Messages

1

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 07, 2023, 11:54:58 AM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

Would tracking oil prices be good?

Oil prices are 50% of what they were in 2007. And 3 years ago they were 13% of their 2007 value. I can only imagine the consequences of sovereign wealth fluctuating like that. I think that is one of the reasons why oil producing countries have tried to invest in alternative assets.

It's certainly better than the historical alternative, storing their profits in US Treasuries as oil has increased from $2 per barrel to what is now a low of $67 (and occassionally over $100 per barrel)

Are you for real?

If you invested to hold in 2007 and your chosen store of wealth was oil then today you would have lost 50% of your capital and received no income in the intervening 15 years. The comforting news being 3 years ago you would have lost 87% of your capital.

You are stating that USD has done worse. What are the numbers you are using?

OK, you chose 2007, so I'm not picking the time comparison.

In 2007 you could buy approx 10 barrels of oil for ounce of gold (source: https://www.macrotrends.net/1380/gold-to-oil-ratio-historical-chart) and today you can buy 26 barrels of oil for an ounce of gold, so gold has increased in value by 2.6 times vs oil.

In USD terms in 2007 a barrel of oil cost cost approx $70 per barrel which is pretty much the same price as today. So the USD has stayed at parity vs oil since 2007.

This is what I mean by a net exporting country is much better to store their reserves in gold than US Treasuries as it maintains their purchasing power of real life commodities much better than USD does.  Yes, you forego an interest, but the interest you receive is less than the underlying currency is being devalued by.

This isn't just my opinion, in a speech Putin gave in June last year he said:
"According to the IMF, global currency reserves are at $7.1 trillion and 2.5 trillion euros now. These reserves are devalued at an annual rate of about 8 percent. Moreover, they can be confiscated or stolen any time if the United States dislikes something in the policy of the states involved. …
According to analyst estimates, and this is an objective analysis, a conversion of global reserves will begin just because there is no room for them with such shortages. They will be converted from weakening currencies into real resources like food, energy commodities and other raw materials. Other countries will be doing this, of course. Obviously, this process will further fuel global dollar inflation."

Crude oil was USD140 in June 2008. It was USD70 this week. That is not a store of value. Since that 2008 date it has also hit a low of USD19.8. In the last year values have got from USD111 to USD70. There is no logical argument for using something as volatile as this as a reserve currency.

You misundertand my point.  I am talking about oil exporting nations (ie they generate surpluses) storing their excess "profits" in gold, as opposed to USD which is what they have done since 1971 when the US went off the gold standard.  Storing them in USD is pointless as it doesn't keep up with the price of oil.  Gold, on the other hand, does.
More and more nations are reducing their holdings of USTs as reserve assets and replacing them with holding physical gold.

How did gold do as a store of value between 1980 and the millennium? Has it much of a store of value then?

Anyone can cherry pick a date range where you can make most things look good or bad. I was trying to be constructive and explain how the USD is seeing a reduction in its use as a global reserve asset.
Maybe the Central Banks that are stacking gold instead of USTs have it wrong as there is an aribtrary period over which gold decreases in value against oil: https://twitter.com/LukeGromen/status/1641431605452369921

but you do accept that during that significant period that gold collapsed in value and it wasn’t a last minute collapse it was a relentless steady erosion of value?

Yes, if you take your starting point of 1980, which was a local high in the price of gold.
And do you accept that since 2008 (oh, and I wonder what might have happened then to change the dynamics of financial markets) that gold has been on a continual rise?

There is a clear rise of central banks storing their surpluses in gold since 2013, or do you think they aren't?

2

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 06, 2023, 04:57:57 PM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

Would tracking oil prices be good?

Oil prices are 50% of what they were in 2007. And 3 years ago they were 13% of their 2007 value. I can only imagine the consequences of sovereign wealth fluctuating like that. I think that is one of the reasons why oil producing countries have tried to invest in alternative assets.

It's certainly better than the historical alternative, storing their profits in US Treasuries as oil has increased from $2 per barrel to what is now a low of $67 (and occassionally over $100 per barrel)

Are you for real?

If you invested to hold in 2007 and your chosen store of wealth was oil then today you would have lost 50% of your capital and received no income in the intervening 15 years. The comforting news being 3 years ago you would have lost 87% of your capital.

You are stating that USD has done worse. What are the numbers you are using?

OK, you chose 2007, so I'm not picking the time comparison.

