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

OldMrBrennan83 · 18-03-2019 10:35pm

crustyjuggler wrote: »

Any ideas what supporters could do to fix the corrupt FAI problem . Marches , Strike ?

There's nothing. People will still go to internationals and that's where the money is. These people done even know the domestic game exists or who is running the FAI at all. Photo op and back to manuniera or liverpewl and wait for the next day out.

Muahahaha · 18-03-2019 10:41pm

theoneeyedman wrote: »

Is that the case though?

I haven't really been following them, but how has the Olympic Council (or what ever they are called) fared since Hickey was exposed/ousted? Has the corporate governance improved there? (I genuinely don't know, they have been keeping a very low profile since Rio).
From the outside, there were certain commonalities between how the 1 organisations were headed up.

Not sure how the IOC have been faring, as you said they have been very quiet. But I just cant see Delaney getting caught up in the same kind of international ticketing scandal that Hickey was. Dont forget that Hickey had previously turned his nose up at the Brazilian authorities including former footballer and now Senator Romario, Hickey had promised to meet them over their concerns on ticketing but then he didn't show up to the meeting. So when the Olympics came around they were ready to jump on him.

Maybe some scandal will emerge someday about Delaney and he will get removed by the Minister of the day. But it will take quite the journalist to uncover it as he has bought the loyalty of his minions below him. You're right to say that Delaney wields power in the FAI in the same way Hickey ran the IOC. And Hickey was in situ for over 20 years yet none of his minions ever leaked the ticketing scam he was up to. It took the Brazilian authorities to take him down not his own people.

More likely to happen though I think is Delaney will land a plum job in UEFA and like any dictator he will be instrumental in picking his successor. When he does move on I don't see much changing with how the FAI is run, the gravy train will continue for them all while the LOI is left in poverty.

Fr Tod Umptious · 19-03-2019 9:00am

kippy wrote: »

Contact their local politicians.
Do not attend any further Ireland matches.
Withdraw any volunteer services.

That hits the wrong people.
That means kids can't play.

Boycott the sponsors instead.
Don't buy their products.
If you go to an international match don't buy any food or merchandise.
If the shirt sponsors have a special offer for season ticket holders, don't take them up on it.

GavRedKing · 19-03-2019 10:10am

crustyjuggler wrote: »

Any ideas what supporters could do to fix the corrupt FAI problem . Marches , Strike ?

Well you cant protest at the matches because the stewards will take any anti-JD or FAI stuff off ya before you get into the stadium.

The Talking Bread · 19-03-2019 10:59am

GavRedKing wrote: »

Well you cant protest at the matches because the stewards will take any anti-JD or FAI stuff off ya before you get into the stadium.

I envisage the stewards got a nice "bridging loan" from The Dark Lord and his merry men for that. Glad that it got a bit of publicity though.

asteroids over berlin · 19-03-2019 11:23am

farcical, how this is tolerated is just a joke, the whole board as well as the actual FAI should be investigated

whiskeyman · 19-03-2019 11:27am

I reckon we'll see JD gone by the summer.
A nice payoff and probably a cushy job with UEFA.
He'd fit right in there...

asteroids over berlin · 19-03-2019 11:31am

whiskeyman wrote: »

I reckon we'll see JD gone by the summer.
A nice payoff and probably a cushy job with UEFA.
He'd fit right in there...

the equivalent division to CAB or even CAB needs to investigate his personal accounts first!:pac:

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 11:42am

whiskeyman wrote: »

I reckon we'll see JD gone by the summer.
A nice payoff and probably a cushy job with UEFA.
He'd fit right in there...

Take your hunch to paddy power. He’s 14/1 to leave the post by the end of the year.

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-03-2019 11:47am

Was he not backed in to evens?

GavRedKing · 19-03-2019 11:48am

There really should be a 2 term, 6-8 year limit on serving the FAI, a bit like the GAA, it should be voted on every few years.

It would serve a better purpose to keep it ticking over with new blood and new ideas.

Not that it will happen at the FAI as they're ran completely differently but if the Government or ISC demanded it or theyed pull funding, it might make the FAI take note.

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 11:54am

Delaney is at worst incompetent & overpaid. This idea from some posters that the FAI need to be investigated for Financial misconduct...any shred of evidence for this?

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-03-2019 11:55am

Dots1982 wrote: »

Delaney is at worst incompetent & overpaid. This idea from some posters that the FAI need to be investigated for Financial misconduct...any shred of evidence for this?

