Jarlath Burns

[NAG1]

JB referenced that there is a way back for RG and that he is aware of what that is, anybody any idea what he is referring too here because I am at a loss 

[Snapchap]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

I respectfully disagree, I find it alarming that Jarlath used a familys trauma to validate the Game Changer initiative, my previous post references the Gallagher family, all well and good for Jarlath he doesn't have to pick up the pieces in the lives of the 3 children who find their dad splashed across the national media. I don't see the LGFA chief Mícheál Naughton going after Aisling Thompson, if he did that would be seen as a serious case of over-reach and victimisation

I find your take on this over the last few pages to be very odd. I can't put my finger on whether you're just a bit of an RG cheerleader, or have a slight chip on the shoulder against JB, but trueblue used the word I was going to use when he said that you almost appear to be presenting RG as a victim in all this, which he is most certainly not. RG's kids aren't seeing their father on the front pages of the papers for the last year or two because of Jarlath Burns.

The fact is that any club or county who considers Gallagher for a role cannot be unaware of the potential for external controvery and internal conflict over it. Derry were on the brink of re-appointing him a few short months ago but were clearly spooked by the backlash that inevitably came their way from the moment the Irish News broke the news of what his apprently imminent re-appointment. A simlar controversy/internal conflict arose in Corduff over the same issue. So if Naas, or anyone else, opt to continue with the appointment of Gallagher, then they can't blame anyone but themselves for the inevitable controversy or pretend that it came as a surprise. They chose to take that chance. You can argue that Burns' actions fueled the controversy, but he didn't create the issue around Gallagher (Rory did that to himself), nor did he attempt to make his concerns to the club public. His email was leaked.

As for "using" the Gallagher family to "validate" the Game Changer initiative, I don't get that argument at all. The GAA like a lot of organisations, sometimes sets up initiatives like this in response to serious incidents. There have been drink driving ones in the wake of accidents, one punch awareness ones etc etc. These can be nothing but positives. The Game Changer initative was already a "valid" one so I see no issue with him referencing a GAA initiative about domestic violence when it's the very topic in question. Id find it far more odd if his email didn't make any reference to the Game Changer Initiative. Otherwise, it wouldn't say much for the initiative, would it?

I'm not writing this as a defence of Burns getting involved with Naas but if you think he shouldn't have gotten involved, then there are more sensible reasons than what you've been putting out there.

[Wildweasel74]

Naas weren't the only team who had Gallagher on the radar! I think the Gallagher situation is done and dusted. But we see what Burns does when another situation arises in the GAA at county level. I was happy Burns got the job after the last lad, but it's beginning to look like it's all about me, and a run at Ireland President down the line. In my own county McFaul can count himself a lucky boy. A Gillane too, but if we starting taking every incident outside the gaa, where there no conviction, where do u stop? Is there anybody within clubs training children with convictions of assault, drugs, accusations of domestic. Violence,i say there is.

[imtommygunn]

There's another Limerick boy who was a good bit worse too. I think he may be in jail. (He seemed to have been booted but you'd imagine he'd be back for the club).

[Duine Inteacht Eile]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

The Gallagher family could be the kids, the innocent victims regardless whether you feel RG has doe wrong.

Bringing this all up again on national tv and media has been JB

I don't believe Burns should have got involved but this simply isn't true. He sent a private email to a club.
Whoever has leaked that email to the press (and indeed Gallagher with his public statement) are responsible for it being played out on national tv & media, not Jarlath Burns.

[Saffrongael]

Naas weren't the only team who had Gallagher on the radar! I think the Gallagher situation is done and dusted. But we see what Burns does when another situation arises in the GAA at county level. I was happy Burns got the job after the last lad, but it's beginning to look like it's all about me, and a run at Ireland President down the line. In my own county McFaul can count himself a lucky boy. A Gillane too, but if we starting taking every incident outside the gaa, where there no conviction, where do u stop? Is there anybody within clubs training children with convictions of assault, drugs, accusations of domestic. Violence,i say there is.

Is that not what Access NI is for ?

[johnnycool]

There's another Limerick boy who was a good bit worse too. I think he may be in jail. (He seemed to have been booted but you'd imagine he'd be back for the club).

