Joe Brolly

[Esmarelda]

The difference it can make is that something he says strikes a chord with a segment of the population and it gathers momentum. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well there is if his case is full of holes or backed-up by conversations he's imagined. Or if it just generally lacks any balance.

I'm not saying that Brolly is starting a movement but I've met people who throw out the "fair play to Brolly" line but struggle to put up the slightest fight when I offer an alternative view.

This is just my view of course.

[BennyHarp]

Whatever about Joe B. talking shite this thread has descended into total nonsense now.

For all the hatred posters on this MB have towards Joe they still seem to read his column every week.

If Joe looked as this thread he would just start laughing at it and this in turn would lead to another 100 odd pages of abuse.  At this stage some posters are just looking to take offence and the title of the thread title should be changed to "rant and feel better"

Have to agree with you.

Ultimately, what difference does any of this really make? The games are entertainment. The pundits talking about them are entertainment. There is no life or death or even semi-serious life issues at stake here.

I enjoy Joe Brolly, even when I don't agree with him or he is intentionally pushing buttons. I like his enthusiasm and passion, his articulateness (is that a word?) and his cockiness and twinkle in his eye. I like the considered and knowledgeable tactical analysis of Canavan and McGuinness on Sky, but there's room for a bit of hype from Joe and Spillane on RTE too.

Not even when he thrust Creggan into the limelight a few weeks ago?

[J70]

The difference it can make is that something he says strikes a chord with a segment of the population and it gathers momentum. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well there is if his case is full of holes or backed-up by conversations he's imagined. Or if it just generally lacks any balance.

I'm not saying that Brolly is starting a movement but I've met people who throw out the "fair play to Brolly" line but struggle to put up the slightest fight when I offer an alternative view.

This is just my view of course.

But are there not plenty of people in the media who DO counter what Brolly says, whether its a mere GAA games issue or something more personal like when he had a go at Colm Cooper over the testimonial?

I'm mainly referring to his GAA commentary, so if he's out there stirring up political stuff or whatever, stuff that does actually matter, that's different.

To Benny, on the Creggan thing - yes, that is a very serious story and he made serious charges, so fair enough, I can see where people would get legitimately upset.

But, you have to admit that Joe is divisive and elicits emotional reactions far beyond the actual importance of the issues when it comes to the football itself during the Sunday Game stuff.

[Kickham csc]

Whatever about Joe B. talking shite this thread has descended into total nonsense now.

For all the hatred posters on this MB have towards Joe they still seem to read his column every week.

If Joe looked as this thread he would just start laughing at it and this in turn would lead to another 100 odd pages of abuse.  At this stage some posters are just looking to take offence and the title of the thread title should be changed to "rant and feel better"

Have to agree with you.

Ultimately, what difference does any of this really make? The games are entertainment. The pundits talking about them are entertainment. There is no life or death or even semi-serious life issues at stake here.

I enjoy Joe Brolly, even when I don't agree with him or he is intentionally pushing buttons. I like his enthusiasm and passion, his articulateness (is that a word?) and his cockiness and twinkle in his eye. I like the considered and knowledgeable tactical analysis of Canavan and McGuinness on Sky, but there's room for a bit of hype from Joe and Spillane on RTE too.

Not even when he thrust Creggan into the limelight a few weeks ago?

Beat me to it. His inaccurate article has led to threats, which apparently Joe just brushed off.

He makes up an opinion without any solid research or hard evidence and without any care of repercussions or stresses that his statements will cause. In our case, loose lips can cause lives to be lost

[Esmarelda]

The difference it can make is that something he says strikes a chord with a segment of the population and it gathers momentum. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well there is if his case is full of holes or backed-up by conversations he's imagined. Or if it just generally lacks any balance.

I'm not saying that Brolly is starting a movement but I've met people who throw out the "fair play to Brolly" line but struggle to put up the slightest fight when I offer an alternative view.

This is just my view of course.

But are there not plenty of people in the media who DO counter what Brolly says, whether its a mere GAA games issue or something more personal like when he had a go at Colm Cooper over the testimonial?

I'm mainly referring to his GAA commentary, so if he's out there stirring up political stuff or whatever, stuff that does actually matter, that's different.

