Thomas Davis Lose

[dublinfella]

As well as we the tax payer paying for the staduium we will also have to pay for the garda overtime to police the place. Somehow i doubt the returns to the exchequer from gate receipts for a whole season (new stadium or not) will cover it.

http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=Tribune/News/Home%20News&id=79668&SUBCAT=Tribune/News&SUBCATNAME=News

  Home News 


Gardai in demand for aggressive soccer games 
Sarah McInerney 


THE same number of gardai are needed to control an Eircom league match between Bohemians and Shamrock Rovers as to police the All-Ireland Final, according to a senior garda.

Even though a game between Bohs and Rovers attracts just 3,500 spectators . . . less than 5% of an AllIreland Final crowd . . . both events require the same level of Garda resources. "It would be a Category A match for us, requiring the public order unit, the dog unit, the mounted unit and around 100 gardai, " said Insp Tony Gallagher from Fitzgibbon Street Garda Station in Dublin. "These groups are fuelled on aggression and intent on attacking each other. They have to be watched."

The stringent measures are taken in response to what gardai say is a notable increase in violence and hooliganism . . . a problem that is exacerbated by the rise in drug abuse.

"They are using drugs to get the psyche right for aggression and violence against rival groups, " said Gallagher. "They're drinking and then they're snorting lines of cocaine and meeting up at a prearranged point, 20 minutes before the match, ready to fight. They are totally fixated. They look beyond you to see their target. They are totally intent on bypassing you to get to the other group."

As well as arranging meeting points outside the stadium grounds, some groups seem to be forming alliances with other clubs.

Recently, a group of Wrexham supporters, known for causing trouble at games, attended a match with Bohemians supporters. Gardai later discovered that some Bohs supporters had booked accommodation in Dublin for the group.

"We followed the Wrexham group and discovered that the Bohemians supporters had booked accommodation for them to come here and assist tactically using the methods they used in Wales. We have to step up to that."

While the Bohemians and Rovers soccer clubs are working to stamp out violent elements among supporters, Gallagher said Stadium Banning Orders were needed to refuse access to troublemakers.

An article from 4 years ago?

they are owned by local authorites like Tallaght. They have an anchor tenant like tallaght. they are open to all sports that can be accomodated like tallaght. whats your point?

"All sports that can be accommodated".

But the biggest sport in the country is excluded - better still, Sham Rovers tried to claim it could be accommodated while privately ensuring it could not.



Hmmmmm I wonder what kind of point I'm trying to make there.

The point that you dont understand what case TD tried to take or what was actually argued. No-one involved in the project ever said a senior GAA pitch was going to be accomodated. Thomas Davis rejected on behalf of the GAA the venue as an underage one. Whatever about the council making a balls of this by intimating they might consider letting the GAA in and changing their mind, I dont see how Shamrock Rovers can be accused of dupicity here.

The Judge was very explicit in asking why 'other sports' in this case was assumed to be the GAA. He was very explicit in asking why the local GAA club were not involved, but one from outside the parish. He also made a point of asking why if there was a need for a GAA venue why the GAA werent trying to build their own facility. The fact that Thomas Davis said they had no intention of using the facilty fatally undermined any ccredibility this case had.

This has been a financial and PR disaster for the GAA. Hopefully we learn from this and realise that the days of the GAA demanding things from the Government are long gone and react to new challenges accordingly.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall when TD officially approached the DCB for all the costs last week. There is no way we in the rest of Dublin's clubs should be forced to pay for one mans folly.

[Jinxy]

I can see that im wasting my time here. All i want is you to present a valid reason as to why the government should fund this stadium, but you seem incapable of doing so. Because............................, is not a valid reason.

If you think your wasting your time, why don't you **** off and not bother replying do? As I already pointed out in a previous post, go have a read of the, "We are Rovers", book, the part about the sale of miltown lad, and come back and then you will see kiddo! Cos tbh, I couldn't be bothered reciting the whole long facts for you bunch of bigots...

You are entitled to your opinion but there's really no need to use terms like "kid," "kiddo" and "buddy" when addressing people. It makes you sound like a complete skanger..............which I'm sure you're not.

