Billy Walsh quits ** SEE MOD WARNING #643 BEFORE POSTING

slow · 22-10-2015 08:57PM

slow wrote: »

Boxing fans don't determine funding. The Irish Sports Council does. Boxing has been seen as something of a special case as there's always the temptation for the top guys to turn pro for short term gain. Billy Walsh is seen by many as one who kept our best boxers in the amateur ranks for Ireland's gain.

I am sad to see him go. Whoever fills his shoes will have a tough job. And I wouldn't like to be the person going into the ISC to negotiate the wages or contract duration for Walsh's successor...

A sure sign of madness is talking to yourself. I posted the above two months ago. I've never been so sorry to be proven right.

efb · 22-10-2015 09:33PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Any white smoke from Dublin 6 yet? Maybe there's an executive meeting tonight?

Dublin 8 no?

Joe_ Public · 22-10-2015 10:15PM

efb wrote: »

Dublin 8 no?

Ah yes, good spot! Doubt the honest toilers of the South Circular Road would want to be associated with the noveau riche of Dublin 6!

efb · 23-10-2015 05:25AM

The IABA reneged on a six-part agreement with the Sports Council over Billy Walsh’s employment terms, according to documents seen by The Irish Times.
Walsh, who left for Colorado Springs on Thursday morning to take up a role with the US Olympic Committee, had agreed terms worth at least €95,000 annually plus bonuses at a meeting in August only to see it withdrawn within days.
The Memorandum of Agreement between the two bodies was drawn up in an attempt to see off the offer from USOC, which had been made six months previously. The offer from America is believed to be worth more than double that amount with provisions for a pension, health insurance and flights back to Ireland included.

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 05:54AM

"IABA president Pat Ryan has told The Irish Times that they are aiming to hold a press conference on Friday to take questions on the matter."

This is my favourite bit from that report. They are "aiming" to hold a press conference, although I don't believe they've ever held one before so would represent a major achievement for them Let's all cross our fingers and hope they succeed in this hugely ambitions endeavour.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 23-10-2015 09:26AM

If that is true and a memorandum was agreed and drawn up then the IABA should rightly have all of their administration funding pulled until they get their house in order

jd · 23-10-2015 10:01AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

"IABA president Pat Ryan has told The Irish Times that they are aiming to hold a press conference on Friday "

Maybe they need to find a few lawyers to read over their statement

Dodge · 23-10-2015 10:16AM

http://www.iaba.ie/iaba-position-re-resignation-of-billy-walsh/

IABA statement. They say they returned contract as agreed to Walsh and he didn't reply.

case885 · 23-10-2015 10:22AM

Tune into radio 1.

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 10:39AM

Dodge wrote: »

IABA statement. They say they returned contract as agreed to Walsh and he didn't reply.

Yes but was it the same contract that had been agreed with the ISC? Isn't that the burning question?

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 10:41AM

case885 wrote: »

Tune into radio 1.

Only caught the end of it. One of the panellists seemed to be verging on a "but Roy think about the kids" moment.

price690 · 23-10-2015 10:51AM

Jesus that was one cranky presenter, seemed like he couldn't wait to put an end to that discussion.

Basically the IABA reckon Walsh was motivated by money.

Any good lawyer hear would tell you they played it perfectly, attack the ISC here rather than Walsh.

Whether they are right or wrong (I highly suspect they got exactly what they wanted in Walsh leaving), the best way for a kangaroo committee to survive is to sling mud at another bastion of ineptitude, in this case the ISC. And hope it sticks.

Dodge · 23-10-2015 10:52AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Yes but was it the same contract that had been agreed with the ISC? Isn't that the burning question?

If the contract was agreed between Walsh (and his solicitors) and the IABA, then that's all that matters (to me)

EDIT; Should say I don't think anyone comes out of this with credit. IABA are clearly well meaning amateurs. ISC are clearly power hungry. Walsh is clearly an egomaniac.

Shame it had to happen at all

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 11:02AM

Dodge wrote: »

If the contract was agreed between Walsh (and his solicitors) and the IABA, then that's all that matters (to me)

EDIT; Should say I don't think anyone comes out of this with credit. IABA are clearly well meaning amateurs. ISC are clearly power hungry. Walsh is clearly an egomaniac.