To Benny, on the Creggan thing - yes, that is a very serious story and he made serious charges, so fair enough, I can see where people would get legitimately upset.

But, you have to admit that Joe is divisive and elicits emotional reactions far beyond the actual importance of the issues when it comes to the football itself during the Sunday Game stuff.

Well obviously it's not life and death when it relates to football, but he often blurts stuff out and then just laughs off a response when he realises he's stumped. A small example being, when in an interview about the Super 8, he said that by the GAA calling it the Super 8 it just shows how elitist the association is. When the interviewer pointed out that the GAA didn't actually give it that name, he paused and says "well sure it was inevitable". That kind of nonsense.

[J70]

The difference it can make is that something he says strikes a chord with a segment of the population and it gathers momentum. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well there is if his case is full of holes or backed-up by conversations he's imagined. Or if it just generally lacks any balance.

I'm not saying that Brolly is starting a movement but I've met people who throw out the "fair play to Brolly" line but struggle to put up the slightest fight when I offer an alternative view.

This is just my view of course.

But are there not plenty of people in the media who DO counter what Brolly says, whether its a mere GAA games issue or something more personal like when he had a go at Colm Cooper over the testimonial?

I'm mainly referring to his GAA commentary, so if he's out there stirring up political stuff or whatever, stuff that does actually matter, that's different.

To Benny, on the Creggan thing - yes, that is a very serious story and he made serious charges, so fair enough, I can see where people would get legitimately upset.

But, you have to admit that Joe is divisive and elicits emotional reactions far beyond the actual importance of the issues when it comes to the football itself during the Sunday Game stuff.

Well obviously it's not life and death when it relates to football, but he often blurts stuff out and then just laughs off a response when he realises he's stumped. A small example being, when in an interview about the Super 8, he said that by the GAA calling it the Super 8 it just shows how elitist the association is. When the interviewer pointed out that the GAA didn't actually give it that name, he paused and says "well sure it was inevitable". That kind of nonsense.

I never denied he talks shite sometimes. I just don't find it something that I really care about either way. I do enjoy watching him though.

[Esmarelda]

The difference it can make is that something he says strikes a chord with a segment of the population and it gathers momentum. Nothing wrong with that you might say. Well there is if his case is full of holes or backed-up by conversations he's imagined. Or if it just generally lacks any balance.

I'm not saying that Brolly is starting a movement but I've met people who throw out the "fair play to Brolly" line but struggle to put up the slightest fight when I offer an alternative view.

This is just my view of course.

But are there not plenty of people in the media who DO counter what Brolly says, whether its a mere GAA games issue or something more personal like when he had a go at Colm Cooper over the testimonial?

I'm mainly referring to his GAA commentary, so if he's out there stirring up political stuff or whatever, stuff that does actually matter, that's different.

To Benny, on the Creggan thing - yes, that is a very serious story and he made serious charges, so fair enough, I can see where people would get legitimately upset.

But, you have to admit that Joe is divisive and elicits emotional reactions far beyond the actual importance of the issues when it comes to the football itself during the Sunday Game stuff.

Well obviously it's not life and death when it relates to football, but he often blurts stuff out and then just laughs off a response when he realises he's stumped. A small example being, when in an interview about the Super 8, he said that by the GAA calling it the Super 8 it just shows how elitist the association is. When the interviewer pointed out that the GAA didn't actually give it that name, he paused and says "well sure it was inevitable". That kind of nonsense.

I never denied he talks shite sometimes. I just don't find it something that I really care about either way. I do enjoy watching him though.

Fair enough. I'm just pointing out that his messing isn't completely harmless, even in football terms. A lot of people pay him attention.

I actually enjoy him on some occasions too.

[caprea]

Apart from correctly calling out GPA, SKY deal, Tyrone's tactics...

2 years ago he said Tyrone would ambush Dublin..how'd that work out?...he hasn't a notion and nobody that matters listens to him.

sounds like you listen to him 

Well he's hard to avoid. It's the poor unfortunates who think they are getting an insight into modern intercounty football from him that I feel sorry. He's good for an insight on 90s football and the under 16s he coaches and that's it.

