Shamrock Rovers Ultras

[Hardy]

Who put in €2M before?

Where did I say 'no soccer club owns its own facilities'? I don't know of any. I don't take any interest in soccer. But my substabntive point stands. I only ever hear of soccer begging for accommodation. GAA people tend to get on with it and build their own.

By the way, where is the documentation for your contention that "all GAA clubs in the SDCC" have had "their grants and planning permission applications frozen"? If that were the case, it would be outrageous discrimiation and victimisation and our friend the judge would be back in action pronto.

[dublinfella]

Who put in €2M before?

Where did I say 'no soccer club owns its own facilities'? I don't know of any. I don't take any interest in soccer. But my substabntive point stands. I only ever hear of soccer begging for accommodation. GAA people tend to get on with it and build their own.

By the way, where is the documentation for your contention that "all GAA clubs in the SDCC" have had "their grants and planning permission applications frozen"? If that were the case, it would be outrageous discrimiation and victimisation and our friend the judge would be back in action pronto.

€2m from Rovers over 5 years approx 10 years ago IIRC.

Are TD 'tending to get on with it and build their own' here? Its a juvenile way to try and make a point. Clearly soccer clubs own their own facilities and use council pitches too, as to the GAA.

It was in the Sun and Mail about 2 weeks ago and I have seen it on the ground, my club is included.there is no 'discrimination and victimisation'  because SDCC are waiting to see the outcome of a court case that has been taken questioning the legalities around state funding of capital infrastructure and can they fund individual sports.

I told you all this 18 months ago....

[Hardy]

€2m from Rovers over 5 years approx 10 years ago IIRC.

Oh THAT Shamrock Rovers! Aren't they the asset-stripping, debt-defaulting, employee-cheating, supplier-screwing Shamrock Rovers that you keep telling us have nothing to do with TODAY'S Shamrock Rovers? In which case what is the relevance of their 'contribution'? (And where did they get the money, btw?)

As Lone Shark pointed out to you more than once, you can't have it both ways. Either this is a different Shamrock Rovers, in which case their contribution has been €100K, or it's the same Shamrock Rovers, in which case they owe us, the taxpayers, their former players and their cheated suppliers a whole lot of money.  Which is it?

It's this sort of tendentious nonsense and your facility to ignore the truths that don't suit you and to trot out again and again the stuff that's been debunked, that provoked my first post today.

[dublinfella]

€2m from Rovers over 5 years approx 10 years ago IIRC.

Oh THAT Shamrock Rovers! Aren't they the asset-stripping, debt-defaulting, employee-cheating, supplier-screwing Shamrock Rovers that you keep telling us have nothing to do with TODAY'S Shamrock Rovers? In which case what is the relevance of their 'contribution'? (And where did they get the money, btw?)

As Lone Shark pointed out to you more than once, you can't have it both ways. Either this is a different Shamrock Rovers, in which case their contribution has been €100K, or it's the same Shamrock Rovers, in which case they owe us, the taxpayers, their former players and their cheated suppliers a whole lot of money.  Which is it?

It's this sort of tendentious nonsense and your facility to ignore the truths that don't suit you and to trot out again and again the stuff that's been debunked, that provoked my first post today.

Hardy, despite popular wisdome I am no more a Rovers fan than the man on the moon.

Answer the GAA related points I raised.

Why is it ok for TD to get a stadium for free and not Rovers (even though thats at best disputed) and the consequnces of suing the state coming into view.

[Hardy]

Answer my question first about which version of Shamrock Rovers we're talking about.

[dublinfella]

Answer my question first about which version of Shamrock Rovers we're talking about.

I couldnt give two fucks. My point is that there is a huge amount of bullshit flying round GAA circles on this, most obvious that Rovers are getting a 'free' stadium. Its not true.

Just for a second assume I am who I say I am, a member of a GAA club near TD. I was 100% right when I predicted that grants would be withheld and 100% correct in the reasons for it. I was 100% correct about the political backing the GAA havent got (mind you no-one could predict that Kennedy would have a govt minister removed from the clubhouse).

You are patently avoiding the substantive point. TD are behaving in a manner against the constitution of the GAA and in an anathema to wht the association claims to stand for.

Again, why is it ok for td to get a free ground but not rovers?

[darbyo]

It's not that the GAA get a free stadium, it's that the Tallaght community get a Govt. built stadium that can be used by all the relevant field sports in the area for the purposes that they need. Adult GAA can't be played in a stadium that's being built by the govt..If it was an ice rink or a swimming pool being built then any local sports organization that could use those facilities should be able to do so.for example if the tallaght synchronised swimming club build their own pool then they can decide if they allow tallaght swimming club to use the facilities or not.But if the govt. build it then the pool should be built to suit the purposes of all aqua related sports in the locality.

[Hardy]

Answer my question first about which version of Shamrock Rovers we're talking about.

I couldnt give two fucks.

So no answer then, because you know it's unanswerable. You can't have it both ways and you can't adduce SR's putative €2M contribution to bolster your argument and then say it's not relevant. You'll quote it again in the future, I've no doubt,  and we'll have to go through all this again.

My point is that there is a huge amount of bullshit flying round GAA circles on this, most obvious that Rovers are getting a 'free' stadium. Its not true.

I've refuted this comprehensively at least twice today alone. And still you carry on. Alright – again – it's substantially free - €100K in a cost of many millions. The €2M is a chimera, as I've shown.

