An independent consultant, who specialises in advising sports organisations on how to maximise revenue, has strongly criticised numerous aspects of the business plan which has, for most of the past year, formed the basis of the FAI's Eircom Park project.

Dr John Tunnicliffe, a former chief executive of the Rugby Football League, in a report commissioned by the makers of last night's RTE Prime Time programme, concludes that the document suggests the association would be "at serious risk of overexposing itself" by proceeding with the construction of the stadium.

The concerns expressed broadly echo those voiced by critics of the scheme at a succession of meetings over the past 12 months.

The business plan in question will be replaced by a new updated one at Monday's board of management meeting in Dublin but it is expected that many of the basic assumptions employed in the earlier versions will be incorporated into the new document.

Tunnicliffe questions a wide range of assumptions made in the document. He describes the projected number of events to be staged annually in Citywest at 57 plus as "unrealistic", the £7 million allocated for fitting out the ground as "surely not enough for a stadium which is intended to meet UEFA's five-star standard," as well as the estimate of £5 million for professional fees as "inadequate" and a "miscalculation".

He expresses surprise that, despite anticipating the arrival of Stadium Ireland as a competitor three years after the completion of Eircom Park, the FAI's plan "does not attempt to analyse or quantify the risks to its own viability that the new stadium may raise".

In his assessment of the plan he goes on to state that the opening of the government's stadium at Abbotstown "could prove disastrous" for the association's own project.

Perhaps the most bizarre question raised by Tunnicliffe from the FAI's point of view is whether staging games at the new venue would make any more sense for the association than leaving them in Lansdowne Road. According to the plan it is envisaged that at least six international games will be played at the new venue each year and that each of these will attract around 43,000 people paying considerably higher ticket prices than at present. This is a presumption that critics of the scheme have regularly singled out as being wildly optimistic.

Even after having taken these projections at face value, however, Tunniliffe argues that when the increased costs of staging games in Eircom Park are factored in the association stands to make little more than £1 million in additional revenue each year from its own international games.

In view of this, he argues that "the FAI needs a cost-benefit analysis against which to decide whether Eircom Park presents a better commercial scenario for the staging of its international matches than do the present arrangements at Lansdowne Road".

In addition to potentially overestimating the revenue that Eircom Park might generate, the report also identifies what he sees as optimistic estimates for required expenditure. The projected spend on just about everything from promotions (put at an average of just £1,750 per event) to heating, telephone and ticketing costs are, he claims, on the low side. The claim that no refurbishment would be required for 15 years is also described as flawed.

Should all of these figures be substantiated, the company operating the stadium (Centime)would find itself in difficulty, and, as Tunnicliffe points out, if it does not raise its target income in a given year "it may be forced to default on loan requirement (and) the FAI will then be left to pick up the tab."

In conclusion the Englishman expresses the concern that "if the profits of the FAI turn out to be eroded by the need to repay the construction costs of Eircom Park, then . . . the organisations (the affiliates of the association) who will suffer most - in the short and medium terms - will be those whom the construction of the stadium was in fact intended to benefit".