Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Main Street

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 698
1
General discussion / Re: Off the Ball v Second Captains - So Who Won?
« on: January 20, 2018, 11:24:30 PM »
I listen to OTB regularly, I've no opinion one way or the other about the 2nd captains except that they sound all a bit too young to me and maybe they'd appeal more to a younger audience.

I think OTB is a very good sports show,  with a a good variety to the content and opinions from the various presenters, which can keep me listening right through to the end.
But there's way too much rugby  and horse racing (not a human sport) and often enough I forget to tune back in whenever that stuff turns me off..
My pet hate - the  talk sport leading question that take 5 minutes of explaining all possible angles, leading to only one acceptable response from the interviewee.
I'll always listen to the Giles' slot on thursdays, even if he's saying the same stuff  week in week out  for the past 40 years.


Never listen to Giles because as you say he's being saying the exact same thing for 40 years, there's nothing new in it....
Why do you want something new?
The man is special, one of the few real talented characters in Irish soccer, so much so that even if he repeats the same lines for 40 years, it's still interesting every time.

2
General discussion / Re: Off the Ball v Second Captains - So Who Won?
« on: January 20, 2018, 11:17:30 PM »
I listen to OTB regularly, I've no opinion one way or the other about the 2nd captains except that they sound all a bit too young to me and maybe they'd appeal more to a younger audience.

I think OTB is a very good sports show,  with a a good variety to the content and opinions from the various presenters, which can keep me listening right through to the end.
But there's way too much rugby  and horse racing (not a human sport) and often enough I forget to tune back in whenever that stuff turns me off..
My pet hate - the  talk sport leading question that take 5 minutes of explaining all possible angles, leading to only one acceptable response from the interviewee.
I'll always listen to the Giles' slot on thursdays, even if he's saying the same stuff  week in week out  for the past 40 years.

Never listen to Giles because as you say he's being saying the exact same thing for 40 years, there's nothing new in it. I like most of OTB stuff but Dave Mc Intyre is a w**ker though, I thought it was just me he irked but his sanctimonious horseshit has obviously riled a lot of people on youtube if you read the comments. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSDvHQ7XzsY&t=163s

Watch from 2:20, he's such an obnoxious w**ker I've to turn it off when he's on. A negative, melodramatic gobshite.

Nailed it
I don't get what happened there to arouse such passions. It sounded a very tame affair in the studio, a discussion about integrating a full back.

I heard Shearer the other day exclaim on MOTD that VAR was a shambles.,   a shambles!!!;D
That's the normal standards of melodrama.

3
General discussion / Re: Clerical abuse!
« on: January 20, 2018, 02:39:21 PM »
The pope states "there is not one shred of proof against him. It’s all calumny"

That's a very interesting choice of words. 

People don't bring proof, they bring evidence and guilt is established based on the balance of probabilities after examination of the merits of all the evidence.
Yet the Pope exclaims that it's all calumny, slanderous statements made to damage the bishop.
How exactly does the Pope shift from seeing no proof of guilt, to determining that it's all lies and slander? All lies, means every piece of evidence is a lie.
How did the Pope determine that ALL the evidence offered were lies? He accuses the abused of maliciously lying through their teeth in order to slander the bishop.
Perhaps the pope is afflicted with the delusion that he is God's representative on earth and everything he believes  has the status of absolute truth in all matters.

Ironic though that a catholic cleric would want to see proof before believing something.

4
General discussion / Re: Clerical abuse!
« on: January 20, 2018, 01:57:21 PM »
The article in the IT is not required to present any evidence to  implicate Biship Barro in the cover up.  The evidence for that lies elsewhere. The IT is reporting the news story. Should people want to refute the basis for the story  on the grounds that they see no evidence in the article, then that denial has no merit.

The Catholic Herald called the appointment of the bishop "disastrous appointment of Bishop Barros could spell trouble for Pope Francis".

Article in Catholic journal  (ironically)  called Crux,    by John Allen the editor
https://cruxnow.com/church/2015/03/27/pope-francis-may-be-nearing-a-tipping-point-on-sexual-abuse/

"five members of the pope’s own anti-abuse commission have expressed “concern and incredulity” that Bishop Juan Barros has been given command of the Diocese of Osorno in Chile, despite his public record of defending the country’s most notorious abuser priest"

5
General discussion / Re: Off the Ball v Second Captains - So Who Won?
« on: January 20, 2018, 12:12:12 AM »
That's a conversation about rugby, that's mostly gobbledygook to me. 
Does he get paid for wearing that idiotic brand label tee-shit?
 The Gilbert ball in the middle of the table?  happenstance I suppose?