Pat Ryan?

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2023/11/02/limerick-hurler-pat-ryan-wins-appeal-over-jail-sentence-and-conviction-for-perjury/

[Milltown Row2]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

The Gallagher family could be the kids, the innocent victims regardless whether you feel RG has doe wrong.

Bringing this all up again on national tv and media has been JB

I don't believe Burns should have got involved but this simply isn't true. He sent a private email to a club.
Whoever has leaked that email to the press (and indeed Gallagher with his public statement) are responsible for it being played out on national tv & media, not Jarlath Burns.

Yes the email no doubt was leaked from Naas or Gallagher but when someone is trying to put manners on you its probably best to think how will they react to this?

How did he think this was going to stay quiet or private?

[tbrick18]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

I respectfully disagree, I find it alarming that Jarlath used a familys trauma to validate the Game Changer initiative, my previous post references the Gallagher family, all well and good for Jarlath he doesn't have to pick up the pieces in the lives of the 3 children who find their dad splashed across the national media. I don't see the LGFA chief Mícheál Naughton going after Aisling Thompson, if he did that would be seen as a serious case of over-reach and victimisation

I find your take on this over the last few pages to be very odd. I can't put my finger on whether you're just a bit of an RG cheerleader, or have a slight chip on the shoulder against JB, but trueblue used the word I was going to use when he said that you almost appear to be presenting RG as a victim in all this, which he is most certainly not. RG's kids aren't seeing their father on the front pages of the papers for the last year or two because of Jarlath Burns.

The fact is that any club or county who considers Gallagher for a role cannot be unaware of the potential for external controvery and internal conflict over it. Derry were on the brink of re-appointing him a few short months ago but were clearly spooked by the backlash that inevitably came their way from the moment the Irish News broke the news of what his apprently imminent re-appointment. A simlar controversy/internal conflict arose in Corduff over the same issue. So if Naas, or anyone else, opt to continue with the appointment of Gallagher, then they can't blame anyone but themselves for the inevitable controversy or pretend that it came as a surprise. They chose to take that chance. You can argue that Burns' actions fueled the controversy, but he didn't create the issue around Gallagher (Rory did that to himself), nor did he attempt to make his concerns to the club public. His email was leaked.

As for "using" the Gallagher family to "validate" the Game Changer initiative, I don't get that argument at all. The GAA like a lot of organisations, sometimes sets up initiatives like this in response to serious incidents. There have been drink driving ones in the wake of accidents, one punch awareness ones etc etc. These can be nothing but positives. The Game Changer initative was already a "valid" one so I see no issue with him referencing a GAA initiative about domestic violence when it's the very topic in question. Id find it far more odd if his email didn't make any reference to the Game Changer Initiative. Otherwise, it wouldn't say much for the initiative, would it?

I'm not writing this as a defence of Burns getting involved with Naas but if you think he shouldn't have gotten involved, then there are more sensible reasons than what you've been putting out there.

That's an equally strange viewpoint in my opinion and suggests you think he's guilty of the allegations? If so, based on what?

The problem with all of this is that its the court of social media that has found RG guilty and commentary on here at least from most seems to be from the starting point that RG is guilty, because everyone "knows" he is.

Playing devils advocate for a minute - lets say (and before anyone jumps on this, I'm making all of this up I'm not stating this as fact) his ex-wife made the whole thing up to be vindictive and for no other reason. She timed the post to mess up what was a big moment for RG leading into an Ulster final, a point in time to cause maximum chaos for him (and for Derry for that matter). What would happen when investigated by the authorities in that case - would they prosecute or would they say not enough evidence or would they say something else? If she had made it up would the police charge her for wasting time? Or given her circumstances would it not be in the public interest? 
In this case would RG be a victim?

All "what if" questions but they are as legally sound as the treatment RG has gotten.

I've said on here before if RG did what he's accused of it's prison he should be in, but I've not seen or heard anything that convinces me 100% he did. Hearsay on the internet is not fact. People saying they know what he's like means nothing - it's just gossip. There are too many people who take everything they read on the internet as gospel truth and that's the issue.

