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

Zebra3 · 01-04-2019 12:26PM

Cyrus wrote: »

i would suggest that delaney was hiding funds for his ongoing divorce rather than the fai needing the funds, a short term bridging loan of 100k being required by an entity that size is utterly unbelievable.

If what you suggest is true, I guess that would be a sackable offence and possibly a criminal one too.

givyjoe · 01-04-2019 12:27PM

Chancer3001 wrote: »

No idea if its normal or not. A)Based on the 1 case i know of (the fai) it seemed normal. So i cant say that its not.

What sport ireland policy did they breach?

Must work for the fai...yawn. B)primary school debating level

Point B is laughable considering point A.

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 12:32PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

If what you suggest is true, I guess that would be a sackable offence and possibly a criminal one too.

It would have to be criminal, also one would have to questions his honesty and integrity as he has kids with the ex and they would supper as a result.

Is that the right personality to run grassroots football in our country???
Is that the type of guy you would want to have spending public money??

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 12:38PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

https://www.sportireland.ie/Media/Latest_News/Sport%20Ireland%20Statement%20on%20FAI.html

"Sport Ireland was not notified at any stage in 2017 about any apparent material deterioration in the FAI’s financial position, as per Sport Ireland’s Terms and Conditions of Grant Approval, and has sought additional clarification in relation to this matter."

Sure there was no major deterioration. They made over 2m profit that year if i recall correctly.

A short term blip in cash flow doesnt count as material deterioration

The_Kew_Tour · 01-04-2019 12:41PM

That Article Stephen Hunt wrote about him in paper was right laugh. Talk about delusion

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 12:42PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

It would have to be criminal, also one would have to questions his honesty and integrity as he has kids with the ex and they would supper as a result.

Is that the right personality to run grassroots football in our country???
Is that the type of guy you would want to have spending public money??

Pretty sure the 100k actually came to light when he showed it during his divorce proceedings. He was the one who showed it first day.

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 12:45PM

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

That Article Stephen Hunt wrote about him in paper was right laugh. Talk about delusion

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

Brock Turnpike · 01-04-2019 12:45PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

That would have been normal business, something which would have been transparent in the accounts.

Is it normal for the CEO to give a company he doesnt own and that is run on large amounts of public funding to give that company a loan??? Is it normal for the same company to breach Sport Ireland policy by not informing them of the need for a short term loan???

Open your eyes or get back to the FAI desk.

You realise this chancer lad is on the wind up?

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 12:47PM

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

You realise this chancer lad is on the wind up?

You realise the only winding up has been people accusing me of being an alt account and or working for the FAI. i havent wound anything up

Cyrus · 01-04-2019 12:47PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

It would have to be criminal

why?

Cyrus · 01-04-2019 12:48PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

McKenna also states in his peice that he was advised by accountants, on his twitter page he stated that he was getting the legal pieces and advise correct before publishing. Hence why I would assume he has something in his hands which backs up his claim.

mckenna is a spoofer, he is trying to create a bigger scandal, no one else is suggesting that there was any more or less than the original 100k at play.

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 12:49PM

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

You realise this chancer lad is on the wind up?

My money is on him being either...
1. An FAI employee
2. The writer of one of the letters of support for JD over the last week or so. Kinda like a FAI employee.

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 12:50PM

Cyrus wrote: »

why?

Maybe because the divorce courts insist on a full overview of your finances....if he is hiding money....is it legal???

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 12:52PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Maybe because the divorce courts insist on a full overview of your finances....if he is hiding money....is it legal???

As already posted. It came to light because HE declared it in his divorce

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 12:57PM

Chancer3001 wrote: »

As already posted. It came to light because HE declared it in his divorce

Have you a link to that info??

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:03PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Have you a link to that info??

Yes. Its in every place that talks about his injunction attempt. He claimed the only place the paper could have gotten that info was from creeping through his private divorce proceedings. Judge said no. Could have gotten it elsewhere.

https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/19/for-the-last-time-it-was-a-bridging-loan/

DeanAustin · 01-04-2019 01:03PM

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.

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:05PM

Cue - that must be chancers other account nonsense in t-10.

Lack of ability to debate is ridiculous although not unexpected.

Ive said many times - its reminiscent of the anti-trump brigade who dont know their arse from their elbow....but TRUMP OUT COS TRUMP BAD

ASOT · 01-04-2019 01:06PM

Two FAI employees plain and simple

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 01:06PM

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Yes. Its in every place that talks about his injunction attempt. He claimed the only place the paper could have gotten that info was from creeping through his private divorce proceedings. Judge said no. Could have gotten it elsewhere.

https://www.broadsheet.ie/2019/03/19/for-the-last-time-it-was-a-bridging-loan/

And what about the internal whistleblower???
https://extra.ie/2019/03/24/news/irish-news/john-delaney-loan-fai-new-role

"Last week, as he sought an injunction to prevent details of the bridging loan to the FAI from being published, Mr Delaney’s legal team argued that details of the transaction could only have emerged from his in-camera divorce case. However, the Extra.ie understands that at least one FAI whistleblower with access to internal files was behind the leak. The transaction was not disclosed in the FAI’s audited accounts for 2017 at all."

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:10PM

Yeah.... so the info WASNT stolen from his divorce proceedings (where it was declared) It was provided by a whisteblower who had the info from somewhere else.

