Thomas Davis v the Government

[dublinfella]

I'm not disputing that, what I am disputing is the 'right' the GAA have to demand access to a project that was never intended for their use.When did municipal become multi sport? The other municipal stadia i listed were all more than 50% funded by the exchequer and the GAA managed to avoid going to court? why is this different?

its clearly a move to damage a soccer club's prospects and thats not acceptable form the GAA in 2006.

Clearly the GAA have the right to argue their position - unless you think due process doesn't apply when it comes to soccer clubs. A substantial amount of public money is being given to one organisation with little or no cost to that organisation. How bad would the uproar have being if 90+% of the funding for Croke Park had come from the public purse?

Of course you could argue (as you seem to be doing) that the GAA's stance is in some way immoral, but some of us find it even more distasteful that large amounts of cash are being handed over to an organisation - Rovers - that has shown itself in the past to be, shall we say, cavalier in matters financial. Maybe the GAA should start flogging all their grounds, safe in the knowledge that not only will they make money out of the sale but the State will then pick up the tab for building new ones - all in the interests of the 'community'

thomas davis have the right to argue its postion in court in the same way the croke park residents do...  and im not defending rovers per say. i just dont see what LEGAL business it is of TD clg what happens across the road in the same way i would ferociously object to the FAI bringing a similar action to demand access to gaa grounds. not moral or as a question of defending the taxpayer, but LEGALLY you cant say a good approach is, and I quote from the submission they are going to make:

"To reserve the SDCC Municipal Stadium exclusively for Assocation Football, a stadium that is intended to be used for other non-sporting community occasions, will place the applicant at a considerable disadvantage in attracting the youth of Tallaght to our club, our sport and the GAA culture."

I dont disagree, but if thats what you are going to the High court armed with, christ. Its easy to argue the govt are wrong to fund the stadium, but its a whole different ball game to argue its ILLEGAL, which TD have to do. the court isnt there to referee a row over who believes they have a right to what,they are there to decide did  the sdcc break the law in building a stadium for a single sport. and i believe they cant and as such, there is an agenda at play and i dont want part of it.

[Bogball XV]

The GAA has done well enough out of the public purse - they shouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth and comments from people on here proclaiming their concern to be about the granting of taxpayers' money to a 'failed' business stink of self righteous hipocracy, if not not self serving bigotry. If it was anything else ye'd not be bothered.

Paddy, the taxpayers thing is what gets me, this is actually a huge issue and one which many league of ireland clubs fail to face up to.  They are businesses, they do not act like businesses - time after time clubs go into receivership, pay their creditors 1c in the €1 and reform the club as a new business.  It's not good enough, they should be forced to comply with normal business rules by their organisation - rovers should have been finished last year - they owed €3.6m to creditors - maybe that's where the alleged €2m they paid into the new stadium came from.  Of this 1.5m was owed to the revenue, an offer of 2% was accepted by the revenue, they owed their other creditors 1.7m, they accepted 4% - these other creditors could be any small businesses in the locality who they owed money to (they could have been anybody actually - but this is a more emotive example).  So, they totally fcuk up their finances and the business essentially closes down, then a bullshit takeover is facilitated by the 400 club, to all intents and purposes the club was finished, but the FAI and the govt saved them by bending the rules and giving favours that other businesses would not get.
Whilst we're on the subject, Shels are also getting treated with kid gloves by the revenue currently, they have also decide that paying paye/prsi (which they have already deducted from player's salaries) is not for them, well not regularly anyway, afaik they owed approx 600k - now what other business would get away with that - apparently it's only Ozzie Kilkenny and a few others who are keeping the club afloat, and thats just because they're paying in advance for Tolka Park (which they now own and will develop once planning is sorted out).
So, looking at those figures, Rovers owed the govt 1.5m, paid them 30K so we could say the govt actually granted them 1.47m. 
If clubs are not responsible enough to budget properly, they should not be in business imo - it's very simple, revenue received is pretty much the amount of money they should spend every year, nothing more.

[dublinfella]

The GAA has done well enough out of the public purse - they shouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth and comments from people on here proclaiming their concern to be about the granting of taxpayers' money to a 'failed' business stink of self righteous hipocracy, if not not self serving bigotry. If it was anything else ye'd not be bothered.

Paddy, the taxpayers thing is what gets me, this is actually a huge issue and one which many league of ireland clubs fail to face up to.  They are businesses, they do not act like businesses - time after time clubs go into receivership, pay their creditors 1c in the €1 and reform the club as a new business.  It's not good enough, they should be forced to comply with normal business rules by their organisation - rovers should have been finished last year - they owed €3.6m to creditors - maybe that's where the alleged €2m they paid into the new stadium came from.  Of this 1.5m was owed to the revenue, an offer of 2% was accepted by the revenue, they owed their other creditors 1.7m, they accepted 4% - these other creditors could be any small businesses in the locality who they owed money to (they could have been anybody actually - but this is a more emotive example).  So, they totally fcuk up their finances and the business essentially closes down, then a bullshit takeover is facilitated by the 400 club, to all intents and purposes the club was finished, but the FAI and the govt saved them by bending the rules and giving favours that other businesses would not get.
Whilst we're on the subject, Shels are also getting treated with kid gloves by the revenue currently, they have also decide that paying paye/prsi (which they have already deducted from player's salaries) is not for them, well not regularly anyway, afaik they owed approx 600k - now what other business would get away with that - apparently it's only Ozzie Kilkenny and a few others who are keeping the club afloat, and thats just because they're paying in advance for Tolka Park (which they now own and will develop once planning is sorted out).
So, looking at those figures, Rovers owed the govt 1.5m, paid them 30K so we could say the govt actually granted them 1.47m. 
If clubs are not responsible enough to budget properly, they should not be in business imo - it's very simple, revenue received is pretty much the amount of money they should spend every year, nothing more.