Shame it had to happen at all

But we have yet to get Billy Walsh's version of the contract negotiations. If he refused to sign the document that was sent to him by the IABA, then - should he choose to respond - he might tell us why. I believe then we might be able to come close to a definitive judgement on this whole sorry mess, if even that's important anymore.

price690 · 23-10-2015 11:05AM

Dodge wrote: »

If the contract was agreed between Walsh (and his solicitors) and the IABA, then that's all that matters (to me)

EDIT; Should say I don't think anyone comes out of this with credit. IABA are clearly well meaning amateurs. ISC are clearly power hungry. Walsh is clearly an egomaniac.

Shame it had to happen at all

Pretty fishy though that the IABA waited until Walsh had crossed the Atlantic before going into more detail though.

They also gave themselves plenty of time to get a version of events together that's palatable.

We will probably never know what was shook on between Walsh and IABA. They claim Walsh kept asking for amendments to his own agreement, which they caved in to. I highly doubt they did. It could be the case the contract agreed with Walsh and the one actually delivered, were very different agreements. But we will never know as its one mans word against the other.

The IABA have a history of shafting people so I'd say they are smugly resolute behind their statement this morning. A statement that hit all the buttons in terms of turning it around to deflect attention from themselves. Grass roots must be mentioned 10 times, for a very Dublin centred organisation I find this quite funny.

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 11:11AM

price690 wrote: »

Pretty fishy though that the IABA waited until Walsh had crossed the Atlantic before going into more detail though.

They also gave themselves plenty of time to get a version of events together that's palatable.

We will probably never know what was shook on between Walsh and IABA. They claim Walsh kept asking for amendments to his own agreement, which they caved in to. I highly doubt they did. It could be the case the contract agreed with Walsh and the one actually delivered, were very different agreements. But we will never know as its one mans word against the other.

The IABA have a history of shafting people so I'd say they are smugly resolute behind their statement this morning. A statement that hit all the buttons in terms of turning it around to deflect attention from themselves. Grass roots must be mentioned 10 times, for a very Dublin centred organisation I find this quite funny.

Yes, for one thing it seems clear the negotiations weren't centred around one consistent document. There is tooing and froing, amendments being inserted, the sands shifting all the time. We still have only a series of broken, fragmented pieces here, far from the full picture. Not that I anticipated it anyway.

efb · 23-10-2015 11:17AM

Paying the boxers is a red herring, they Cannot be given monetary reward

Dodge · 23-10-2015 11:41AM

efb wrote: »

Paying the boxers is a red herring, they Cannot be given monetary reward

Many of them already do get monetary reward. Joe Ward for example fought in the APB championship. The P is for Professional. The WSB boxers (Conlan, Barnes et al) aren't doing it for nothing either

jd · 23-10-2015 11:43AM

Was what Joe Christle and Billy Walsh "shook on" the same as was posted to Billy? That's the question to be answered for me.

efb · 23-10-2015 11:44AM

Dodge wrote: »

Many of them already do get monetary reward. Joe Ward for example fought in the APB championship. The P is for Professional. The WSB boxers (Conlan, Barnes et al) aren't doing it for nothing either

They are getting grants based on performance but in the Olympics can't be actually paid a bonus for medal

price690 · 23-10-2015 11:45AM

Dodge wrote: »

Many of them already do get monetary reward. Joe Ward for example fought in the APB championship. The P is for Professional. The WSB boxers (Conlan, Barnes et al) aren't doing it for nothing either

Conlan and Barnes were not paid for WSB only travel costs covered, thats on the record

http://www.irish-boxing.com/barnes-conaln-and-i-were-the-only-fighters-not-to-get-paid-in-wsb/

Whether its true or not, im not sure obviously

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 11:51AM

price690 wrote: »

Conlan and Barnes were not paid for WSB only travel costs covered, thats on the record

Whether its true or not, im not sure obviously

Didn't Paddy Barnes insist on getting paid by the IABA when they fought against France a couple of years ago? I'm hazy on the details but there was a fuss about it at the time. Anyway, I don't begrudge the boxers any extra income they get, fully deserve it as top class sportsman, and don't see why it's that relevant to any of the current issues.

Henno30 · 23-10-2015 11:51AM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

People indeed have drawn their conclusions. They've concluded the IABA are hopeless and not fit for purpose.

The Americans who routinely come top of Olympics medals tables and are the recognised powerhouse of the Olympics headhunted Walsh and were prepared to do what it took to get him.

