The below article was in this weeks Anglo Celt and the majority of it also appeared in the "Match Preview" in the program of the Monaghan game the other night.
The background is that after the Antrim game he saw fit to come onto the Cavan thread and copy and paste what posters there had said about the game into a section called "what the internet pundits say" or something like that.
Some of us said that he was being lazy and he did not like it, this is the same journalist that posted a letter from a mentally unstable poster called RichieJ in the Celt about Val Andrews last year, which should not have got the time of day.
The best of it all is that he used to be a poster here.
The article
The background is that after the Antrim game he saw fit to come onto the Cavan thread and copy and paste what posters there had said about the game into a section called "what the internet pundits say" or something like that.
Some of us said that he was being lazy and he did not like it, this is the same journalist that posted a letter from a mentally unstable poster called RichieJ in the Celt about Val Andrews last year, which should not have got the time of day.
The best of it all is that he used to be a poster here.
The article
QuoteMemo to those who lurk in internet forums – man up or shut up please.
Cavan county board chairman Tom Reilly and his committee should speak to some of the faceless internet experts – they know all the answers, writes Anglo-Celt Sports editor Paul Fitzpatrick.
The Internet is another country; they do things differently there. It would make you wonder. Why do ordinarily sane punters turn into abusive, angry, bewildered lunatics, foaming at the mouth with a righteous rage, their plan of attack just that – an all-out offensive?
They are like the viscous drunk we all know, who changes when the liquor is in. It's a case of "with keyboard veritas" to coin the phrase. Of course, it's not the effect of sitting down at a computer or with a smartphone that creates this altered state of mind; rather it's the drug of anonymity.
Unhappy with how others perceive you in real life? No problem, switch your attentions to a made-up world and live vicariously through an online persona.
I have no problem with fair comment online but personal criticism(when the "alligator", as a famous politician once said, hasn't the courage to put their own name on it) is cowardly and unfair. Cavan footballers and management would surely agree – in fact, I know they do, because they have said so privately.
After the Antrim game, we ran some of the online comments in a panel under the heading "what the internet pundits say". The reaction was amazing. It was lazy journalism, suggested one nameless poster. Others were clearly alarmed at being quoted, possibly because the fact that their very public utterances were printed in a newspaper meant that they had to stand over them, just as I and anyone else who writes in a newspaper does.
Journos get plenty of vitriol, but they can hack it, no pun intended, and secretely, in a lot of cases, probably enjoy the attention. But players, who train as hard as any professional sportsmen for little or no return, and managers, who try as best they can to turn out winning teams, often feel the brunt of it.
Where am I going with all this? Well, as usual, there was an online Armageddon last week following Cavans defeat to Antrim. Forget the fact that the Saffrons routed us in our own castle last April, Cavan were expected to go to Belfast and win last Sunday week. Nothing less or the keyboard warriors wouldn't be happy.
Of course, they didn't win, but it wasn't for want of trying. Antrim have had the upper hand for a few years and the home advantage. Cavan were missing a few important men, trying out new tactics and positioning of players. They competed well, and they were in a winning position, but didn't close it out.
And the internet experts? Well there were about 600 punters in total at the game, most of whom were from Antrim. The majority of those who lurk in online message boards, then, weren't at the match about which they were commenting.
Amid all the guff, however, (and I didn't go through it all, life is too short to hang on the ramblings of the semi-literate and anonymous) there was one morsel of wisdom.
"Every time we lose" noted one poster, I think, on the gaaboard.com web-site, "we try to re-invent the wheel" Bang! Spot on. A rare diamond in the rough.
Cavan lost to Antrim – on another day, maybe with another referee, we'd have beaten them. What does that mean? It means we lost by 2 points and needed to beat Monaghan so as not to come under pressure. Nothing more, nothing less.
That doesn't mean Cavan need a new manager, or to bring back old players or drop young ones, or any reaction of that type. We're coming from a low base, having won – going into last Saturdays game – six matches in league and championship from the last 20. "Monaghan", we wrote in the programme last Saturday, "will bring huge enegery and confidence after their fantastic win over Meath last week. In Malachy O Rourke, they have one of the best managers in the game, and they have a potent blend of experience, scoring power, physique and young talent.
"But, to use a cliché, it's a local derby, and results which run counter to the form book are common in those fixtures. Cavan are at home and, as Michael Hannon pointed out in a recent mostly football column in the Anglo-Celt, that's worth a 5% boost. An extra game under Cavans belts will bring them up another notch and if Terry Hylands troops can hold their focus for the full 70 minutes – Cavan haven't done that in years – they will be very hard to beat. And if everything does come right and the season is not so much salvaged as steered back on course, even the internet pundits might be happy. And pigs might fly, too" They weren't happy of course. One person who posts under their real name wrote to question whether the piece was accusing him of idiocy (it wasn't – he has the cojones to put his name to his words). Another supporter emailed saying "well done – it had to be said". And the chorus line had it that your correspondent "let the Celt down"
It was all to be expected. The rules of the engagement, you see, aren't fair. Write in a newspaper and you must be able to back it up, meet those you praise or criticise on the street; hide behind a made up moniker on an internet forum and you can libel individuals, cast aspersions and spit out whatever vitriol comes into your head, without fear or repercussions.
There are some very knowledgeable posters on message boards, and often there are those with more-than-tenuous links to the team (and Val Andrews even suggested that some were actually members of the panel itself). The question is, though, in an age of social media, just what do these fellas have to hide?