The only facts in the public domain that I know of is that his ex-wife made allegations, he was investigated and not charged. End of.
He's since been treated as if he's guilty by the GAA.

Moving on from that, in terms of the Naas gig, JB was completely out of line getting involved.
And his reasoning for getting involved in that but not in the Hayes case just didn't stand up. One convicted of serious assault and another subject to allegations that haven't been proven.

He seemed to be saying that it was different for managers and players - I call BS on that, but it does give him room for manoeuvring over the current Armagh player accused of sexual assault. Surely he couldn't be using his position to protect his own county could he?

Not exactly recent, but Mickey Harte gave a character reference for a lad found guilty of raping a woman and leaving her for dead. There doesn't seem to be an issue with him being involved in GAA but what message does that send out to young fellas in the GAA? One of the most respected coaches in the games giving a character ref to someone guilty of the most vicious crimes - but that's ok?

There was a video doing the rounds maybe a year ago of a certain Armagh player chasing someone down a street to attack him. Will JB get involved and say that's not behaviour befitting a gaa player and they should be left out of the senior panel? Or maybe he's only getting involved in things that happened since he became president, or things that don't involve Armagh.

I'd say JB doesn't need to look too far outside his own county to find plenty of people at all levels in the GAA who have had a colourful past or maybe even present. And I'd say most counties have people with some sort of convictions involved in the GAA. They only way his interjection could be seen as appropriate is if he's taking a stance against anyone with convictions or allegations to their name.

It just feels a bit like he was jumping on a bandwagon of public opinion as it suits his own agenda and promoting his own personal profile - whilst not wanting to rock the Armagh boat by mentioning anything that is going on or has went on there.

I'm disappointed in him so far in general. I had high hopes when he came in, met him a couple of times at corporate events and he came across very well and spoke very well and there's no doubting his love of the GAA. But in his short tenure already, he's become the story and I don't really see what positives he's brought in yet.

[Duine Inteacht Eile]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

The Gallagher family could be the kids, the innocent victims regardless whether you feel RG has doe wrong.

Bringing this all up again on national tv and media has been JB

I don't believe Burns should have got involved but this simply isn't true. He sent a private email to a club.
Whoever has leaked that email to the press (and indeed Gallagher with his public statement) are responsible for it being played out on national tv & media, not Jarlath Burns.

Yes the email no doubt was leaked from Naas or Gallagher but when someone is trying to put manners on you its probably best to think how will they react to this?

How did he think this was going to stay quiet or private?

It doesn't matter. He conducted his business privately. He is not responsible for it going public. That was somebody else.

[Snapchap]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

The Gallagher family could be the kids, the innocent victims regardless whether you feel RG has doe wrong.

Bringing this all up again on national tv and media has been JB

I don't believe Burns should have got involved but this simply isn't true. He sent a private email to a club.
Whoever has leaked that email to the press (and indeed Gallagher with his public statement) are responsible for it being played out on national tv & media, not Jarlath Burns.

Yes the email no doubt was leaked from Naas or Gallagher but when someone is trying to put manners on you its probably best to think how will they react to this?

How did he think this was going to stay quiet or private?

"Put manners on"? He made a phonecall to the club chairman expressing concern for the welfare of the club. The subsequent email came at the request of the chairman, and the email explcitly stated that he was merely expressing concern for the club and that the decision was entirely theirs to make.

A bit like with Tiempo, if you think Burns was wrong to contact the club then there are better arguments than having to fabricate the idea that Burns was somehow attempting to intimidate or "put manners on" them.

[Snapchap]

That's an equally strange viewpoint in my opinion and suggests you think he's guilty of the allegations? If so, based on what?

The problem with all of this is that its the court of social media that has found RG guilty and commentary on here at least from most seems to be from the starting point that RG is guilty, because everyone "knows" he is.

Playing devils advocate for a minute - lets say (and before anyone jumps on this, I'm making all of this up I'm not stating this as fact) his ex-wife made the whole thing up to be vindictive and for no other reason. She timed the post to mess up what was a big moment for RG leading into an Ulster final, a point in time to cause maximum chaos for him (and for Derry for that matter). What would happen when investigated by the authorities in that case - would they prosecute or would they say not enough evidence or would they say something else? If she had made it up would the police charge her for wasting time? Or given her circumstances would it not be in the public interest? 
In this case would RG be a victim?

