Who do we like the least?

[Evil Genius]

Evil Genius, I'll tell you how you can prove you are not just here on the wind up, dont post again on this thread.

If you continue into an 8th or 9th page it just proves my earlier points about you.

And the smug patronising language makes you look like an ass, not clever.
But no doubt you will want the last word 

Yes.

[pintsofguinness]

However, your revisionist attempt to recharacterise the nature of the Poll is clearly disingenuous. What caused me originally to take exception was a Poll whereby GAA fans stated, however humourously or light-heartedly, that they "hate the Brits".
All I was did essentially was to try to point out three things:
1. The epithet "Brits" applies not only to those people from the other side of the Irish Sea who speak with an English accent; rather, it also applies, "hateful" or otherwise, to around one million of your fellow islanders;
2. This "blindspot" precisely demonstrates just how little comprehension some GAA supporters have of "the other million";
3. The combination of ignorance, indifference and occasional antagonism towards your fellow islanders explains exactly how and why the GAA only appears to recognise one type of islander as being truly "Irish" i.e. those who endorse the "right" kind of politics.

Or it could be that, as I've tired to explain, irish nationalist's definition of "brits" in the context that it was used is different to yours.
But no, that would be to simple of an explanation and it wouldnt give you a chance to play the victim.

(On a more specific note, if Kevin Lynch, Dungiven were to be my local GAA club, what reception do you think I would receive if I were to pay my subscription, join and then at the next AGM, propose that the club name be changed to something less "partisan", on the basis that mixing politics with sport should be avoided wherever possible?  Huh)

I would say if you raised the issue there would be a debate, you may or may not receive support but after it you might understand why the club was named after Kevin Lynch.

[Lar Naparka]

This topic is already 8 pages long and may be good for another few yet if present indications are anything to go by.
I don't want too see anyone being denied a good discussion, or row or argy bargy or call it what you will but the subject matter currently under discussion has gone decidedly off-topic  since about the end of page two in fact..
What we are now getting is quite an able presentation by the main poster, Evil Genius, of how it feels to be both Irish and British simultaneously and of how he and others like him regard the GAA.
That may appear as over simplification but any reasonable person, on reading the last six pages of this thread, may very well come to the same conclusion.
The poll asks participants to indicate which of six options they like least and the second listed was the British Establishment. Now, this is a poll on a GAA board and the person setting the poll might reasonably infer that the vast majority of viewers would understand what is meant by the British Establishment and, in this context, it does have a pretty narrow, specific meaning. For starters it does not refer to the non-GAA ((loyalist) people of Northern Ireland.
When I think of the British Establishment I bring to mind Colonel Forde of Bloody Sunday fame or Maggie Thatcher and one could include much of the media and really the list is a long one.
My point is that most poll participants will immediately know the people I am referring to and I do say that this is what, or who, I had in mind when I picked the second option.
I do not think the poll was structured to represent an attack on the people of Northern Ireland who broadly share EG's point of view and I certainly have seen no evidence on this post or elsewhere that GAA followers, as a body, feels it can happily live without the interest of one million Irish people, who just don't happen to share their sporting interests.
I also don't feel that all loyalist people have the same developed sense of Britishness as EG does; I have stood shoulder to shoulder with good decent Irishmen, who also happened to be professed Orangemen, on the terraces of Landsdowne Road as Ireland faced up to the common enemy and I have heard them bawl out the words of the National Anthem too!
Really, I do have many sincere good friends in the North and apart from a period leading up to every Twalfth and in the days afterwards I never have sensed any appreciable change in their demeanour. 
I may be half-joking here but I am deadly serious when I say that many people who feel a sense of being British also have a sense of betrayal and insecurity, as if the protestations of loyalty no longer evoke the same sense of bonding and support it once did. Obviously I am not speaking for the whole of the loyalist people of Northern Ireland here but I do know enough of its rugby confraternity to say there is a case to be made.
I'd go further and state that many such people would blame the British Establishment for this and would share my view that the view from that quarter of all of us who share this island is one of studied indifference and condescension.
I'd gladly discuss this further buy in my view this is not the forum to do so.

