of our business.

Unless a whistleblower comes forward with solid allegations of financial wrongdoing you just cannot investigate an organization about it's affairs just because you don't like the way it's run or the people running it.

How are you making your mind up that nothing illegal has gone on here in two cases.
You simply cannot make that determination based on a statement from the FAI
The people saying nothing illegal has happened here do not have access to enough information to make that determination.

His tax affairs are none of our business, but they are the business of Revenue.
Whether or not he provided an interest free loan to the organisation is our business.
A whistleblower has come forward and reported a highly irregular financial situation that has happened and been covered up in the past.
The group concerned have advised that the action took place.
If that's not enough of a reason to investigate further I don't know what is.

Never realised Delaney's bootlicks were on here in such numbers.

PARlance wrote: »

There is, it's 8 years. They just introduced it last month... funnily enough, it doesn't apply to JD. It fairly went under the radar.

"FAI brings in eight-year term limit forboard members. The FAI have introduced a new measure to limitterms for members of its board of management to eight years. FAI CEO John Delaney will be exempt from the new term limits."

https://www.breakingnews.ie/sport/soccer/fai-brings-in-eight-year-term-limit-for-board-members-902236.html

Brilliant.

Nobody is going to go against him anyway, it would be career suicide.

What I found funny from Delaney trying to justify his wages that he turned down a job worth more than his already extraordinary wages.

Delaney, who has presided over stringent cutbacks which have affected even Republic of Ireland boss Giovanni Trapattoni and his coaching staff, reportedly earns around €340,000 a year.

However, he has revealed he could have left for a better-paid post and believes his wage is commensurate with the FAI's income, with the country still in the grip of a difficult economic situation.

Delaney told Sky Sports News: "I was offered a job three times the salary that I'm currently on, and that's a fact.

"I didn't take the job, I didn't want the job. I'm very happy in this job.

"I think the turnover of the FAI in the mid-90s, 1996, 97, was about €7million. Last year it was north of €40 million.

"We are in a tough economy in Ireland at the moment and anybody who is on a big salary is going to grab media attention."

It reminds me of the time RTE were trying to justify playing their top "stars" 6 figures a year in case they were poached by other broadcasters.

Nobody in their right minds believes it but its the line trotted out constantly.

Dots1982 wrote: »

Fair points, I would say I don’t find them applying for an injunction as particularly suspicious. It’s about Delaney keeping his name out of the papers and avoiding negative publicity. There’s not yet a lot in this story, no smoking gun, no evidence of financial misconduct but it’s still enough to get a lot of traction and intestify pressure on Delaney

"I dont find them applying for an injunction as particularly suspicious"
"There's not yet a lot in this story"

I don't get it, I really don't.

Dots1982 wrote: »

Their end of year accounts are freely available to view and independently audited. Not sure what more you want.

Indepentently audited....by whom?? One of their friends...who picks the auditor and who pays them???


If you had any business experience you would know that published accounts are for the purpose of keeping the legal side of things in order and not for the general public. All you see in them is what the company want you to see....the rest is well hidden away.


If the FAI were transparent...they would take questions at the AGM, wouldnt prevent fans from protesting and certainly would seek injuctions at a high price when experiencing/selling cash flow problems to the general public.

Dots1982 wrote: »

People who have high profiles on high salaries like to keep their names out of the papers. This goes for anyone under any level of public scrutiny so I don’t find it surprising at all and neither should anyone else to be perfectly honest.

He's happy enough to get his name in the papers for plenty other things. Why not this? CEO digs the organisation out of a hole - all good there.

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Wait there....


1. Who sang IRA songs in public and then denied it??
2. Who denies knowledge of fans being searched before games??
3. Who has a number of times take out injuctions against the press or individuals???
4. Who tried again this week to get an injuction???


5. Who did a glossy magazine interview with his missus??
6. Who was only too happy to push the carrier of a young lady who is today the mother of a young child whose father is a rugby player???
7. Who has willingly been photographed with fans pissed drunk when it suites the agenda??

8. Who had a two part documentary made about themselves?

I like this game.

9. Who ran onto the pitch and threw their tie into the crowd when we won our qualifier?

Dots1982 wrote: »

This is the arrangement for every business entity so your point has no merit.

Ohhh it has merit....all listed companies are subject to control through its supervisory board. They are put in place by the shareholders and ask the questions on their behalf.....


Who does JD or the FAI answer too?? What chance do fan clubs/clubs/fans have to ask questions without them being filtered or blocked as they dont meet the agenda??? Have you ever tried to ask the FAI about details of topics.....away ticket allocations for example???


Have we ever been told who paid for the VIP tickets bought to keep fans happy after the Scotland away after the FAI failed to allocate tickets to fans who had followed the team around the world for years????

Dots1982 wrote: »

They’re ultimately answerable to the government, minister for sport and public accounts committee. Those bodies are answerable to the people. Put enough pressure on those people or organize a boycott and you’ll threaten Delaney’s power.

A group have lobbied for JD to appear infront of a government comittee....he had no time last month, is expected in April if he doesnt find another reason to leave.



Since then....
- LOI clubs officiall allowed to share goal clips before Monday nigh RTE

coverage (there is no deal for LOI coverage...)

- LOI manager appointed to the U21s, with promise of first team

- Term periods have been fix for FAI comitte members
- He organised a coat and dagger meeting in a pub with hand picked fans,

a few of which have been public about his position.
- He tried to block a story in the news papers about loans to the FAI


A large group of fans have been staying away from the Aviva for a while. All you have to do is watch games...the stadium isnt every full at lower tier level.



Banner fly overs of the Aviva stopped at the last minute, pilot was advised not to fly, fans searched by JDs head of security at home and away games to take banners or flags off them, heavy handed security in the singing section of the Aviva and FAI employees searching socail media looking for critical fans, banners or plan for protest.....

Dots1982 wrote: »

Delaney would also been answerable to the board and various parties at the annual congress- schoolboy leagues etc I’d imagine but he’s oiled the wheels with them so they are all in his pocket.

Who makes up these boards and parties.....friends of himself and his father. Its a closed shop and it should stay that way....if its open why havent any of the lads on YBIG forum been allowed join or ask questions.