[blast05]

dublinfella.
I have no problem with the idea of a professional sports team being the anchor tenant to a municipal facility .... on the condition that there is a reasonable and fair rent for the use of the stadium and that other school and underage teams of various sports can use it free of charge subject to the pitch being maintained to a sufficient degree for the primary tenant. That would be a similar arrangement that a professional ice hockey team in Sweden had with the local council (or whatever they are called) until they were unable to keep up with rental payments and the arena was converted into a conference centre. Is there such a scenario in place for the Tallaght stadium. i.e.: SR kicked out and say a rugby team given usage. (For the record, the Swedish hockey team went ahead and built their own arena after a few years when the league was restructured with a lot more TV coverage and games and now are hugely successfuly with the stadium also hosting vast numbers of concerts)

So,

• what is the cost to the council of building the stadium? and lets stick to the reality of more than the full cost being taken on by the council, particularly when the €1.5 million the council paid to get its own land back is taken into account
• what will the rent per week / match / year be? (which ever it is)
• what should happen if SR fail to keep up rental payments?

[dublinfella]

dublinfella.
I have no problem with the idea of a professional sports team being the anchor tenant to a municipal facility .... on the condition that there is a reasonable and fair rent for the use of the stadium and that other school and underage teams of various sports can use it free of charge subject to the pitch being maintained to a sufficient degree for the primary tenant. That would be a similar arrangement that a professional ice hockey team in Sweden had with the local council (or whatever they are called) until they were unable to keep up with rental payments and the arena was converted into a conference centre. Is there such a scenario in place for the Tallaght stadium. i.e.: SR kicked out and say a rugby team given usage. (For the record, the Swedish hockey team went ahead and built their own arena after a few years when the league was restructured with a lot more TV coverage and games and now are hugely successfuly with the stadium also hosting vast numbers of concerts)

So,

• what is the cost to the council of building the stadium? and lets stick to the reality of more than the full cost being taken on by the council, particularly when the €1.5 million the council paid to get its own land back is taken into account
• what will the rent per week / match / year be? (which ever it is)
• what should happen if SR fail to keep up rental payments?

Where did the figure of €1.5m come from? The papers during the week had €6m as the total cost of the stadium.

I don't know the answers to those questions as I dont work for the council and amn't involved in Shamrock Rovers, but I read during the week that there is a flat fee per year and half of the advertising revenue and possible naming rights. plus the council get to use the stadium after Rovers are accomodated for whatever puropses they see fit. It was planned that the stadium would have paid for itself in ten years. Interestingly, Rovers were talking about paying for 'Phase II', increasing capacity from 6,000 to 10,000, and their clubhouse and offices/shop themselves.

I would assume if Rovers didnt pay the council they would be evicted as in any rental arrangement.

[blast05]

OK, fair enough.
6 million to build, 1.5 million already paid by the council to buy their own land back from SR plus a very conservative site valuation of say another 6 million ...... i'll round it down to 12 million being the value fo the asset that SR are getting access to.
If this cost were to be paid for in 10 years as you say then taking an interest rate of 5.5%, then that would equate to 130K per month.
Being very very generous here, lets half that figure so that only the cost of construction is being paid for here then we are saying that the flat fee, half the advertising renvenure and naming rights would equate to 65K per month or 780K per year ??  ..... not a hope.

[dublinfella]

OK, fair enough.
6 million to build, 1.5 million already paid by the council to buy their own land back from SR plus a very conservative site valuation of say another 6 million ...... i'll round it down to 12 million being the value fo the asset that SR are getting access to.
If this cost were to be paid for in 10 years as you say then taking an interest rate of 5.5%, then that would equate to 130K per month.
Being very very generous here, lets half that figure so that only the cost of construction is being paid for here then we are saying that the flat fee, half the advertising renvenure and naming rights would equate to 65K per month or 780K per year ??  ..... not a hope.

6 milliion is the total cost of the project to the taxpayer (less than the grants to GAA players per annum for context) . where is this 1.5 figure that has alledgedly already been paid coming from?

Naming rights could be worth millions.

Either way, if Thomas Davis got their way, Rovers would have 1,500 seats to pay off €15m, so if we are doing the value to the taxpayer line....