6
General discussion / Re: Clerical abuse!
« on: January 19, 2018, 11:39:51 PM »
I appreciate that just when you thought you had already heard it all re clerical abuse, that nothing new could top what you already have witnessed, but this is a new compelling candidate for the GUBU award.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/pope-francis-accuses-clerical-abuse-victims-of-slandering-bishop-1.3361838

Pope Francis accuses clerical abuse victims of slandering bishop

Pope Francis has accused victims of Chile’s most notorious paedophile of slander, in an astonishing end to a visit meant to help heal the wounds of a sex abuse scandal that has cost the Catholic Church its credibility in the country.

Francis said that until he sees proof that Bishop Juan Barros was complicit in covering up the sex crimes of the Reverend Fernando Karadima, such accusations against the bishop are “all calumny”.

The pope’s remarks drew shock from Chileans and immediate rebuke from victims and their advocates. They noted the accusers were deemed credible enough by the Vatican that it sentenced Karadima to a lifetime of “penance and prayer” for his crimes in 2011.

A Chilean judge also found the victims to be credible, saying that while she had to drop criminal charges against Karadima because too much time had passed, proof of his crimes was not lacking.“As if I could have taken a selfie or a photo while Karadima abused me and others and Juan Barros stood by watching it all,” tweeted Bishop Barros’s most vocal accuser, Juan Carlos Cruz.
Truly crazy

“These people are truly crazy, and the pontiff talks about atonement to the victims. Nothing has changed, and his plea for forgiveness is empty.”

The Karadima scandal dominated Francis’s visit to Chile and the overall issue of sex abuse and church cover-up was likely to factor into his three-day trip to Peru that began late on Thursday.

Karadima’s victims reported to church authorities as early as 2002 that he would kiss and fondle them in the Santiago parish he ran, but officials refused to believe them.

Only when the victims went public with their accusations in 2010 did the Vatican launch an investigation that led to Karadima being removed from ministry.

Francis had sought to heal the wounds by meeting this week with abuse victims and begging forgiveness for the crimes of church pastors. But on Thursday, he struck a defiant tone when asked by a Chilean journalist about Mr Barros.

“The day they bring me proof against Bishop Barros, I’ll speak,” Francis said. “There is not one shred of proof against him. It’s all calumny. Is that clear?”

Anne Barrett Doyle, of the online database BishopAccountability.org, said it was “sad and wrong” for the pope to discredit the victims since “the burden of proof here rests with the church, not the victims – and especially not with victims whose veracity has already been affirmed.

“He has just turned back the clock to the darkest days of this crisis,” she said in a statement. “Who knows how many victims now will decide to stay hidden, for fear they will not be believed?”
Claims

Indeed, Catholic officials for years accused victims of slandering and attacking the church with their claims. But up until the pope’s words on Thursday, many in the church and Vatican had come to reluctantly acknowledge that victims usually told the truth and that the church for decades had wrongly sought to protect its own.

German Silva, a political scientist at Santiago’s Universidad Mayor, said the pope’s comments were a “tremendous error” that will reverberate in Chile and beyond.

Patricio Navia, political science professor at Diego Portales University in Santiago, said Francis had gone much further than Chilean bishops in acknowledging the sexual abuse scandal, which many Chileans appreciated.

“Then right before leaving, Francis turns around and says: ‘By the way, I don’t think Barros is guilty. Show me some proof’,” Mr Navia said, adding that the comment will probably erase any goodwill the pope had won over the issue.

7
GAA Discussion / Re: Mick O'Dwyer
« on: January 19, 2018, 07:46:05 PM »
I thought there was a poignant moment at the end of Kerry's 4th in a row v Offaly. Probably the final whistle came right after the ball was kicked out by the goalie, players were being  marked by their opposite, as soon as the whistle blew each player turned to his marker and exchanged words along with a handshake, there were even a few  embraces.

8
General discussion / Re: Off the Ball v Second Captains - So Who Won?
« on: January 19, 2018, 07:15:23 PM »
I listen to OTB regularly, I've no opinion one way or the other about the 2nd captains except that they sound all a bit too young to me and maybe they'd appeal more to a younger audience.

I think OTB is a very good sports show,  with a a good variety to the content and opinions from the various presenters, which can keep me listening right through to the end.
But there's way too much rugby  and horse racing (not a human sport) and often enough I forget to tune back in whenever that stuff turns me off..
My pet hate - the  talk sport leading question that take 5 minutes of explaining all possible angles, leading to only one acceptable response from the interviewee.
I'll always listen to the Giles' slot on thursdays, even if he's saying the same stuff  week in week out  for the past 40 years.

9
GAA Discussion / Re: Joe Brolly
« on: January 19, 2018, 06:19:13 PM »
Colm Parkinson had a pretty lengthy and interesting interview with Joe on the latest GAA Hour podcast
https://soundcloud.com/sportsjoe-gaa-hour/joe-brolly-talks-about-important-gaa-issueswooly-mostly-listens#t=27:54
I'd need subtitles to understand what Joe is mumbling.