Rovers are the only LOI club to ever go into examinership, and to be fair i wouldnt call the 400c takeover 'bullshit', they are running the show very well since removing the crooks and liars involved, which in part explains TD's determination not to let them into tallaght. the recievership was above board and legal, many struggling business do it. the fan takeover ensured that they as a members club will never be so prolifigate again.

but broadly, yes, LOI clubs are a mess.  but the revenue is sniffing aroung managers and players expenses, and 'raided CP to check on the security and catering firms, so we arent in a position to be too moralistic on this. i think the gaa are next when the revenue are finished with soccer clubs.

but the dept still have a legal right to build a stadium for local soccer clubs, including rovers. despite what previous chairmen of the club got up to

[tayto]

If SDCC wants to build a ground for whatever it wants to build a ground for, that's its business.  Hasn't the GAA got grounds all over South Dublin - the Davis and St Annes grounds are literally within shouting distance - if they really want to develop them. Small minded petty s**t like this is what p****s me off about the GAA and some of the people that inhabit it.

I'm from south Dublin and i think Thoman Davis are more then jusified in their action.

So this is how you punish a business for cooking it's books? You biuld them a free stadium. Great stuff altogether.

SDCC had agreed to let the local GAA clubs use the stadium but the sports minister pulled the plug inexplicably. Now unless anyone here thinks FF are alway righ then Thomas Davis are perfectly entitled to take this to court. People saying they should just build their own ground are just talking cobblers, SDCC had agreed to let them use this one with minor modifications. It is in a prime location that is easy to access from anywhere in south Dublin due to a host of bus routes and the Luas.

Fact is Eircom league clubs shouldnt be going full time because they simply can't afford it ont he tiny crowds that come through the gates, i fail to see why the government should prop up an unsustainable business model like this. 

[ildanach]

The ground is being built for a league of ireland team. A team that plays in a division the top precentile of soccer players play in. Do people honestly think that if a u12  local team match is to be player that shamrock rovers first team will not take precident on the pitch. So lets stop this shit that  it is a community field etc.. It is a stadium being built using tax payers money to accomadate a club who mismanaged their finances.
Maybe I am wrong but of any of the gaa clubs that have sold there grounds or part of their grounds- i have not heard of one where the government go and build them a new ground. Why should we the tax payer but up money for a club who can not look after their own affairs, unless it is a ground that is available to all sports, rugby,gaa soccer and even while they are doing it put an  athletics track in as well.   

[tayto]

U12 match? oh for the love of god, will you cop on. No one is being that unreasonible. You seem determined to make as weak an argument as humanly possible by total exaggeration.

The stadium is being finished by SDCC as a municipal stadium, with Rovers as the primary tenants. So yes, Rovers  get first dibs on use of the stadium, fair enough, but championship matches between two Dublin southside clubs should be able to be played there as well instead of dragging players and supporters across Dublin [often on weeknights now aswell with the floodlights]. SDCC had agreed as much, the Dublin county board had offered to help pay for the extension, then minister knuckle head comes along and says no.

[neilthemac]

the same man who gives millions to the horse racing and greyhound lobby?

the same man who said at the weekend GAA players should bring their disputes to the courts??? Well here they are so, Minister

[tayto]

Yes, the same minister who mouthed off on Prime Time recently about how the GAA should end it's association with drinks sponsorship. Happily forgetting to mention the the Heineken cup, the Carlsberg Cup, the Magners league, the Guinness autumn internationals.

[neilthemac]

Hennessy Gold Cup along with a host of other races I don't even know

[easytiger]

Don't really have an opinion on the main issue here - but I do find it fairly amazing that the LOI clubs should be slagged about failing to comply with the Revenue, when there are a fair amount of county boards/ supporters club/ big local clubs who would hate to see them sniffing around "expenses" for managers and certain high profile players.

Glass houses and all that.

[ildanach]

tayto,

point taken on board regarding u12 game,  i was however trying to show an example (howevery bad) that the stadium being built for "the community" should be for the community, If the government want to build shamrock rovers a stadium let them just come out and say it not in this veiled form.

[Lone Shark]

Easytiger, for what it's worth I'd love to see Revenue going after that kind of carry on. If we could get back to unpaid managers it might suck a lot of the air out of the GPA professionalism balloon.

[tayto]

tayto,

point taken on board regarding u12 game,  i was however trying to show an example (howevery bad) that the stadium being built for "the community" should be for the community, If the government want to build shamrock rovers a stadium let them just come out and say it not in this veiled form.

Fair enough boss, I took you up wrong so, sorry about that.

People seem to have such black and white opinions on this.

I have sympathy for Rovers and their fans over this but a community stadium should sure be able to fit all the sports played in the community. The thing could probably be finished by now if the minister hadnt forced the SDCC to change their mind. Anyone saying it wouldnt be an ideal location for GAA matches in south dublin is just not being objective in my opinion.

[ildanach]

No worries. Anyway if it goes to the supreme court i can not see it being resolved before the next election and by then the bull o donohue will probably have a new brief.. that is if FF are still in power.

[tayto]

As the original poster said, the only winners if this goes that far would be the lawyers. The legal bill would probably pay for the work in the first place. Why not just extend it and be done with it, get rovers in place, with GAA clubs using it on other days, maybe even the dublin hurlers or footballers could play there once or twice.