[Gnevin]

OK, fair enough.
6 million to build, 1.5 million already paid by the council to buy their own land back from SR plus a very conservative site valuation of say another 6 million ...... i'll round it down to 12 million being the value fo the asset that SR are getting access to.
If this cost were to be paid for in 10 years as you say then taking an interest rate of 5.5%, then that would equate to 130K per month.
Being very very generous here, lets half that figure so that only the cost of construction is being paid for here then we are saying that the flat fee, half the advertising renvenure and naming rights would equate to 65K per month or 780K per year ??  ..... not a hope.

6 milliion is the total cost of the project to the taxpayer (less than the grants to GAA players per annum for context) . where is this 1.5 figure that has alledgedly already been paid coming from?

Naming rights could be worth millions.

Either way, if Thomas Davis got their way, Rovers would have 1,500 seats to pay off €15m, so if we are doing the value to the taxpayer line....

For context tell me the last time Rovers generated 50 million in one game for the Dublin economy

[his holiness nb]

Re the comparison with the grants, you will find a huge amount of GAA people being opposed to these grants being paid out by the government.
I along with many would much rather this money go to healthcare or the likes.

I wonder how many Rovers fans object to the goverment spending money on the stadium?

Just a thought.

[lynchbhoy]

The Judge was very explicit in asking why 'other sports' in this case was assumed to be the GAA. He was very explicit in asking why the local GAA club were not involved, but one from outside the parish. He also made a point of asking why if there was a need for a GAA venue why the GAA werent trying to build their own facility. The fact that Thomas Davis said they had no intention of using the facilty fatally undermined any ccredibility this case had.

This has been a financial and PR disaster for the GAA. Hopefully we learn from this and realise that the days of the GAA demanding things from the Government are long gone and react to new challenges accordingly.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall when TD officially approached the DCB for all the costs last week. There is no way we in the rest of Dublin's clubs should be forced to pay for one mans folly.

was the 'throwing of he pigs heads four years ago ?
so rovers have no 'criminal/hooligan element' anymore?
In comparison to GAA crowds....? (answer is the GAA does not posess a hooligan element - rovers and loi/soccer clubs do).


Anyhow,
the costs paid by TD and DCB will be small in comparison the the funding they receive for whatever their next venture is - as rovers have set the precedent for huge (near 100%) funding of private sports grounds.
I presume the new southside stadium and/or Dublin centre of excellence will be paid for by the Gov - as they did for rovers.

However as a tax payer, this is way too much.
I dont think any sporting group should have their stadia or grounds fully funded by the gov - no matter what hard luck story they have experienced.
People should be expected to pay for their own grounds and clubs - with small funding contributions from the lotto fund or whatever gov agency/sports council wish to give them.

GAA clubs pay for their own pitches and stadia, and I would prefer if it staed that way.
Other countries governments may fund ventures , but this is not the case in this country - until now.
We cannot afford to fund such things - especially for wastful organisations like the fai , loi and in particular - rovers.
I have to laugh, there were known rovers fans picketing the possibility of Bohs having a new stadium out around D15.
Hypocricy !

[ildanach]

An article from 4 years ago?

that article was from the sunday tribune of 4th November 2007

[dublinfella]

Other countries governments may fund ventures , but this is not the case in this country - until now.

There are hundreds of municipal facilities up and down the country. Morton Stadium, the RSC in Waterford, dozens of golf courses, swimming pools, gyms. The only difference here is an outside interest decided they wanted it stopped.

Basic stuff lynchbhoy.

[lynchbhoy]

Other countries governments may fund ventures , but this is not the case in this country - until now.

There are hundreds of municipal facilities up and down the country. Morton Stadium, the RSC in Waterford, dozens of golf courses, swimming pools, gyms. The only difference here is an outside interest decided they wanted it stopped.

Basic stuff lynchbhoy.

....basic community stuff, but  apart from your waterford example which is multiple grounds shared by all sports from what I gather -
never at a cost of millions for one sport and a singular private club ....which is the point....
why should the taxs payer have to fund that, and for the entire cost ( €6 million is about half or one third of the end cost I'll wager)

[tayto]

Oh dear god not again!!! 

