Messages

 Brolly has always been an advocate of player rights. But had a big falling out, and now has totally reversed his views. His criticisims are purely personal.

He then had the opportunity to rejoin LFC but thought he would be better with an extra £20k a week in his pocket and got relegated.  The little c**t has no shame full stop.  United and Owen are made for each other.  If you want to welcome him back to Anfield good luck to you.  He has burnt all bridges end of.  All he cares about his himself and his precious England caps.  Oh, and his tax bill.

Also, you can't understand the hatred for Owen when he refused to play for Liverpool when he was contracted to do so?  Or when he forced the club to sell him cheaply???

Not true.

He did not have the opportunity to go to Liverpool. Newcastle bid considerably more than Liverpool were prepared to. The Real Madrid president told him they would not accept Liverpool's final bid under any circumstances so he had a choice to either sign for Newcastle or spend a year at Madrid in the reserves. Owen initially refused and was prepared to call Madrid's bluff but Keegan and Shearer eventually persuaded him.

This time Owen had two firm offers. Man Utd and Hull. Stoke were just about to finalise their offer. Villa and Everton made some noises but no proposals. If Liverpool had made any kind of offer Owen would have jumped. But Benitez doesn't like him. He only made the half arsed bid for him a couple of years ago because Gerrard and Carragher pestered him. But he ignored them this time. Personally I think Benitez is right. I also don't blame Owen one iota for making the choice he did.

I just noticed on the GAA website that we've an early start on Sunday week. 2pm throw-in for the senior game (the Munster hurling final has the 4pm slot). This presumably means a 1200 start for the minors, or maybe 1145 to allow for the presentation.

Suits me much better 

Excellent detective work Bud. I haven't seen the accounts but would have the following comments:

There are only two shareholders in the Gaelic Players Management Company. Donal O'Neill and a guy called David Burke own 75% and 25% of the shareholding respectively.

I thought O'Neill had left the GAA.
Burke is a lawyer and used to play with Waterford (footballers I think). He's been involved with the GPA for at least 5 or 6 years.

How can another company apply for a Government Grant if they owe VAT, or better still, how did they get previous grants at a time when they appeared to owe vat?

The company paid Corporation Tax of  €21,209. This would indicate that the company made profits of €169,672 in 2007, again a tidy sum (after directors salaries etc) to be shared among two individuals.
The accounts record the company as owing €78,590 to the Revenue as at 31 December 2007 and €52,973 as at 31 December 2006. So was this owed when they got original funding? This would normally appear to indicate an ongoing problem with VAT arrears and/or cashflow

The company had "cash in bank and at hand" of €121,125 as at 31 December 2007, which is very curious given the existence of the large VAT liability as at that date. The  "cash in bank and at hand" as at 31 December 2006 was €247,626.

The tax figures are in no way unusual. The amount of €78k owing could include the 21k corporation tax and will include 3 months worth of PAYE/PRSI and at least 2 months of VAT. There is nothing to indicate the company does not pay its tax liabilities as they fall due. The company clearly has the cash, but to pay Revenue before it was due would be silly.
In my view the extracts you have shown would indicate the company does NOT have any tax issues and would qualify for a tax clearance certificate.

Not sure why the company is making profits. You would think that if they allocated the profits to player welfare activities they could have avoided the 20k tax. There are no dividends being paid out, so the net profits have been reinvested. I presume O'Neill and Burke are nominees rather than the actual owners of the company and therefore would never receive dividends? 

Ciaran McArdle was appointed as director on 1 October 2008. There is no mention either of any connection between Ciaran McArdle (who is listed as an "accountant" on the B10 return filed with the CRO to record his appointment as director) and the auditors Kearney McArdle McEnaney & Company, so it can probably be assumed that no such connection exists simply because you can't be a director of a company and be the companies auditor at the same time

McArdle has been an accountant with the GPA for a number of years. Dunno if he has any connection with Kearney McArdle McEnaney.

Darius Vassell got some reception in Turkey when he went over to sign for Ankaragucu! 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1197078/VIDEO-SPECIAL-Turkish-delight-Manchester-City-reject-Darius-Vassell-mobbed-3-000-jubilant-Ankaragucu-fans.html

Them Turks are crazy when it comes to football!