In 2007 you could buy approx 10 barrels of oil for ounce of gold (source: https://www.macrotrends.net/1380/gold-to-oil-ratio-historical-chart) and today you can buy 26 barrels of oil for an ounce of gold, so gold has increased in value by 2.6 times vs oil.

In USD terms in 2007 a barrel of oil cost cost approx $70 per barrel which is pretty much the same price as today. So the USD has stayed at parity vs oil since 2007.

This is what I mean by a net exporting country is much better to store their reserves in gold than US Treasuries as it maintains their purchasing power of real life commodities much better than USD does.  Yes, you forego an interest, but the interest you receive is less than the underlying currency is being devalued by.

This isn't just my opinion, in a speech Putin gave in June last year he said:
"According to the IMF, global currency reserves are at $7.1 trillion and 2.5 trillion euros now. These reserves are devalued at an annual rate of about 8 percent. Moreover, they can be confiscated or stolen any time if the United States dislikes something in the policy of the states involved. …
According to analyst estimates, and this is an objective analysis, a conversion of global reserves will begin just because there is no room for them with such shortages. They will be converted from weakening currencies into real resources like food, energy commodities and other raw materials. Other countries will be doing this, of course. Obviously, this process will further fuel global dollar inflation."

Crude oil was USD140 in June 2008. It was USD70 this week. That is not a store of value. Since that 2008 date it has also hit a low of USD19.8. In the last year values have got from USD111 to USD70. There is no logical argument for using something as volatile as this as a reserve currency.

You misundertand my point.  I am talking about oil exporting nations (ie they generate surpluses) storing their excess "profits" in gold, as opposed to USD which is what they have done since 1971 when the US went off the gold standard.  Storing them in USD is pointless as it doesn't keep up with the price of oil.  Gold, on the other hand, does.
More and more nations are reducing their holdings of USTs as reserve assets and replacing them with holding physical gold.

How did gold do as a store of value between 1980 and the millennium? Has it much of a store of value then?

Anyone can cherry pick a date range where you can make most things look good or bad. I was trying to be constructive and explain how the USD is seeing a reduction in its use as a global reserve asset.
Maybe the Central Banks that are stacking gold instead of USTs have it wrong as there is an aribtrary period over which gold decreases in value against oil: https://twitter.com/LukeGromen/status/1641431605452369921

3

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 05, 2023, 06:11:13 PM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

Would tracking oil prices be good?

Oil prices are 50% of what they were in 2007. And 3 years ago they were 13% of their 2007 value. I can only imagine the consequences of sovereign wealth fluctuating like that. I think that is one of the reasons why oil producing countries have tried to invest in alternative assets.

It's certainly better than the historical alternative, storing their profits in US Treasuries as oil has increased from $2 per barrel to what is now a low of $67 (and occassionally over $100 per barrel)

Are you for real?

If you invested to hold in 2007 and your chosen store of wealth was oil then today you would have lost 50% of your capital and received no income in the intervening 15 years. The comforting news being 3 years ago you would have lost 87% of your capital.

You are stating that USD has done worse. What are the numbers you are using?

OK, you chose 2007, so I'm not picking the time comparison.

In 2007 you could buy approx 10 barrels of oil for ounce of gold (source: https://www.macrotrends.net/1380/gold-to-oil-ratio-historical-chart) and today you can buy 26 barrels of oil for an ounce of gold, so gold has increased in value by 2.6 times vs oil.

In USD terms in 2007 a barrel of oil cost cost approx $70 per barrel which is pretty much the same price as today. So the USD has stayed at parity vs oil since 2007.

This is what I mean by a net exporting country is much better to store their reserves in gold than US Treasuries as it maintains their purchasing power of real life commodities much better than USD does.  Yes, you forego an interest, but the interest you receive is less than the underlying currency is being devalued by.

This isn't just my opinion, in a speech Putin gave in June last year he said:
"According to the IMF, global currency reserves are at $7.1 trillion and 2.5 trillion euros now. These reserves are devalued at an annual rate of about 8 percent. Moreover, they can be confiscated or stolen any time if the United States dislikes something in the policy of the states involved. …
According to analyst estimates, and this is an objective analysis, a conversion of global reserves will begin just because there is no room for them with such shortages. They will be converted from weakening currencies into real resources like food, energy commodities and other raw materials. Other countries will be doing this, of course. Obviously, this process will further fuel global dollar inflation."