Just in the hope they find something so they can clean house.

GavRedKing · 19-03-2019 12:03pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

Delaney is at worst incompetent & overpaid. This idea from some posters that the FAI need to be investigated for Financial misconduct...any shred of evidence for this?

Its a bit dodgy that an organisation that posted over €5m in profit and a €50m revenue got a €100k cash flow loan from its CEO.

Either hes massively over paid (he is) or the organisation has a serious cash flow issue and it wasnt recorded.

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 12:07pm

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Just in the hope they find something so they can clean house.

I think they are going to be disappointed. Delaney is guilty of cronyism as as well I should mention but that’s not illegal. Maximum terms will address this to some degree. In terms of scandal the English FA have had a much rougher couple of years.

There’s a bit of a mob mentality to opposition to Delaney. I wish it was more thought out in terms of if Delaney is forced out who exactly do we want to take over. What is the plan. All seems half arsed from mostly dummies to me.

I’ve blogged and posted on boards is what Irish football needs is a supporters trust to invest directly in grassroots football here and weaken the FAI but that would take a financial commitment, planning and strategy. Most seem to think that if they post #delaneyout on twitter enough times the Irish football will magically start winning games again and qualifying for world cups .

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 12:09pm

GavRedKing wrote: »

Its a bit dodgy that an organisation that posted over €5m in profit and a €50m revenue got a €100k cash flow loan from its CEO.

Either hes massively over paid (he is) or the organisation has a serious cash flow issue and it wasnt recorded.

It’s curious alright and I’d like to know the reasoning. Do I think it’s outright dodgy dealing? No I don’t think it is to be honest.

Hoboo · 19-03-2019 12:12pm

whiskeyman wrote: »

I reckon we'll see JD gone by the summer.
A nice payoff and probably a cushy job with UEFA.
He'd fit right in there...

He already had a nice role with UEFA, 100k for 100 days 'work'.

OldMrBrennan83 · 19-03-2019 12:15pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

It’s curious alright and I’d like to know the reasoning. Do I think it’s outright dodgy dealing? No I don’t think it is to be honest.

Of course you'll think that, he's untouchable in your eyes. Hopefully something comes of it, if it does how far will you defend him?

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 12:25pm

OldMrBrennan83 wrote: »

Of course you'll think that, he's untouchable in your eyes. Hopefully something comes of it, if it does how far will you defend him?

A stupid post that I wouldn’t normally even reply to but here goes-

I’ll defend someone against financial misconduct allegations where there is no existence of evidence to show financial misconduct.

All we have is he gave a personal loan to the fai in the amount of 100k. I’m sorry I don’t think that is a sackable offence.

I’ve said he might be overpaid and incompetent but if he leaves I’d like to hear someone/anyone at all come up with a plan of what happens next to improve Irish football. I’ve literally posted about what should happen interms of planning and strategy in Irish football. I don’t see anyone else posting anything productive here.

I’m not pro Delaney, but I’m not in favor of people calling for the CAB to investigate him without even the slightest evidence of money taken out of the accounts that is unaccounted for. That’s just a witchhunt.

kippy · 19-03-2019 12:27pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

It’s curious alright and I’d like to know the reasoning. Do I think it’s outright dodgy dealing? No I don’t think it is to be honest.

The only way to have any chance of knowing the reasoning is to have an independent investigation by a group that has the relevant powers and expertise to do what is required to get to the bottom of things.

How do you know anything? We wouldn't even know this had happened if the FAI had their way - why should we trust anyone at the top of that organisation based on the events of the past few days?

kippy · 19-03-2019 12:29pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

A stupid post that I wouldn’t normally even reply to but here goes-

I’ll defend someone against financial misconduct allegations where there is no existence of evidence to show financial misconduct.

All we have is he gave a personal loan to the fai in the amount of 100k. I’m sorry I don’t think that is a sackable offence.

I’ve said he might be overpaid and incompetent but if he leaves I’d like to hear someone/anyone at all come up with a plan of what happens next to improve Irish football. I’ve literally posted about what should happen interms of planning and strategy in Irish football. I don’t see anyone else posting anything productive here.

I’m not pro Delaney, but I’m not in favor of people calling for the CAB to investigate him without even the slightest evidence of money taken out of the accounts that is unaccounted for. That’s just a witchhunt.