All "what if" questions but they are as legally sound as the treatment RG has gotten.

I've said on here before if RG did what he's accused of it's prison he should be in, but I've not seen or heard anything that convinces me 100% he did. Hearsay on the internet is not fact. People saying they know what he's like means nothing - it's just gossip. There are too many people who take everything they read on the internet as gospel truth and that's the issue.

The only facts in the public domain that I know of is that his ex-wife made allegations, he was investigated and not charged. End of.
He's since been treated as if he's guilty by the GAA.

The 'allegations' surrounding RG were widely known long before his ex-wife posted what she did. If you want to go down the "legally speaking" route, then the GAA are not treating him as guilty in that they have not banned him. He is not breaking any rule by coaching a club, but nor is Burns breaking any rule by contacting said club to warn them of the risk such an appointment poses to the welfare and reputation of that club. That doesn't mean it would be right for a club to appoint him, or that it is right for Burns to contact a club to express concerns. Those are both matters of opinion.

Moving on from that, in terms of the Naas gig, JB was completely out of line getting involved.
And his reasoning for getting involved in that but not in the Hayes case just didn't stand up. One convicted of serious assault and another subject to allegations that haven't been proven.

He seemed to be saying that it was different for managers and players - I call BS on that, but it does give him room for manoeuvring over the current Armagh player accused of sexual assault. Surely he couldn't be using his position to protect his own county could he?

Not exactly recent, but Mickey Harte gave a character reference for a lad found guilty of raping a woman and leaving her for dead. There doesn't seem to be an issue with him being involved in GAA but what message does that send out to young fellas in the GAA? One of the most respected coaches in the games giving a character ref to someone guilty of the most vicious crimes - but that's ok?

There was a video doing the rounds maybe a year ago of a certain Armagh player chasing someone down a street to attack him. Will JB get involved and say that's not behaviour befitting a gaa player and they should be left out of the senior panel? Or maybe he's only getting involved in things that happened since he became president, or things that don't involve Armagh.

I'd say JB doesn't need to look too far outside his own county to find plenty of people at all levels in the GAA who have had a colourful past or maybe even present. And I'd say most counties have people with some sort of convictions involved in the GAA. They only way his interjection could be seen as appropriate is if he's taking a stance against anyone with convictions or allegations to their name.

It just feels a bit like he was jumping on a bandwagon of public opinion as it suits his own agenda and promoting his own personal profile - whilst not wanting to rock the Armagh boat by mentioning anything that is going on or has went on there.

I'm disappointed in him so far in general. I had high hopes when he came in, met him a couple of times at corporate events and he came across very well and spoke very well and there's no doubting his love of the GAA. But in his short tenure already, he's become the story and I don't really see what positives he's brought in yet.

I'm very much on the fence as to whether or not he was right or wrong to get involved with Naas, but I reject the idea put forward by yourself and others, that he did so in a public fashion to "promote his personal profile" or other such nonsense. He made a private phonecall to the club chairman. He subsequently wrote an email to the club at the request of the chairman. Someone then leaked it. At no point was Burns seeking publicity.
There has also been many "why didn't he get in volved in X or Y" arguments put forward by yourself and others, but that doesn't stand up to scrutiny either. While I agree that his rationale on the difference between Hayes as a player and Gallagher as a coach is absolute horsesh!t, neither you nor I know what other cases he made private phonecalls about. How do you know he didn't make phonecalls or send emails remating to the incidents in his own county that you referenced? You don't. Same as how you wouldn't have known he contacted Naas only for someone leaking the email.

As far as I can see, a lot of those criticing Burns for his involvement are presenting bogus arguments that only vaguely disguise the fact that their real motivation for complaing is that they just don't like him.

[tiempo]

@snapchap you can't put your finger on whether I'm a RG cheerleader or have a chip on my shoulder regards JB because neither are true. I have no real vibe toward RG in any way shape or form, and if he's been involved in domestic abuse thats abhorrent. JB is a man of virtue, but not infallible.