[Farrandeelin]

How is anyone who is a member of Kevin Lynch's club associated with the INLA?

[lynchbhoy]

So are you saying anyone that's a member of the Kevin Lynch club is "associated" with the INLA?

(Come to think of it, seeing as Billy Wright is reputed to have played GAA when a boy growing up in South Armagh, would you be happy to see a GAA club named after him?

I couldnt care less.

Re your first point: Yes, that's precisely what I'm saying; I fail to see how it could be any different 

As for Billy Wright GAA club, perhaps you dont mind being associated with murderous, drug-dealing sectarian bigots like him or Kevin Lynch, but I do. And that counts equally in the context of GAA, soccer, rugby or any other sport. 

its astonishing to see someone with their head purposely stuck in the sand like this evil chappie...

[rosnarun]

how about the GAA retiring all names found offensive to the enghlish 'KEVIN LYNCH' 'PEARSES' ect  if the english decommisson all clubs and associations with names like  'ROYAL' 'HER MAJESTYS'S ' ' THE QUEENS VERY OWN'  ect ect ect.

[Evil Genius]

The poll asks participants to indicate which of six options they like least and the second listed was the British Establishment. Now, this is a poll on a GAA board and the person setting the poll might reasonably infer that the vast majority of viewers would understand what is meant by the British Establishment and, in this context, it does have a pretty narrow, specific meaning. For starters it does not refer to the non-GAA ((loyalist) people of Northern Ireland.
When I think of the British Establishment I bring to mind Colonel Forde of Bloody Sunday fame or Maggie Thatcher and one could include much of the media and really the list is a long one.
My point is that most poll participants will immediately know the people I am referring to and I do say that this is what, or who, I had in mind when I picked the second option.
I do not think the poll was structured to represent an attack on the people of Northern Ireland who broadly share EG's point of view and I certainly have seen no evidence on this post or elsewhere that GAA followers, as a body, feels it can happily live without the interest of one million Irish people, who just don't happen to share their sporting interests.
I also don't feel that all loyalist people have the same developed sense of Britishness as EG does; I have stood shoulder to shoulder with good decent Irishmen, who also happened to be professed Orangemen, on the terraces of Landsdowne Road as Ireland faced up to the common enemy and I have heard them bawl out the words of the National Anthem too!
Really, I do have many sincere good friends in the North and apart from a period leading up to every Twalfth and in the days afterwards I never have sensed any appreciable change in their demeanour. 
I may be half-joking here but I am deadly serious when I say that many people who feel a sense of being British also have a sense of betrayal and insecurity, as if the protestations of loyalty no longer evoke the same sense of bonding and support it once did. Obviously I am not speaking for the whole of the loyalist people of Northern Ireland here but I do know enough of its rugby confraternity to say there is a case to be made.
I'd go further and state that many such people would blame the British Establishment for this and would share my view that the view from that quarter of all of us who share this island is one of studied indifference and condescension.