[Bud Wiser]

Can I have a go!  For what my opinion is worth Davis's should never have gone there in the first place.  It would have been more in their interest to look after the open parkland along the Dodder Valley opposite their club.  I am chairman of the local Community Council and when a recent application to build a dense apartment development "cantilevered over the Dodder" as it said in the application was amde there was not a pip of an objection from them.  I, on the other hand was threathened publicly in the Tallaght Echo by a TD that "he would take legal action against me" for allegations made.

Some of thiose included (FACT) that the applicant had stated in his application that he was "ceding" 3.5 hectares of land to the council (opposite Thomas Davis) in return for getting the land rezoned.  When I measured it, it was 5-7 acres short of this and it is on record on the planning site of South Dublin County Council.   Our fight to retain open public space outside the clubs door did not get any support from Thomas Davis.

Directly opposite the Speaker Pub down the road is open space that was once an old bl;ock yard owned by a Mr. O'Neill.  When Dublin County Council was split into Dunlaoire, Fingal and South County this land was to be handed over to South Dublin County Council because it had ben CPO'd from O'Neill to provide "Dodder Linear Park with seating and tree lined walks" ( 1979 Development Plan).

However, a trawl through the Land Regiistry Office one day and a half uncovered that it was never handed over, it ended up in the name of a builder.  That builder handed the land over to South Dublin County Council and now the land is being developed into a parkland.  But what did the builder get in return?  He got permission for hundreds, hundreds of houses on the primest open parkland on the banks of the Dodder.  Where?  Outside Thomas Davis Club and for two miles along the banks.  Where were their legal swat team then?

It would answer them better to try and keep what they have, and maybe then look for more, but not until then.

P.S.
The matter of the land swaps and other details are on public record in the Land Registry Office and a certain lady in News At One, RTE Radio currently has the details on her desk as does a producer in a program called Prime Time.

Also, another PS.  Why was it Davis's who got involved in all this when the club beside it with less facilities is St. Marks.  I agree it would have been nice at some time in the future to have a street league type hurling competition between young lads from Jobstown and surrounding areas in Tallaght and to give them a run out in this stadium.  Thanks to our brialliant PR that is now unlikely to happen.

[tayto]

ah yes the soccer boys are trotting out their favorite 'bigots' line again i see.

We're such a bunch of bigots we let the FAI into Croke Park. And since when is not liking soccer on par with being a bigot? I would've thought it was a matter of taste.

We all know well what reaction rangers players get at Lansdowne Road. No bigots there then?

....

Thomas Davis GAA Club/Dublin County Board

Thomas Davis GAA Club and the Dublin County Committee of the GAA have noted the decision of Mr Justice Roderick Murphy in relation to SDCC's plan to develop a stadium in Tallaght. We are clearly disappointed that Justice Murphy decided to uphold the SDCC's resolution of 13 February 2006 to develop the Stadium as a soccer only stadium, notwithstanding that this resolution was made outside the time limits prescribed by the relevant planning legislation.

We will be reviewing the detailed judgement in the case over the coming weeks in conjunction with our legal advisors before deciding whether to appeal the judgement. Our intentions remain as they always have been, to ensure that this major infrastructural investment in Tallaght, which is to be funded almost exclusively from Government monies, is available for use by all sports codes.

We are very conscious of Shamrock Rovers requirement that the Stadium be completed and available for their use as soon as possible. Our analysis in the coming weeks will take account of how that requirement might be met, whilst respecting the GAA's objective of having shared use of the Stadium in the medium term.

We point out that the Tallaght Stadium issue is one, which the GAA considers completely separate to its development plans for Rathcoole. Recent developments in relation to the Rathcoole site are set to accelerate its development by the GAA as a Centre of Excellence for the development of underage and adult teams on the Southside. There have never been any plans to develop a stadium at Rathcoole. Use of Tallaght Stadium, on the other hand, serves the GAA's ambition to have a suitable venue available to facilitate and promote inter-county games at all levels on the south side of Dublin.

Christopher O'Donnell John Costello
Chairman Dublin GAA Board
Thomas Davis GAA Club