Again, why is it ok for td to get a free ground but not rovers?

This is an unbelievable contortion. Who is suggesting that the issue is about a fee stadium for TD? The issue is about a free (for all intents and purposes) stadium for Shamrock Rovers, and the specific EXCLUSION of TD. So, in case you still don't get it, your question should read "why is it ok for Shamrock Rovers to get a stadium free and GAA clubs to be specifically excluded, having initially being promised inclusion?" Both questions are an avoidance of the issue, in any case. The question is why should TD and the GAA meekly accept O'Donoghue's dictat, and the reversal of a written undertaken from the public authority?

And now I have better things to do with my Saturday evening.

[deiseach]

And now I have better things to do with my Saturday evening.

[dublinfella]

Hardy,

You make one profound mistake in your summing up. The stadium was always a soccer facility. The GAA lobbied to have that overturned, conditional on funding, and when the minister said he wouldnt fund it, it reverted to a soccer stadium. To say it was initially offered to the GAA is patently untrue. Your entire argument falls apart on the caveat that was in the GAA being included, subject to funding for the project remaining in place. The minister has consistanly said 2,000 is not viable.

TD arent being excluded. They actually rejected the offer to allow their underage players to use the facility. If they had let it go they actually would have this facility for the youth of the area already. Now they are facing a ruinious multi million legal bill after losing costs last week.

Darbyo, would you allow yachting in the pool? Or would you say sorry, you dont fit?

[darbyo]

I thought you might ask about boat related water sports, but this brings us back to the vicious circle of what capacity the ground would be if an adult size GAA pitch was built there. I would accept that TD have'nt shown any documented proof of their architectural report but I think mid Louth posted a link to an O'Donoghue quote that the ground capacity would be 4500.Which seems to me to be the ideal capacity for SR given their average gate. The arguement has gone around in circles at this stage so there seems little point in getting into the 'small print' points again, I (and I suspect most others on this board) would'nt support TD if this was simply a case of trying to destroy SR, would you Dublinfella have a problem with TD and SR sharing if the capacity was acceptable to all concerned?

[dublinfella]

I thought you might ask about boat related water sports, but this brings us back to the vicious circle of what capacity the ground would be if an adult size GAA pitch was built there. I would accept that TD have'nt shown any documented proof of their architectural report but I think mid Louth posted a link to an O'Donoghue quote that the ground capacity would be 4500.Which seems to me to be the ideal capacity for SR given their average gate. The arguement has gone around in circles at this stage so there seems little point in getting into the 'small print' points again, I (and I suspect most others on this board) would'nt support TD if this was simply a case of trying to destroy SR, would you Dublinfella have a problem with TD and SR sharing if the capacity was acceptable to all concerned?

Not really but I would still have a problem with that being all the southside gets after years of f**king around from the DCB. They get off the hook about making a balls of Rathcoole.

We really shouldnt be waiting for soccer clubs to get into difficulty and try and muscle in.

Semms like Rovers would rather cold days in hell than have to work with Kennedy after the email and letter to his membership and trying to delay the case. They simply dont trust him and his motives.

[darbyo]

Fair enough, I don't live in Dublin so I would'nt be too familiar with the whole situation, in fact most of what I 'know' is from what I've read on this board, though I also check out the soccer sites for a bit of balance. As regards Rathcoole it's my understanding that there are road access problems in relation to this and that it's intended as a center of excellence rather than a southside stadium, so if thats the case then Tallaght is a different situation.However you've argued your position consistently and often effectively IMO but you've also avoided answering some of the questions put to you or tackling some of the issues raised by some of the more knowledgable posters on this issue. Anyway the substantive points have been argued to death at this stage, I would be interested to know what you mean by saying that DCB made 'a balls of Rathcoole'

[dublinfella]

Fair enough, I don't live in Dublin so I would'nt be too familiar with the whole situation, in fact most of what I 'know' is from what I've read on this board, though I also check out the soccer sites for a bit of balance. As regards Rathcoole it's my understanding that there are road access problems in relation to this and that it's intended as a center of excellence rather than a southside stadium, so if thats the case then Tallaght is a different situation.However you've argued your position consistently and often effectively IMO but you've also avoided answering some of the questions put to you or tackling some of the issues raised by some of the more knowledgable posters on this issue. Anyway the substantive points have been argued to death at this stage, I would be interested to know what you mean by saying that DCB made 'a balls of Rathcoole'

they got the land for something like £1 an acre 12 years ago.

the SDCC wont put in an access road until there is some form of plan for the site. you dont need an access road to design a stadium or centre of excellence on it. even a few pitches and a portacabin while they make up their minds. its been dragging on too long and suspicions should have been raised when the DCB turned down the ministers offer of a similar funding arrangement for Rathcoole that Rovers were getting in Tallaght.

its unnacceptible to be sitting on this land still and stinks of a property play. ballybodedn st endas got cheap land around the same time and sold it on for appartments.

[darbyo]

Find it hard to believe that it's a property play by the DCB, surely in Dublin land is of more importance for games development than money.Are you saying that if DCB put any ol' plan in that an access road would be built by SDCC on the strength of it?. Again I'm not familiar with the Dublin scene but I'm sceptical that Rathcoole has'nt been built simply because of DCB incompetence, if that was the case then more of the Dublin posters would be venting their frustrations right?