Crude oil was USD140 in June 2008. It was USD70 this week. That is not a store of value. Since that 2008 date it has also hit a low of USD19.8. In the last year values have got from USD111 to USD70. There is no logical argument for using something as volatile as this as a reserve currency.

You misundertand my point.  I am talking about oil exporting nations (ie they generate surpluses) storing their excess "profits" in gold, as opposed to USD which is what they have done since 1971 when the US went off the gold standard.  Storing them in USD is pointless as it doesn't keep up with the price of oil.  Gold, on the other hand, does.
More and more nations are reducing their holdings of USTs as reserve assets and replacing them with holding physical gold.

4

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 04, 2023, 09:38:40 PM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

Would tracking oil prices be good?

Oil prices are 50% of what they were in 2007. And 3 years ago they were 13% of their 2007 value. I can only imagine the consequences of sovereign wealth fluctuating like that. I think that is one of the reasons why oil producing countries have tried to invest in alternative assets.

It's certainly better than the historical alternative, storing their profits in US Treasuries as oil has increased from $2 per barrel to what is now a low of $67 (and occassionally over $100 per barrel)

Are you for real?

If you invested to hold in 2007 and your chosen store of wealth was oil then today you would have lost 50% of your capital and received no income in the intervening 15 years. The comforting news being 3 years ago you would have lost 87% of your capital.

You are stating that USD has done worse. What are the numbers you are using?

OK, you chose 2007, so I'm not picking the time comparison.

In 2007 you could buy approx 10 barrels of oil for ounce of gold (source: https://www.macrotrends.net/1380/gold-to-oil-ratio-historical-chart) and today you can buy 26 barrels of oil for an ounce of gold, so gold has increased in value by 2.6 times vs oil.

In USD terms in 2007 a barrel of oil cost cost approx $70 per barrel which is pretty much the same price as today. So the USD has stayed at parity vs oil since 2007.

This is what I mean by a net exporting country is much better to store their reserves in gold than US Treasuries as it maintains their purchasing power of real life commodities much better than USD does.  Yes, you forego an interest, but the interest you receive is less than the underlying currency is being devalued by.

This isn't just my opinion, in a speech Putin gave in June last year he said:
"According to the IMF, global currency reserves are at $7.1 trillion and 2.5 trillion euros now. These reserves are devalued at an annual rate of about 8 percent. Moreover, they can be confiscated or stolen any time if the United States dislikes something in the policy of the states involved. …
According to analyst estimates, and this is an objective analysis, a conversion of global reserves will begin just because there is no room for them with such shortages. They will be converted from weakening currencies into real resources like food, energy commodities and other raw materials. Other countries will be doing this, of course. Obviously, this process will further fuel global dollar inflation."

5

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 04, 2023, 07:47:13 AM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

Would tracking oil prices be good?

Oil prices are 50% of what they were in 2007. And 3 years ago they were 13% of their 2007 value. I can only imagine the consequences of sovereign wealth fluctuating like that. I think that is one of the reasons why oil producing countries have tried to invest in alternative assets.

It's certainly better than the historical alternative, storing their profits in US Treasuries as oil has increased from $2 per barrel to what is now a low of $67 (and occassionally over $100 per barrel)

6

General discussion / Re: The US$$ as the World's reserve currency

« on: May 04, 2023, 07:04:03 AM »

I don't see much risk to the US$ not being the currency that is used the most throughout the world.

However, I can see it's days as being the world's reserve asset (ie countries save the majority of their surpluses in US Treasuries) being numbered.  Gold will go back to being a bigger part of countries storing their savings, note it hit an all time high valuation yesterday with the continued difficulty of US regional banks, as will Bitcoin (not "Crypto", but Bitcoin).  The valuation of gold will have to rise significantly in price if it is used to settle net trading accounts as the energy trading surpluses / defecits are many multiples of the value of the gold being produced.

The change didn't start with the US sanctioning Russia's FX reserves, but it certainly accelerated the speed of this change.
Energy producers have known for some time that it doesn't make any sense for them to store the profits of their energy sales in US Treasuries when their fossil fuels are finite yet the value of the USD decreases every year due to inflation.  They would literally be safer keeping their excess exports in the ground as it will hold it's purchasing power better for future years.  But storing their reserves in gold is different as gold has historically kept its value compared to the price of oil; something the USD definitely hasn't done in the last 40 / 50 years.