An interesting and considered reply, LN. Believe it or not, I, too, share your concern about the length of this thread, but as I said elsewhere, I don't believe in "soundbites" and I have always tried to keep my posts related to the situation as regards the GAA, rather than just letting the debate generate to the usual, never-ending argument over the border etc.
Anyhow, I don't know at what point you came into this debate, but the Poll originally asked: "Who do you hate the most?", with "The Brits" being offered as a choice. This is rather more stark than the present revisionist version, even though it garnered hardly less support than the new version!
I originally posted to point out that by voting for "The Brits", respondants are also voting for a million or so of their fellow Irish people.
Of course, many pointed out, as you do, that this is not what Nationalists generally mean when using the term. However, as a teenager growing up in the Troubles, faced daily with Gerry Adams et alia using guns and bombs in the "Armed Struggle", we knew exactly who the "Brits" in the accompanying cry of "Brits Out" were then: it meant us.
Of course, circumstances have calmed down considerably since those dark days, but whilst even Adams has realised that he has got to find a way of sitting down and dealing with these former enemies - "We've not gone away, either, you know!" - it seems to me that the GAA still fails to recognise our presence, or our legitimacy as Irishmen and women the same as the rest of our fellow islanders.
It is curious that you raise the topic of rugby-supporting Unionists. I, too, have sat or stood to cheer on Ireland at Lansdowne Road as loudly as the next fan. I am also an avid soccer fan, with the NI team being especially dear to me.
However, whilst I see no contradiction or difficulty in supporting either code, I simply cannot feel the same ease in my relationship with the GAA.
Let me explain. Historically, both rugby and soccer were organised on an All-Ireland basis, as it happens with rugby centred in Dublin and soccer in Belfast. At the time of their origins, whilst participation inevitably reflected the political and religious divide in the island to a certain extent, nonetheless, neither had the same overt political ambitions as adopted by the emerging GAA of the period. (Let me add, too, that I do understand why the GAA was more than a mere sporting organisation at that time; also that rugby and soccer were somewhat divided on socio-economic, or class, lines)
Subsequently, at the time of partition, whilst rugby managed to remain organised on al All-Ireland basis, soccer was split following the breakaway in the South of the new "Football Association of the Irish Free State", with the IFA left to continue in the new NI.
This split was sad imo, but for all the difficulties which followed for both codes, they eventually managed to steer an apolitical "path through the minefield" to arrive at the present situation, which is as follows.
Consequently, just as a David Humphries or Andrew Trimble can happily represent the Ireland rugby team at Landsdowne, without in any way being required to deny or "trim" his own political or cultural identity, similarly, a Pat Jennings or a Gerry Armstrong can achieve hero status for the NI soccer team without it making either of them one whit less of a Nationalist or Republican etc (if that's what they wish). This is because ultimately, they are both merely representing their own wee "patch" at their chosen game for 80 or 90 minutes.
Whereas, Gaelic Games still retain the historic "qualification" which requires adherents to sign up not just to sporting rules, but also to a political aspiration of a United Ireland - it's even in the Rulebook.
Of course, I understand entirely that that may be the last thing on the mind of 99.9% of players when they line up for a game. And I accept that in the 26 counties, at least, such considerations have little meaning even when drawn to their attention. (Then again, for people in the South, the "National question" has alrady been settled pretty much to their satisfaction, so it need not have the same significance?)
In parts of the North, however, the situation is different. As Unionists, we are faced with the naming of clubs, stadia and competitions in honour of people seen in GAA circles as heroes of the Armed Struggle for Nationhood, but whom we saw merely as people with bombs and guns who tried to kill us. We see elaborate ceremonies on GAA premises featuring prominent Republican activists (both political and paramilitary), commemorating overtly political events such as the Hunger Strikes, at the same time as Charities like the Omagh Bomb Appeal are turned away.
Nowhere does either soccer or rugby maintain official practices on an anything remotely similar basis.
Of course, that is not to say that everything is "rosy" for Northern Nationalists in the garden or soccer or rugby - far from it.
However, any occurrences as may give offence are nowhere condoned or defended, much less authorised or endorsed, by the organisers of these games, unlike the situation with Gaelic Games.
Ultimately, as an Irishman who is also a sports fan, I am not asking that my own particular political aspirations should be accorded some sort of official "recognition" by the GAA, either in addition to Nationalism, never mind instead of it. Nor would I ask that any of my fellow adherents become in any way less Nationalist or whatever in their views.
All I am saying is that if Gaelic Games are to hold any appeal to people like me, they will have to drop the political baggage which they are still carrying from the 19th Century.
If the organisation cannot, or will not, do so, then that's fine with me, as well; other than a mild irritation that GAA should try to claim that it is a "Sport For All", I am quite happy to let them carry on as at present, whilst I carry on celebrating my Northern Irishness at Windsor Park and my Irishness at Lansdowne*, with all my fellow fans, irrespective of who they are or where they come from!