-

Remember we all laughed at the Fr Ted sketch of John and Mary beating the head off each other, be careful jumping to conclusions in the case of domestic abuse allegations

I feel strongly that Jarlath took liberties with the new initiative and the Gallagher family, RG isn't the victim of domestic abuse that I'm aware of, quite possibly a perpetrator, but on this occasion JB has victimised RG, thats on JB

Jarlath has an initiative in place, a range of rules and guidance, committees, trained officials and responsible persons in lead roles, and access to relevant authorities, but he superseded all those to go after someone personally, he brought the full weight of his role to bear on an individual, crushing RG like this creates more problems than solutions

Jarlath favours tackling issues with a gender based focus, but he's targeted a man in a way I suggest he'd never target a woman, notice the LGFA President hasn't followed Jarlath's lead because its outside due process and scope of the role, and not in the spirit of the initiative to initiate a witch hunt

[tbrick18]

I'm very much on the fence as to whether or not he was right or wrong to get involved with Naas, but I reject the idea put forward by yourself and others, that he did so in a public fashion to "promote his personal profile" or other such nonsense. He made a private phonecall to the club chairman. He subsequently wrote an email to the club at the request of the chairman. Someone then leaked it. At no point was Burns seeking publicity.
There has also been many "why didn't he get in volved in X or Y" arguments put forward by yourself and others, but that doesn't stand up to scrutiny either. While I agree that his rationale on the difference between Hayes as a player and Gallagher as a coach is absolute horsesh!t, neither you nor I know what other cases he made private phonecalls about. How do you know he didn't make phonecalls or send emails remating to the incdents in his own county that you referenced? You don't. Same as how you wouldn't ahve know he contacted Naas only for someone leaking the email.

As far as I can see, a lot of those criticing Burns for his involvement are presenting bogus arguments that only vaguely disguise the fact that they just don't like him.

Fair point and I hadn't thought of that scenario.

However, the point still stands that if he's getting involved in any, he has to get involved in all cases where allegations/convictions are in play and there can't be different rules based on a hierarchy of position within the GAA.
For me personally, I wouldn't say I don't like JB, in fact when he got appointed I was over the moon as I did like him. There are players, managers etc I dont like from a personality point of view, but I can still respect them as good players or coaches. In the JB case, I just dont think he's doing a good job and his "horsh!t" argument is evidence of him making bad decisions if that's an honest answer - but I'm not convinced its the honest answer.
He says the GAA are not interested in cancel culture, but he effectively cancelled RG. What is the road back for RG he spoke about?
Again I don't think there is one now that JB has done what he has - so it feels dishonest from JB. I'm actually realising as I write this - I'm starting to not like him. 

[Milltown Row2]

You're looking at it like RG is the victim here. That's a starting point most others are not at, so I don't think there's much point in rehashing it.

The Gallagher family could be the kids, the innocent victims regardless whether you feel RG has doe wrong.

Bringing this all up again on national tv and media has been JB

I don't believe Burns should have got involved but this simply isn't true. He sent a private email to a club.
Whoever has leaked that email to the press (and indeed Gallagher with his public statement) are responsible for it being played out on national tv & media, not Jarlath Burns.

Yes the email no doubt was leaked from Naas or Gallagher but when someone is trying to put manners on you its probably best to think how will they react to this?

How did he think this was going to stay quiet or private?

"Put manners on"? He made a phonecall to the club chairman expressing concern for the welfare of the club. The subsequent email came at the request of the chairman, and the email explcitly stated that he was merely expressing concern for the club and that the decision was entirely theirs to make.

A bit like with Tiempo, if you think Burns was wrong to contact the club then there are better arguments than having to fabricate the idea that Burns was somehow attempting to intimidate or "put manners on" them.

When the Associations president phones the club and 'expresses' his concerns, he's putting them in a corner. If you can't see that then you are blind. Naas obviously knew there would be flack from this appointment but seemed that they were going a head with it anyways until the they got a call and email.


At no point in my posts have I also said that RG is innocent in all of this either, I generally follow the rule, there are two truths and somewhere in the middle is the actual truth. I'm just wondering did he go solo on this or has he the backing of the committee around him?