I think he's fairly clued in out the GPA and SKY and I feel sorry for the poor unfortunate who is bought in by Murdock and elitism if it's any consolation

Good luck with that, it really seems the GAA are taking huge notice.

Of course they're not, that's why CPA was formed because of treatment of clubs. Good we have people like Joe Brolly to challenge them about it.

In my own opinion there is one huge problem facing the GAA; 80% of football counties are making up the numbers. No ambition or chance to win anything and Brolly almost never mentions it.

Good luck to the CPA but they have no power, no paying membership, no threat of strike. Just a glorified talking shop for now.

But they do have the ability to organize a boycott of the county games. 90% of county attendances would be loyal club people who 1st alliance is with club issues. They the organized a 1 day boycott of national league attendances, the GAA would sit up and take notice

They don't have that ability. All they have at the moment is 20000 people who signed up online. That is grand but what does it really mean?

If the CPA wanted to, it could easily impact attendances by organizing a boycott. Remember, it's club members who attend the games so it would not take a lot to influence club members throughout the country not to attend games to put pressure on the GAA to fix the club scheduling issues.

In 2015 Attendances for championship were approx. 900k, for 2016 approx. 800k

The CPA could get 20,000 to influence 10 people each to not attend a round of GAA matches, or even boycott the attending the year.

so 20k x 10 = 200k, which could equate to 20% to 25% reduction in attendances

They could also send out a message, or get rep in each club to organize a boycott by each club.

Even if the CPA were able to reduce attendances by 10%, approx. 90k (15) -80k (16, the GAA would be worried.

It's drastic, but def doable

Stop dreaming. You think every lad who took 5 minutes to sign as a member for the CPA on the net is going to obey them when they say to not attend games...and you think they could influence 10 others to do the same...sorry but there is no chance of that...the only player I asked he joined  the CPA couldn't remember if he did or he didnt.

All the CPA is for now is a loose body with a big membership but no evidence of having any control over that membership. Talk of boycotts is more realistic than strikes but neither have a hope of happening in the numbers that you say.

[east down gael]

The CPA won't need to organise a strike or a boycott,for people are fed up and are voting with their feet. I honestly think intercounty football is dying a slow death already. Dublin will walk leinster,kerry the same in Munster. Mayo might get caught in Connaught but will be the only team from that province capable of doing anything at the business end of the season. And Ulster is a toss between Donegal and Tyrone,neither capable of breaking into the top 3. Going to watch the county used to be enjoyable,that seems like a long time ago.

[caprea]

The CPA won't need to organise a strike or a boycott,for people are fed up and are voting with their feet. I honestly think intercounty football is dying a slow death already. Dublin will walk leinster,kerry the same in Munster. Mayo might get caught in Connaught but will be the only team from that province capable of doing anything at the business end of the season. And Ulster is a toss between Donegal and Tyrone,neither capable of breaking into the top 3. Going to watch the county used to be enjoyable,that seems like a long time ago.

Well fair enough and i agree but brolly isnt saying these things...brolly's focus is not on this at all.

[thewobbler]

East Down Gael - sorry but personally I just don't remember this golden age of football when things were unpredictable. 

There is probably a greater number of hidings handed out in county championship these days but the overall results are not much different than any era, which is in terms of winning Sam, 3-4 live contenders, 1-2 outsiders, and the rest might as well not bother.

[caprea]

East Down Gael - sorry but personally I just don't remember this golden age of football when things were unpredictable. 

There is probably a greater number of hidings handed out in county championship these days but the overall results are not much different than any era, which is in terms of winning Sam, 3-4 live contenders, 1-2 outsiders, and the rest might as well not bother.

Maybe you are right about the 70s and 80s  but this is the age where games are on tv every week. In the 70s and 80s it didn't matter because there were 3 football games on tv every year. Plus the 90s and 00s were far less predictable than now.

[RedHand88]

The 90s were the only decade in modern times where it was truly unpredictable. 8 different winners in 10 years. Unbelievable. Will it ever happen again?

[armaghniac]

Joe talking to Pat Kenny on TV3. Two of GAABoard's favourites together.

[Jinxy]

Frost/Nixon.