And in the interests of conserving bandwidth (and keeping other posters awake!), that's just about all I can say on the matter - Over and Out!


* - I'll even do so at Croke Park, should I get a ticket! 

[dubnut]

"I, too, share your concern about the length of this thread"

Followed by....

"but as I said elsewhere, I don't believe in "soundbites" and I have always tried to keep my posts related to the situation as regards the GAA, rather than just letting the debate generate to the usual, never-ending argument over the border etc.
Anyhow, I don't know at what point you came into this debate, but the Poll originally asked: "Who do you hate the most?", with "The Brits" being offered as a choice. This is rather more stark than the present revisionist version, even though it garnered hardly less support than the new version!
I originally posted to point out that by voting for "The Brits", respondants are also voting for a million or so of their fellow Irish people.
Of course, many pointed out, as you do, that this is not what Nationalists generally mean when using the term. However, as a teenager growing up in the Troubles, faced daily with Gerry Adams et alia using guns and bombs in the "Armed Struggle", we knew exactly who the "Brits" in the accompanying cry of "Brits Out" were then: it meant us.
Of course, circumstances have calmed down considerably since those dark days, but whilst even Adams has realised that he has got to find a way of sitting down and dealing with these former enemies - "We've not gone away, either, you know!" - it seems to me that the GAA still fails to recognise our presence, or our legitimacy as Irishmen and women the same as the rest of our fellow islanders.
It is curious that you raise the topic of rugby-supporting Unionists. I, too, have sat or stood to cheer on Ireland at Lansdowne Road as loudly as the next fan. I am also an avid soccer fan, with the NI team being especially dear to me.
However, whilst I see no contradiction or difficulty in supporting either code, I simply cannot feel the same ease in my relationship with the GAA.
Let me explain. Historically, both rugby and soccer were organised on an All-Ireland basis, as it happens with rugby centred in Dublin and soccer in Belfast. At the time of their origins, whilst participation inevitably reflected the political and religious divide in the island to a certain extent, nonetheless, neither had the same overt political ambitions as adopted by the emerging GAA of the period. (Let me add, too, that I do understand why the GAA was more than a mere sporting organisation at that time; also that rugby and soccer were somewhat divided on socio-economic, or class, lines)
Subsequently, at the time of partition, whilst rugby managed to remain organised on al All-Ireland basis, soccer was split following the breakaway in the South of the new "Football Association of the Irish Free State", with the IFA left to continue in the new NI.
This split was sad imo, but for all the difficulties which followed for both codes, they eventually managed to steer an apolitical "path through the minefield" to arrive at the present situation, which is as follows.
Consequently, just as a David Humphries or Andrew Trimble can happily represent the Ireland rugby team at Landsdowne, without in any way being required to deny or "trim" his own political or cultural identity, similarly, a Pat Jennings or a Gerry Armstrong can achieve hero status for the NI soccer team without it making either of them one whit less of a Nationalist or Republican etc (if that's what they wish). This is because ultimately, they are both merely representing their own wee "patch" at their chosen game for 80 or 90 minutes.
Whereas, Gaelic Games still retain the historic "qualification" which requires adherents to sign up not just to sporting rules, but also to a political aspiration of a United Ireland - it's even in the Rulebook.
Of course, I understand entirely that that may be the last thing on the mind of 99.9% of players when they line up for a game. And I accept that in the 26 counties, at least, such considerations have little meaning even when drawn to their attention. (Then again, for people in the South, the "National question" has alrady been settled pretty much to their satisfaction, so it need not have the same significance?)
In parts of the North, however, the situation is different. As Unionists, we are faced with the naming of clubs, stadia and competitions in honour of people seen in GAA circles as heroes of the Armed Struggle for Nationhood, but whom we saw merely as people with bombs and guns who tried to kill us. We see elaborate ceremonies on GAA premises featuring prominent Republican activists (both political and paramilitary), commemorating overtly political events such as the Hunger Strikes, at the same time as Charities like the Omagh Bomb Appeal are turned away.
Nowhere does either soccer or rugby maintain official practices on an anything remotely similar basis.
Of course, that is not to say that everything is "rosy" for Northern Nationalists in the garden or soccer or rugby - far from it.
However, any occurrences as may give offence are nowhere condoned or defended, much less authorised or endorsed, by the organisers of these games, unlike the situation with Gaelic Games.
Ultimately, as an Irishman who is also a sports fan, I am not asking that my own particular political aspirations should be accorded some sort of official "recognition" by the GAA, either in addition to Nationalism, never mind instead of it. Nor would I ask that any of my fellow adherents become in any way less Nationalist or whatever in their views.
All I am saying is that if Gaelic Games are to hold any appeal to people like me, they will have to drop the political baggage which they are still carrying from the 19th Century.
If the organisation cannot, or will not, do so, then that's fine with me, as well; other than a mild irritation that GAA should try to claim that it is a "Sport For All", I am quite happy to let them carry on as at present, whilst I carry on celebrating my Northern Irishness at Windsor Park and my Irishness at Lansdowne*, with all my fellow fans, irrespective of who they are or where they come from!

