Messages

1

General discussion / Re: East wall #Irelandisfull

« on: February 03, 2023, 12:06:55 PM »

These fkn scum want stopping and soon

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41063030.html

Just to clarify

A migrant went into a hospital and said he wanted to rape children

And that triggered a violent response by the locals

Just to clarify, did the violent right wing locals mete out the same treatment to the white Irish rapist in finglas? Or does he get a bye ball?

No idea (and completely irrelevant )

It's not irrelevant. These people don't care about women. How many of the far right organisers have been involved in violence against women campaigns. Or housing protests. Or hospitals. Or anything

2

General discussion / Re: East wall #Irelandisfull

« on: February 03, 2023, 12:05:05 PM »

These fkn scum want stopping and soon

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41063030.html

Just to clarify

A migrant went into a hospital and said he wanted to rape children

And that triggered a violent response by the locals

Did he though? Says who?

3

General discussion / Re: Boxing Thread

« on: February 02, 2023, 10:50:12 PM »

The price is the price, if Eddie Hearn doesn't like it then the GAA are probably doing something right.

But it's wbat the price is that is the issue. It's not like for like as Wembley is in a city with 5 other 50,000 plus venues wheras Dublin has 1, but it doesn't explain why the GAA want 1.2m a day.

they dont

€400k is the price for renting Croke Park

which is less than 10% of the total expected take

Hearn doesnt want to pay for security/policing costs

he wants the GAA or the taxpayer to pay for it

Also Why is this boxing match even being entertained in Croke Park in the middle of the Championship when it could be accommodated in August September

and they also want it on the same weekend as 2 rugby european finals are on in Dublin

cue whinging then about beds pricing and availibilty

The FAI and IRFU didn't get CP for 400k, but if that's what he says that's what he says

Money was considerably more fluirseach pre the 2008 crash.

And becausethe GAA had the FAI and IRFU by the bollocks as it was that or Glasgow. But it is odd that the price has fallen by 66% in 15 years.

What do the wimmin get charged?

4

General discussion / Re: Boxing Thread

« on: February 02, 2023, 05:32:34 PM »

The price is the price, if Eddie Hearn doesn't like it then the GAA are probably doing something right.

But it's wbat the price is that is the issue. It's not like for like as Wembley is in a city with 5 other 50,000 plus venues wheras Dublin has 1, but it doesn't explain why the GAA want 1.2m a day.

they dont

€400k is the price for renting Croke Park

which is less than 10% of the total expected take

Hearn doesnt want to pay for security/policing costs

he wants the GAA or the taxpayer to pay for it

Also Why is this boxing match even being entertained in Croke Park in the middle of the Championship when it could be accommodated in August September

and they also want it on the same weekend as 2 rugby european finals are on in Dublin

cue whinging then about beds pricing and availibilty

The FAI and IRFU didn't get CP for 400k, but if that's what he says that's what he says

5

General discussion / Re: Boxing Thread

« on: February 02, 2023, 12:38:03 PM »

The price is the price, if Eddie Hearn doesn't like it then the GAA are probably doing something right.

But it's wbat the price is that is the issue. It's not like for like as Wembley is in a city with 5 other 50,000 plus venues wheras Dublin has 1, but it doesn't explain why the GAA want 1.2m a day.

6

GAA Discussion / Re: GAA WTF

« on: January 30, 2023, 08:31:12 PM »

"She claims her husband, other parents and volunteer coaches were unhappy with the approach to the tournament taken by Richie Herity, who was the head coach of the under-9 group."

Probably a dispute between play your best players and try to win versus everyone gets a turn.

At under 9, which is the right thing for a coach to do?


Should loud parents be able to over rule a coach?

But throwing 4 kids out of the club because a parent may or may not be a pain in the hole isn't right either

7

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 30, 2023, 01:19:03 PM »

100% on the officials. The Club Champions should not be punished because the officials made a slight error on the day. Ireland didn't get a replay with France after Henry's handball.

KC get away with this without sanction, and through the GAA's wilful blindness in following their own rules, then there is absolutely no deterrent on future transgressions -- ah sure, what's the worst could happen.

It's referee error. It happens

8

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 29, 2023, 01:04:05 PM »

Probably would be a replay but they are likely afraid of Crokes and the money/power they have. Also the Dublin media seem fully behind them, Philly McMahon calling out Glen today said they should be embarrassed.

Not sure if McMahon has much credibility he's running his mouth all the time now about stuff he knows nothing about. Irish media allow him the platform to attack Glen.

I like McMahon, always have, but what have Glen to be embarrassed about?

Running to committee as opposed to taking their beating

9

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 28, 2023, 06:11:06 PM »

"An extra player on the pitch had no impact on his execution"

KC lost last year's final via a goal at the death.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYui7_rrWyk

The extra man wasn't placed at a random spot around the pitch. He was standing on the goal line.
why was he there ? Admiring the painting of the posts ?
If he hadn't been there would KC have had  2 or 3 on the line? Would Wattys have done what they did or lobbed the ball in ?
Would KC have panicked like last year ?

Answers on a postcard

the amount of players on the line would have been the same regardless.

If 3 are on the line there are 12 outfield.
Wattys have 1 kicker and 14 outfield

The dynamics are very different with 16 v 15

So did the Glen players know there was 16 active players?