They obviously haven't seen him play.

I was just thinking about what might have been going through Vassell's head at the time:

"I wonder who they think I am..."

I'm still astonished by it. I like Owen, do not begrudge him either leaving Liverpool for Madrid or not rejoining Liverpool when he left Madrid, but I'm glad he's not rejoining now. Without his killer pace, he's an average enough footballer. Even though he's older I reckon RvN would have been a far better signing.

Unless its stage 1 of Ferguson's masterplan of getting Gerrard to Old Trafford 

A batch of 20p coins accidentally issued with no date on them could be worth £50 each, say coin collectors.

Tens of thousands of the coins have been produced in error by the Royal Mint at Llantrisant, near Cardiff.


Rare mistakes might be worth £50 each. Tens of thousands of mistakes won't be.

A rare mistake would be worth a helluva lot more than £50.

Coin collectors would want one of these and I'm sure they'd pay at least £50.
Not sure I'd sell if I had one. Even in 12 months time there'd be far less of them on the market, therefore the price would go up a lot.

Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911.  Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.

Hound the amount of people that do not believe the insane Official Story may surprise you and it's growing daily. The evidence is substantial with zero speculation while on the other hand the ridicules fairytale we were given cannot hold up to the slightest bit of scrutiny.  Plenty whistle blowers have also come forward. With so much evidence I wouldn't know where to start so it's best you do you own research.

Well there's scores of different theories, was just wondering who you thought was behind it if it wasnt the Al Qaeda terrorists who claimed it.

Keeping off topic for a sec:
Seamus, can you explain to me what did happen re 911.  Which is presumably different to the common perception that it was masterminded by Al Qaeda and Osama.

I wouldnt mind the England thing as Capello just doesnt like him. However, any time I saw him for Newcastle this season he was poor. I'm pretty sure he's finished. He's lost his killer pace. Sure he'd get some goals for Man U or Liverpool, but more than a Macheda or even a Ngog if they played instead? I don't think so.

Fair play - you can't accuse them of not reacting postively - bads news for the GPA and their demands for a slice of the action  - the cake has just got smaller.

Fair play indeed, seems on first reading to be a good idea. The silly dig at the GPA is nonsensical though. Especially as it should increase rather than decrease total gate receipts as it should encourage higher attendances. 

You have a belief strongly based on one interview with him.
Fine
If these allegations were about a priest or an adult in charge of boy scouts on a camping trip,  would you have a different perspective?

Based on one interview, the fact that there was no physical evidence, and that the allegations seemed to have arisen some time after the alleged events took place.

What are your beliefs based on?

Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs  and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.

Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.

So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?

Perhaps not - but you'd be hard pushed to find anyone who'd find that sort of behaviour acceptable.

But behaviour not being acceptable is a long way from behavious being criminal.

As somebody said on the previous Wacko thread, society seems to look for the badness in people rather than goodness/innocence.

Kids generally love sleepovers, whether it be with their parents or their friends.
My belief is that is all this was. Innocent. Unacceptable, naive and idiotic, but no harm meant.

From what I read there was no accusation of sexual intercourse, no physical evidence of abuse.

The accusations were of inappropriate touching, something that could not be proved, one person's word against another, so impossible for any of us to know the truth. But when I saw him interviewed on the subject he convinced me that he did no wrong to any child.

As for Gandhi. That's a new one for me!

Nevertheless, Jackson's personal conduct did not meet even the common standard of decency. Much of his personal life centered around (prescribed) drugs  and an obsession with children and childhood. By his own admission, Jackson repeatedly "slept" with unrelated children at his mansion in "Neverland". Perhaps as a form of compensation, those children and their families enjoyed luxurious benefits.

Are courts with juries the only way in which someone may be recognized as a pedophile? Is there no common definition that might apply based
on undisputed facts? if this was a priest would such leeway be given by the public? Nowadays pedophilia is high profile. Everyone is sensitive about it.

So if you sleep in the same bed as (an unrelated) child, you are a paedophile?

An awful pity the GAA haven't the cop to look at supply and demand and then substantially reduce ticket prices. Would increase both attendance and gate receipts. Also doesnt help that the footballers are playing both the week before and the week after (from both a financial and a getting a pass from herself point of view).