Face remains it was discussed and declared during his divorce. Not hidden from his ex.

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 01:13PM

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.

Would we have ever known about it if it was not exposed?? The simple fact that a loan was given and an invoice received by the FAI shows that the accountants within the FAI are not either fit for their profession or they accepted the situation.

Should they have missed it why havent they come out and admitted it?? Why hasnt someone lost his/her position?? Why hasnt the CFO spoken on the matter??? Why didnt they inform Sport Ireland of the lack of funds as their policy would insist on happening??

Should he have invoiced the FAI for a loan...then it means in basic accounting he would be free to claim repayment for both. If someone was nasty they would suggest he was trying to filter money out of the organisation for other purposes.....maybe back handers???? Thats nasty and full of ifs and buts......

Cyrus · 01-04-2019 01:16PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Should he have invoiced the FAI for a loan...then it means in basic accounting he would be free to claim repayment for both. If someone was nasty they would suggest he was trying to filter money out of the organisation for other purposes.....maybe back handers???? Thats nasty and full of ifs and buts......

stop, seriously

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:16PM

Youre misunderstanding this 100k completely.

He loaned it in april. It was paid back in june.

Simple as that. The FAI has already released statements to clear it up.

Had no impact on financial year apart from preventing short term cashflow problems

WinnyThePoo · 01-04-2019 01:18PM

Silly shill shill.

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 01:18PM

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Yeah.... so the info WASNT stolen from his divorce proceedings (where it was declared) It was provided by a whisteblower who had the info from somewhere else.

Face remains it was discussed and declared during his divorce. Not hidden from his ex.

Have we seen documentation or minutes of his divorce court proceedings??? No we havent so we have no proof that it was discussed or disclosed. I would also doubt his solicitors comments as being 100% as he is being paid to ensure JD comes out of this looking as good as possible.

DeanAustin · 01-04-2019 01:18PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Would we have ever known about it if it was not exposed?? The simple fact that a loan was given and an invoice received by the FAI shows that the accountants within the FAI are not either fit for their profession or they accepted the situation.

Should they have missed it why havent they come out and admitted it?? Why hasnt someone lost his/her position?? Why hasnt the CFO spoken on the matter??? Why didnt they inform Sport Ireland of the lack of funds as their policy would insist on happening??

Should he have invoiced the FAI for a loan...then it means in basic accounting he would be free to claim repayment for both. If someone was nasty they would suggest he was trying to filter money out of the organisation for other purposes.....maybe back handers???? Thats nasty and full of ifs and buts......

That's a whole load of speculation there. It's hard to know how it was done without seeing the books.

If he gave them a loan, there are a number of ways it could have been treated that would necessitate an invoice to repay it. As an example, take expenses that are vouched. You are effectively giving your company a loan, providing a receipt and they repay you. Could be a similar arrangement here.

Delaney is not a fool. Men at his level don't pull clumsy stunts like that to defraud organisations.

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:21PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Have we seen documentation or minutes of his divorce court proceedings??? No we havent so we have no proof that it was discussed or disclosed. I would also doubt his solicitors comments as being 100% as he is being paid to ensure JD comes out of this looking as good as possible.

Youre not allowed to see divorce processdings. Thats why he tried to get an injunction in the first place.

He said THEY GOT THIS INFO BY LOOKING AT MY DIVORCE CASE....

Doesnt take einstein to figure out it was discussed in the divorce case. Doesnt even take double figure IQ .

Chancer3001 · 01-04-2019 01:23PM

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

Irishmale0399 · 01-04-2019 01:28PM

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

Sorry FAI havent admitted it but here you can read it all:

https://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/international-soccer/ewan-mackenna-why-the-fais-predictable-silence-cant-be-considered-either-an-answer-or-good-enough-37965302.html

"
In April of 2017, John Delaney says he loaned his employer €100,000. The way this works in bookkeeping is the FAI would debit their bank account as they received money, and they credit a loan account for money they owe to that person or institution. As the Sunday Times reported, an invoice was then received and a remittance issued in July of 2017. However when someone produces an invoice, that's not a loan, and the double entry in that case is you debit an expense and credit a creditor's ledger account. At that point he's now owed €200,000.
If you are lost, it's okay. One expert that has studied the accounts tells us, "In layman's terms, the books say they paid him back €100,000 and that means he's still owed another €100,000, or there was a further payment of €100,000 to him to clear whichever was outstanding, be that the loan or the creditor's ledger entry. Either that or them saying the invoice that was produced was a mistake.""

Additionally from the article he tried to stop with the court injunction by Mark Tighe:
John Delaney, chief executive of the Football Association of Ireland (FAI), ... Last night the FAI boss failed in an emergency application before the ... The remittance of €100,000 is said to have been paid based upon an invoice. ... stated that he provided the FAI with a €100,000 bridging loan in April 2017.

Chancer3001 wrote: »

Youre misunderstanding this 100k completely.

He loaned it in april. It was paid back in june.

Simple as that. The FAI has already released statements to clear it up.

Had no impact on financial year apart from preventing short term cashflow problems

Give a loan and write an invoice??? Off you go an read a Leaving Cert Accounting Book....basics in accounting seem to be missing for you.

When your at it ask yourself......
Why wasnt the 2010 €5million UEFA shush money put into the accounts seperately and transparently???

There is a history developing and it maybe why the FAI are so secretive.

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

Comments