Exactly. Was not a factor in the taking of the free

10

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 28, 2023, 01:36:44 PM »

"An extra player on the pitch had no impact on his execution"

KC lost last year's final via a goal at the death.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYui7_rrWyk

The extra man wasn't placed at a random spot around the pitch. He was standing on the goal line.
why was he there ? Admiring the painting of the posts ?
If he hadn't been there would KC have had  2 or 3 on the line? Would Wattys have done what they did or lobbed the ball in ?
Would KC have panicked like last year ?

Answers on a postcard

the amount of players on the line would have been the same regardless.

11

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 28, 2023, 01:12:26 PM »

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can’t penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That’s how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref’s error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

This.

So a team can fire on as many players as they want and its up to the ref to sort out? Lack of responsibility from crokes is unreal

It is up to the referee to referee. He made an error, quite a big one, but it had no material impact on the result. Bench the referee and get on with it - too much sorted out at committee l

Even if the ref was at fault there was still an extra man on the line.
It's like the Thierry Henry goal. You are not allowed to score with an arm or a hand in soccer but ....

And soccer brought in var to try and eliminate those match official errors. There was no replay.

Refereeing errors happen. We can't go to committee every time the press go to town on one.

And I despise Crokes. Everything that is wrong with Gaelic games in one horrible club.

12

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 28, 2023, 01:10:08 PM »

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can’t penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That’s how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref’s error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

This.

So a team can fire on as many players as they want and its up to the ref to sort out? Lack of responsibility from crokes is unreal

It is up to the referee to referee. He made an error, quite a big one, but it had no material impact on the result. Bench the referee and get on with it - too much sorted out at committee l

you cant say it had no material impact o the result though.
Who has responsibility for making sure a substituted player leaves the field?

The ref and the linesman between them.

He went for a point and balooned it. An extra player on the pitch had no impact on his execution

13

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 28, 2023, 12:33:41 PM »

Can't see how kilmacud can object

Their argument is they did nothing wrong.

They advised the officials they wanted to make the substitution.
The officials allowed the sub to come on.
The officials allowed the game to re-start without allowing time for Mullin to go off (or for anyone to tell Mullin that he was going off). 
The officials were notified of their error and did not order a retake.

Just a refereeing mistake. One of those things.  Unfortunate for Glen, but the rule everyone quotes is for when a club puts an extra player on without the permission of the officials. You can’t penalise Crokes for the officials making a mistake.

That’s how they can, and are, objecting.

During the 6 seconds of play where Crokes had 16 on the pitch, the Glen full back had a great chance to deflect the ball into the net, but missed. Imagine an alternative scenario where it was 15 v 15, and the full back got the crucial touch, the ball ended up in the net, the officials missed that he was in the square before the ball was played to him and wrongly allowed the goal. Would there be grounds for a replay because the winning goal was illegal? Of course not. A ref’s error. Unfortunate for Crokes, but one of those things.

This.

So a team can fire on as many players as they want and its up to the ref to sort out? Lack of responsibility from crokes is unreal

It is up to the referee to referee. He made an error, quite a big one, but it had no material impact on the result. Bench the referee and get on with it - too much sorted out at committee l

14

GAA Discussion / Re: Ticket Prices

« on: January 19, 2023, 11:03:21 AM »

Thanks for posting

Agreed, the  ticket price rise was  uncalled for

And I really don’t like  this move towards cashless turnstiles.  Not one bit

Are tickets no longer available  in SuperValu or centra?

No pay at the gate is fine. But have a booth. It's bonkers to turn away punters who rock up on the day.

15

General discussion / Re: OFFICIAL FAI games...Men v France and Gibraltar, then Women's World Cup in July

« on: January 15, 2023, 08:35:50 PM »

The FAI have a 60 year lease on the Aviva . Past form would seem to suggest that they won't build their own stadium before time runs out.

Do you think the Capital needs another National Stadium? The Aviva more than accommodates the needs of the both Rugby and Soccer. Tallaght Stadium covers the smaller capacity games.  We already have Croke Park empty for 7 to 8 months of the year. And of late is struggling to half fill it at peak times of the year.

It would be a complete Joke to go and build a new stadium and burden an association with the repayment and maintenance costs.

Not now but over the next 50 years the cost of building  a stadium in Dublin will fall significantly as interest rates go up.
If the price and maintenance costs were acceptable would a separate stadium for soccer not be desirable ?

Soccer has a stadium. Landsdowne Road. It owns half of it. Rugby and woccer had the choice to build separately in tbe suburbs but chose to share in the city. A seperate atadium for the sake of it isn't feasable or desirable

It doesn't own it AFAIK

https://web.archive.org/web/20191117100856/https://www.independent.ie/sport/columnists/vincent-hogan/vincent-hogan-aviva-the-most-expensive-second-home-in-history-26651129.html
The IRFU and FAI are, of course, equal tenants here, but -- in 50 years' time (considered the natural life-span of a stadium) -- the site reverts to exclusive rugby ownership. It's essentially time-share with a twist.

How do you think owning an apartment works?

Usually it's possible to sell an apartment

And they can sell their 50%. But to who and why?