And in the interests of conserving bandwidth (and keeping other posters awake!), that's just about all I can say on the matter - Over and Out!"

Oh the irony! 

[Mayo4Sam]

Lads once again Evil Genius is winning this argument hands down with well thoughtout structured arguments.
He does betray his upbringing in some of his comments

whilst even Adams has realised

but on the whole from his point of view the argument makes perfect sense, if the GAA is claiming to be a sport for all then they need to stop celebrating, as an organisation, political events which some people would view as atrocities from their backround.

[lynchbhoy]

. However, as a teenager growing up in the Troubles, faced daily with Gerry Adams et alia using guns and bombs in the "Armed Struggle", we knew exactly who the "Brits" in the accompanying cry of "Brits Out" were then: it meant us.

Actually it didnt.
Your whole argument is based on a false sense of exclusion if this is the case.

I will say again, that if any protestant wanted to join/play hurling at Kevin Lynch's Hurling club in dungiven county Derry, they would be welcomed.
they would be made to feel VERY welcome.
the issue then is whether someone from that community would want to join.
Ok so the name puts them off.
Funnily similar names do not put off too many nationalists from attending 'Queens University' , Royal Victoria etc etc

if you want to find offense you will - which is what your postulation and 'debate' actually just is.

OK so the name doesnt fit, how about you go to any GAA club with some Irish name - Ruari Og in Cushendall ...
Would you go then?
The GAA does not exclude anyone, the last traces of that were discarded with the rule banning british army and security forces being deleted a couple of years ago.
you are going around in circles but avoiding the real crux that is - people like you will never want to join the GAA as you will alwsys find faults and move the goalposts - as witnessed by all in the dup's goalpost moving in the assembly 'talks'.
thats in the nature of a lot of these people folks.
Dont be taken in.

[Evil Genius]

He does betray his upbringing in some of his comments

whilst even Adams has realised

Fair enough; you may substitute "Paisley" for "Adams", if you wish! 

[dubnut]

Lads once again Evil Genius is winning this argument hands down with well thoughtout structured arguments.

With all due respect Mayo4Sam, its your personal opinion that Evil Genius is "winning" this argument.
Its not for you to decide as fact who is.
There are many who disagree with you, and him.
And while it is my own opinion that he is wrong and being very deceptive, and overloading this thread with so much text that people just dont have the time to reply to his points, I can at least admit it is just my opinion.
Lets not assume the roles of "judge" here.