The only thing we know is what the FAI have told us (against their will might I add)

What do you want to see happen?
The FAI investigate themselves and us to believe what we are being told?

That's a great Idea. The office of corportate enforcement should be involved at the very least.

Why shouldn't people be calling for investigations?

Christ, the mind absolutely boggles at some of the logic here.

kippy · 19-03-2019 12:32pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/b]

That hits the wrong people.
That means kids can't play.

Boycott the sponsors instead.
Don't buy their products.
If you go to an international match don't buy any food or merchandise.
If the shirt sponsors have a special offer for season ticket holders, don't take them up on it.

Fair enough, but hitting the "wrong people" tends to work faster than anything else. If the kids cant play who gets it in the neck - the parents - if the parents are p1ssed you end up with a situation where hundreds of thousands of people are instantly engaged. It's the fastest way to get traction - and the question was asked.
Kids can still play soccer btw.

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 12:33pm

kippy wrote: »

The only way to have any chance of knowing the reasoning is to have an independent investigation by a group that has the relevant powers and expertise to do what is required to get to the bottom of things.

How do you know anything? We wouldn't even know this had happened if the FAI had their way - why should we trust anyone at the top of that organisation based on the events of the past few days?

To investigate what exactly? There’s no money missing. The accounts are completed by independent auditors. They would need to be in b the scam. The chances of that are even more remote.

You’ll never bring down the FAI this way. I’ve posted how I see the best way to reduce their stranglehold over Irish football.

kippy · 19-03-2019 12:42pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

To investigate what exactly? There’s no money missing. The accounts are completed by independent auditors. They would need to be in b the scam. The chances of that are even more remote.

You’ll never bring down the FAI this way. I’ve posted how I see the best way to reduce their stranglehold over Irish football.

To investigate why an organisation:
1. Needed a 100K cheque in the first instance.
2. Why it couldn't raise the funds elsewhere.
3. Why it wasn't reported in any accounts for the organisation.
4. Why the FAI covered up the transaction in the first instance.
5. Why the FAI attempted to gag reporters on reporting the story.
6. How JD treated this transaction (Revenue/Interest)

How do we know there is no money missing? What are we to believe?
How do we know that there weren't other instances of this behaviour?

Fr Tod Umptious · 19-03-2019 1:22pm

kippy wrote: »

To investigate why an organisation:
1. Needed a 100K cheque in the first instance.
2. Why it couldn't raise the funds elsewhere.
3. Why it wasn't reported in any accounts for the organisation.
4. Why the FAI covered up the transaction in the first instance.
5. Why the FAI attempted to gag reporters on reporting the story.
6. How JD treated this transaction (Revenue/Interest)

How do we know there is no money missing? What are we to believe?
How do we know that there weren't other instances of this behaviour?

Now that is a witch-hunt.

Fr Tod Umptious · 19-03-2019 1:24pm

kippy wrote: »

Fair enough, but hitting the "wrong people" tends to work faster than anything else. If the kids cant play who gets it in the neck - the parents - if the parents are p1ssed you end up with a situation where hundreds of thousands of people are instantly engaged. It's the fastest way to get traction - and the question was asked.
Kids can still play soccer btw.

I help train the kids in the soccer club.
I'm a cone mover.
If I, and others, decide to withdraw our services then the quota of kids to adults is breached and training is cancelled.

kippy · 19-03-2019 1:34pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/b]

I help train the kids in the soccer club.
I'm a cone mover.
If I, and others, decide to withdraw our services then the quota of kids to adults is breached and training is cancelled.

You do realise kids play soccer outside of a "managed" environment all the time?

kippy · 19-03-2019 1:34pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Now that is a witch-hunt.

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

GavRedKing · 19-03-2019 1:42pm

I've not as much issue with Dleaney digging out the FAI as much as I do with him and the FAI trying to block the reporting of it via an injunction.

Even the most easily explainable loans and their terms becomes questionable by the layman on the street if an injunction is sought.

Delaney and the FAI ahvent helped their cause by going down that route.

I dont think anyone is fiddling the books, nobody here is in a position to say otherwise but the miss management at the top and the massive pay to Delaney, looking in, is a joke.

Fr Tod Umptious · 19-03-2019 1:51pm

GavRedKing wrote: »

I've not as much issue with Dleaney digging out the FAI as much as I do with him and the FAI trying to block the reporting of it via an injunction.

Even the most easily explainable loans and their terms becomes questionable by the layman on the street if an injunction is sought.

