'We are astounded the FAI announced a proposal which involves PFAI funding half without having any discussion' - PFAI issue strong response to FAI proposal for distressed clubs fund

The Professional Footballers' Association of Ireland have declared themselves 'astounded' the FAI announced a proposal for a six-figure distress fund for clubs struggling to honour contracts without consulting them first.

The FAI released a statement early on Wednesday evening proposing the creation of a €300,000 escrow fund that would be financed equally by the association and the PFAI – however they also revealed no discusion had taken place with the players' association.

The hypothetical fund could be accessed by clubs who found themselves unable to honour contractual agreements and its access would bring automatic sanctions from the governing body.

While the FAI said they had contact the PFAI, this was done via its affiliated union SIPTU, and the players' association in a strongly-worded reply expressed their dismay at the manner in which the proposed scheme had been announced.

Futhermore, the PFAI stated that there have been no meetings 'of any substance' between the organisations since April 2017, and a recently scheduled meeting was postponed by the FAI until Friday.

“The PFAI welcomes the concept of this fund and believes it will assist greatly in alleviating the sort of issues that have bedevilled the league in the last few weeks,” read the PFAI's statement.

“However, we are astounded that the FAI have seen fit to announce a proposal which involves the players association funding half of it without having any discussion on the issue beforehand.

“The PFAI have been seeking a meeting with John Delaney for over a year now to discuss matters of importance to the domestic game but he has refused to meet with us.”

It continued: “The idea that we would match the contribution of the FAI, an organisation with a multi million euro turnover, when our organisation has a tiny fraction of its size and turnover, is mind boggling.

“The total fund proposed is less than the annual salary of the chief executive of the FAI thus making it deeply insulting that players, all of whom earn a tiny percentage of his income, should be expected to contribute to a fund to pay their own wages.

“Equally we wonder why the clubs themselves would not contribute to it.”

PFAI statement in full:

The PFA Ireland (PFAI) has this evening been made aware of a proposal by the FAI to provide a fund to assist players in contractual difficulty. The PFAI welcomes the concept of this fund and believes it will assist greatly in alleviating the sort of issues that have bedevilled the league in the last few weeks.

However, we are astounded that the FAI have seen fit to announce a proposal which involves the players association funding half of it without having any discussion on the issue beforehand. The PFAI have been seeking a meeting with John Delaney for over a year now to discuss matters of importance to the domestic game but he has refused to meet with us. We have had no meeting of any substance with any senior member of FAI management since the women's international team dispute in April 2017.

Furthermore, SIPTU have had no discussions with the FAI about this proposal. At the FAI’s request a meeting was scheduled for today with Fran Gavin and Rea Walshe to discuss improving the relationship between both associations and to discuss the recent issues related to players salaries and potential solutions to ensure these issues do not arise again. This meeting was cancelled by the FAI for reasons unknown and rescheduled for this Friday.

The idea that we would match the contribution of the FAI, an organisation with a multi million euro turnover, when our organisation has a tiny fraction of its size and turnover, is mind boggling. The total fund proposed is less than the annual salary of the chief executive of the FAI thus making it deeply insulting that players, all of whom earn a tiny percentage of his income, should be expected to contribute to a fund to pay their own wages. Equally we wonder why the clubs themselves would not contribute to it.

In summary, we welcome the proposal of the fund but object greatly to the manner of the announcement and the idea that the players should contribute to a fund to pay their own wages. We will meet with the FAI on Friday and making our position on funding very clear to them.