[Evil Genius]

. However, as a teenager growing up in the Troubles, faced daily with Gerry Adams et alia using guns and bombs in the "Armed Struggle", we knew exactly who the "Brits" in the accompanying cry of "Brits Out" were then: it meant us.

Actually it didnt.
Your whole argument is based on a false sense of exclusion if this is the case.

I will say again, that if any protestant wanted to join/play hurling at Kevin Lynch's Hurling club in dungiven county Derry, they would be welcomed.
they would be made to feel VERY welcome.
the issue then is whether someone from that community would want to join.
Ok so the name puts them off.
Funnily similar names do not put off too many nationalists from attending 'Queens University' , Royal Victoria etc etc

if you want to find offense you will - which is what your postulation and 'debate' actually just is.

OK so the name doesnt fit, how about you go to any GAA club with some Irish name - Ruari Og in Cushendall ...
Would you go then?
The GAA does not exclude anyone, the last traces of that were discarded with the rule banning british army and security forces being deleted a couple of years ago.
you are going around in circles but avoiding the real crux that is - people like you will never want to join the GAA as you will alwsys find faults and move the goalposts - as witnessed by all in the dup's goalpost moving in the assembly 'talks'.
thats in the nature of a lot of these people folks.
Dont be taken in.

It seems to me that what you are saying is that you, as a Nationalist, reserve the right to determine what you mean by epithets such as "Brits", but I, as a Unionist, am not accorded the same privilege when using the same term. Thank You.

As for the Kevin Lynch club (an example of a less "liberal-minded" club chosen by Max Mill, rather than me, btw), I have no reason to suppose you're wrong about the welcome I would receive. However, I have no more wish to be associated in any way with a GAA club named in honour of an INLA man, than I would a soccer club named in "honour" of a UDA man. And just in case there should be any doubt, yes, that is precisely because "the name puts [me] off".

Your examples of QUB or the Royal Victoria are mere "whataboutery".  I no more object to these than I do to the naming of O'Connell Street or Parnell Square in Dublin. The naming of institutions such as these are solely a political matter, to be determined by political authorities. I fail to see what they have to do with sport, which is what we are discussing here (or more particularly, the mixing of sport and politics, as practised by the GAA)

Nor have I anywhere in my (lengthy!) posts expressed any objection whatever to the Irish language; how could any reasonable person take exception to a Gaelic Athletic club having, ahem,  a Gaelic name? As it happens, many NI soccer clubs have Irish names (albeit Anglicised), like Portadown, Glenavon, Derry City, Ballymena United etc etc!

And while the GAA does not specifically exclude anyone (bar those who might wish to rent their facilities for certain "foreign" games, unlike e.g. rugby or soccer  ), it does deter many by its insistence in retaining a political, as well as a sporting ethos, unlike just about every other sporting organisation in Ireland.

As for Irish Unionists consistently "moving the goalposts" in order to justify not joining in GAA, I have consistently said that my objection is simply to the GAA's insistence on mixing the political with what I believe should solely be sporting matters. But if you don't believe me, then call my bluff: if you drop the politics, see then whether I drop the objections!

As for "the dup's goalpost moving in the assembly 'talks'.", where, other than in a light-hearted aside to Mayo4Sam, did I even mention, never mind endorse, anything to do with the DUP in this debate? This is more "whataboutery" from you, I'm afraid, and frankly, I think it's pathetic.

[OdoSkimodo]

we knew exactly who the "Brits" in the accompanying cry of "Brits Out" were then: it meant us

Prove it. You can't, because it's absolute bollocks. 'Brits out' referred to the british armed services, no more and no less. You are still trying to be offended by a poll which in intent does not refer to northern unionists, protestants, british irish, northern british irish etc. etc. Give it up

[dubnut]

Evil Genius, tell you what.
You have explained why you wouldnt join the GAA in detail, not that I believe for a second you ever had any intentions.
So dont join, dont participate, dont watch it, entirely your choice, if you change your mind you will be welcomed.
END OF STORY!!!