10
GAA Discussion / Re: Joe Brolly
« on: January 18, 2018, 10:56:11 PM »
Did he not contradict himself re: Kevin Lynch? Brolly despises violence, criticises those who attacked Heffron, but is happy with the naming of the club after Lynch?

No, you see....you are looking at things in a 2 dimensional sense. Joe doesn't look at things that way.

So a man nearly at the top of his profession in the North, and he can't see things in a 2-D sense? You're opening up a can of worms regards to Kevin Lynch. There is a world of difference between both examples.

That was Joe's answer.
Joe can look at an event and appreciate the multi dimensions, that's how he can select the dimension that fits his agenda and be good at his profession.
When confronted by a blatant contradiction, Joe can even find a dimension that enables him to minimise the import of that contradiction in the greater good of the moral crusade.

11
General discussion / Re: The OFFICIAL FAI Thread.....Roll on France 2016
« on: January 18, 2018, 09:07:37 PM »
I think it's a storm in a teacup too.

Many managers go and speak to other clubs and decide against the move, McInnes at Aberdeen in recent times being one example.

The Irish situation stands out slightly because of the failure of the FAI to actually get him to sign the contract and the debate over whether a gentleman's agreement was worth anything. Other than that though, I don't see the issue.
O'Neill stated that in rejecting Stoke he felt he was bound by the terms of that verbal contract.
Fwiw, both O'Neill and the FAI had verbally agreed to a new contract which was on the table. O'Neill was obliged to inform the FAI of the Stoke interview and Stoke would have been legally obliged to pay compensation to the FAI had they contracted O'Neill.
(a win win situation in my book)

People had every right to question wtf was happening with O’Neill's commitment to the Irish job and this Stoke interview,
especially in the context of previous questions around his ‘lazy´faire management style and general lack of commitment to pursuing minor details like practice, tactics and  game plans which included, tactics, opposition breakdown, defining a player's role in the game plan etc.
O'Neill has evolved into a spoofer



12
General discussion / Re: Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.
« on: January 17, 2018, 04:55:07 PM »
This is very good

https://thebrokenelbow.com/2018/01/15/barry-mcelduffs-resignation-the-two-questions-that-follow/

Barry McElduff’s Resignation: The Two Questions That Follow   
I read it and found it to be disjointed waffle with little or no substance to support the 2 question supposition.










13
General discussion / Re: Silent Justice/ Internet Interceptors
« on: January 14, 2018, 10:12:33 PM »
So like the Police they make mistakes (but far fewer than the Police).

The Police get relatively few convictions,on account a lot of the time, of their own c**k ups.

These groups are exposing paedophiles who have groomed what they thought to be children, so people know who they are and can take steps to protect their children.I for one support this fully.

They are advertising for people to help them.

What qualifications do you need to help them? As well as the fact that it is pure vigilante justice and they could ruin innocent peoples lives this knd f thing has the potential to go very wrong.

What if they film someone who gets violent and even is potentially armed? What if the person doing the video gets violent?

I really do not think the whole thing is well advised at all.
They appear to be following a formula to catch the pedophile which satisfies legal requirements, enough to be regarded as bona fide testimony in court. It would appear they have received schooling re  how far they can go to trap  and how to document all exchanges.  They have to avoid entrapment.
I don't like this broadcasting the confrontation/citizens arrest, though the English police themselves set an awful example, are fond of these high profile perp walk type shenanigans in front of the press and have wrought havoc in the lives of innocent people.


14
General discussion / Re: TV Show recommendations
« on: January 13, 2018, 11:43:55 PM »
Dexter any good ?
Brilliant

Is there a storyline or is it one of those shows that you can turn on at any stage and watch away at it?
Yes there is a storyline, from S1  E1 right to the the end. It's an enjoyable yarn which you'll find out soon enough if you like it or not.

15
General discussion / Re: The OFFICIAL FAI Thread.....Roll on France 2016
« on: January 13, 2018, 01:34:12 PM »
Interesting to note that there's been no contract in place since the last one ran out in November but the good old FAI have been paying the management team anyway - As usual great governance from Delaney and Co
I think in this matter the FAI are doing the right thing.
Generally it is acceptable that a 2 or 3  months grace period be given to find another job
It was not known for sure that we would not qualify at any time during the qual campaign.
Had we qualified, then it would have been expected that O'Neill would lead  the team to the Finals. I don't think it would have sent out 'the right message' had O'Neill been taking interviews for a new job  before the qualifying campaign had run its course.

Regardless of whether he gets the Stoke job or not, I think the FAI should cut him (and Keane) loose.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 698