You must not have looked at any boxing medal tables lately.

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 11:54AM

Yes, but it's precisely because they're languishing in those tables that they seem to be desperate to get Billy in.

brooke 2 · 23-10-2015 12:05PM

Darkest Horse wrote: »

As a boxing outsider and someone who prefers to listen to both sides of the story, this is a tragedy in sporting terms, regardless of the circumstances. How this man was allowed to be lost is beyond me. In my opinion, his achievements put him in a position to rightly name his price and the approaches from other international organisations should have motivated the powers that be to do anything to keep him here. This would be easier to swallow if it weren't right in the middle of an Olympic cycle and by not matching the offer of the Americans, we now stand to lose exponentially more in the long run. This is a joke.

Say, for the sake of argument, the Americans offered $2m to Billy (crazy money was mentioned after all!) after the recent successes at Doha, especially Michael Conlan's gold medal win, do you think we should match it? If our government decided to spend 'crazy' money like that to hold on to Billy, how do you think that would go down with the general public?

walshb · 23-10-2015 12:06PM

Like I said. This was and is about money. And no amount of ISC disguising and deflecting and covering changes that. Whoever was footing the bill is irrelevant. Billy wanted X, and theIABA likely didn't believe he was worthy of it. No matter who stepped in to pay it may not have been enough for the IABA. It began about money and it ended about money. These issues mostly do. All the autonomy and other stuff was just a part of the mess. The IABA and Walsh have given their sides of this mess. I see no winners here, and for me the ISC come out the worst

price690 · 23-10-2015 12:08PM

walshb wrote: »

Like I said. This was and is about money. And no amount of ISC disguising and deflecting and covering changes that. Whoever was footing the bill is irrelevant. Billy wanted X, and theIABA likely didn't believe he was worthy of it. No matter who stepped in to pay it may not have been enough for the IABA. It began about money and it ended about money. These issues mostly do. All the autonomy and other stuff was just a part of the mess. The IABA and Walsh have given their sides of this mess. I see no winners here, and for me the ISC come out the worst

Ah yes, no reading between any lines with you this morning. Seems you were just waiting for the IABA's side and whatever they say is fact.

brooke 2 · 23-10-2015 12:09PM

pac_man wrote: »

It's quite easy to slate IABA saying they fcuked up so I wouldn't mind hearing what they've got to say. It will probably be just a wishy washy statement wishing Walsh all the best in his future endeavours.

Joe Chrystal was certainly not 'wishy washy' this morning! I would describe Kieran Mulvey's useless contribution as such!!

Clearlier · 23-10-2015 12:11PM

walshb wrote: »

Like I said. This was and is about money. And no amount of ISC disguising and deflecting and covering changes that. Whoever was footing the bill is irrelevant. Billy wanted X, and theIABA likely didn't believe he was worthy of it. No matter who stepped in to pay it may not have been enough for the IABA. It began about money and it ended about money. These issues mostly do. All the autonomy and other stuff was just a part of the mess. The IABA and Walsh have given their sides of this mess. I see no winners here, and for me the ISC come out the worst

Well, the ISC said that it wasn't about money and Billy Walsh said that it wasn't about money. It wasn't the IABA's money so had no impact on them so we should accept their assertion that it was about money?

There are nearly as many holes in their statement as there are in a sieve. They are playing a political game though and no doubt the end result will be some kind of fudge.

Joe_ Public · 23-10-2015 12:11PM

The money thing is beginning to get on my wick. Nobody is saying it isn't part of it, but when Billy Walsh says it wasn't the ultimate reason why he walked away, why do people try to say he's effectively lying?

The Americans were offering him twice the salary he was on here, including benefits (that's in Irish Times today.) Walsh says he was happy to accept the lower offer the IABA were offering, that it was the ancillary conditions that were the stumbling block. Is he lying?

There are set guidelines in Irish sport as to what these positions are paid. So much for a head coach, more for a performance director. By refusing to elevate him to his proper title of director, the IABA were ensuring Walsh was only paid the smaller salary of 77k, a situation Walsh tolerated so he could stay and do the job he loved. I believe he would have been fully entitled to test that in a tribunal if he was so inclined.

Billy Walsh quits ** SEE MOD WARNING #643 BEFORE POSTING

Comments