Delaney and the FAI ahvent helped their cause by going down that route.

I dont think anyone is fiddling the books, nobody here is in a position to say otherwise but the miss management at the top and the massive pay to Delaney, looking in, is a joke.

True
Mismanagement ? yes
Illegal activity ? Well that's a lot harder to prove.

Fr Tod Umptious · 19-03-2019 2:01pm

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.

PARlance · 19-03-2019 2:07pm

GavRedKing wrote: »

There really should be a 2 term, 6-8 year limit on serving the FAI, a bit like the GAA, it should be voted on every few years.

It would serve a better purpose to keep it ticking over with new blood and new ideas.

Not that it will happen at the FAI as they're ran completely differently but if the Government or ISC demanded it or theyed pull funding, it might make the FAI take note.

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

kippy · 19-03-2019 2:17pm

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.

Hoboo · 19-03-2019 2:21pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Now that is a witch-hunt.

Ok John.

dan1895 · 19-03-2019 3:22pm

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

alta stare · 19-03-2019 4:25pm

I see the FAI are sending our surveys via email. I just completed one and one of the questions was asking if there is anything negative about the FAI. I just put in John Delaney. It would be great if those who took part done the same.

GavRedKing · 19-03-2019 4:25pm

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.

Irishmale0399 · 19-03-2019 4:50pm

There are 3 interesting things which have to happen or we have to be advised on here:

1. Who paid for the injunction and for what reason was it sought...why hide something which is innocent.

2. Interesting would be to know if money was being moved so that it wasnt involved in a divorce settlement.....

3. Have the FAI ever received such payments before and from whom, why did it come to such a point where the FAI needed bailouts and why wasnt their current bank asked to help out.

All in all I would say its time for the government to call for an independant review of the FAI, its finances and its leadership structures. Its a group which gets tax payers money and doesnt seem to think they are oblieged to give any information into where or what they spend their money. Furthermore its not the first time the FAI have sought court injunctions....why are they so secretive?? What have they to hide???

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 5:09pm

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

There are 3 interesting things which have to happen or we have to be advised on here:

1. Who paid for the injunction and for what reason was it sought...why hide something which is innocent.

2. Interesting would be to know if money was being moved so that it wasnt involved in a divorce settlement.....

3. Have the FAI ever received such payments before and from whom, why did it come to such a point where the FAI needed bailouts and why wasnt their current bank asked to help out.

All in all I would say its time for the government to call for an independant review of the FAI, its finances and its leadership structures. Its a group which gets tax payers money and doesnt seem to think they are oblieged to give any information into where or what they spend their money. Furthermore its not the first time the FAI have sought court injunctions....why are they so secretive?? What have they to hide???

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

Irishmale0399 · 19-03-2019 5:12pm

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

The smoking gun is the person willing to speak to the government about mismanagement within the FAI....cracks starting to appear.

There can be no evidence of financial misconduct as no one outside the FAIs inside circle have seen the books. They are not very open about finances etc.

Fans have to keep the pressure up...only way they can do that is stay away from games. Not good for the team but the FAI only understand one thing and thats money in pockets. 2-3 empty games in the Aviva and questions will be asked.

kippy · 19-03-2019 5:16pm

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 · 19-03-2019 5:16pm

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

There can be no evidence of financial misconduct as no one outside the FAIs inside circle have seen the books. They are not very open about finances etc

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

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 5:18pm

kippy wrote: »

"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.

Can you read? Didn’t I explain why I didn’t find it suspicious?

kippy · 19-03-2019 5:21pm

Dots1982 wrote: »

Can you read? Didn’t I explain why I didn’t find it suspicious?

I can read good.

I just cannot believe what I am reading.

JD wants to keep his name out of the papers so he is "allowed" spend thousands on solicitors?

Irishmale0399 · 19-03-2019 5:23pm

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 · 19-03-2019 5:23pm

kippy wrote: »

Because JD wants to keep his name out of the papers - you don't find that suspicious - for something he actually did?

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.

kippy · 19-03-2019 5:24pm

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.

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 5:26pm

Irishmale0399 wrote: »

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.
.

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

Dots1982 · 19-03-2019 5:28pm

kippy wrote: »

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.

Because it’s brought a significant level of negative scrutiny on him. Again this is so obvious I’m perplexed why I’m having to explain it

Irishmale0399 · 19-03-2019 5:31pm

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.

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??

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

Comments