7

GAA Discussion / Re: Sam Maguire permutations

« on: April 17, 2023, 06:56:29 AM »

Can someone clarify if it has been already sorted that number 1 seeds in ulster are grouped with number 2 seeds in leinster I think it is while the number 2 seeds in ulster will be grouped with the number 1 seeds in leinster?  Similar scenario with munster and connacht?

Yes, it would appear that the 1 and 2 seeds are being matched from their provinces such that the provincial finalists all have 2 weeks until their 1st round robin game

20-21.05.2023 (Sat/Sun)
GAA Football All-Ireland Senior Championship | Round 1 (Home & Away)
(Involving Munster & Connacht Finalists)
Seed 1 v Seed 3
Seed 2 v Seed 4

27-28.05.2023 (Sat/Sun)
GAA Football All-Ireland Senior Championship | Round 1 (Home & Away)
(Involving Leinster & Ulster Finalists)
Seed 1 v Seed 3
Seed 2 v Seed 4

8

General discussion / Re: Cryptocurrency

« on: March 13, 2023, 09:34:54 PM »

Nothing to do with Thiel and the Venture Capitalist crew?

How does what a "VC crew" did impact on the ability of a Bank to be able to honour their deposits when they are requested?

9

General discussion / Re: Cryptocurrency

« on: March 13, 2023, 08:02:23 PM »

The irony.
The current bout of finanical instability is caused purely by the Fed.

Print loads of dollars in QE from 2019-21, banks invested a lot of these funds in Treasuries etc. Indeed due to liquidity regulations they are mandated to hold a minimun percentage of HQLA (High Quality Liquid Assets) in order to reduce their riskiness.

But because of all the financial easing inflation started to run away, so then the Fed rapidly raised rates as well as remove approx $1tn from the system by way of QT.
Due to the rapid rise in interest rates the market value of the Treasuries fall.  The rising interest rates also cause businesses to struggle (this is one of the prescriptions for reducing inflation) which means there is less cash deposited at banks.  When account holders ask to withdraw their cash and the banks don't have sufficient cash on hand (due to fractional reserve banking) then they need to sell their assets to raise the cash.  But their assets are now worth less due to higher interest rates.  This means the banks lose money so then try to raise fresh equity, but this then spooks the market and a bank run starts.

Every single aspect of that is caused by the Fed / Central Bank actions, not crypto.  How did they not realise that increasing rates from 0% to 5% wouldn't result in these issues with huge chunks of banks' assets having to be marked to market?

Given the way the Fed has used this to close down Signature Bank (even though it supposedly wasn't in that much trouble) as it and Silvergate were the two most crypto friendly banks it is hard not to wonder if we are approaching the 3rd stage of the below Mahatma Gandi quote:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win"

How does the Fed / Central Bank get the trains back on the track? The QE started in 2019 due to worsening conditions in the Repo market, the printing resulted in rising asset prices and really high inflation. They raise rates for 12 months and reduce their balance sheet for 7 or 8 months and we now end up in this crisis.  I'm sure they'll go back to easing again, indeed it could perhaps already be said that easy has started again yesterday with banks able to post their under water collateral with the Fed to borrow the full nominal value.  What happens when inflation goes crazy again?
I've said for a couple of years here that I don't know if Bitcoin is the answer, but the current system seems to be running on fumes and I'm happy to take a punt on Bitcoin given the evidence before me.

10

General discussion / Re: What happened the DUP thread?

« on: March 09, 2023, 10:53:40 AM »

I do wonder how long the DUP will take to give their thoughts on the Framework.
Or indeed, how long they will be allowed to take by the UK govt.

Surely there isn't any logical reason why, more than a week later, they still haven't given their opinion on whether they can support it or not.

11

GAA Discussion / Re: Most likely provincial finalists

« on: March 02, 2023, 01:41:29 PM »

is their a scenario where say tyrone dont make sam maguire group stages.

In theory it is possible, although highly unlikely.
The greater number of provincial finalists that come from Div 3 or 4 the less Div 2 (and in theory, ultimately, Div 1) teams will make the Sam Maguire based on their league placings.

12

GAA Discussion / Re: GAA WTF

« on: February 11, 2023, 12:08:19 AM »

How he get away with that for so long?

Who?

13

GAA Discussion / Re: NFL Division 1 2023

« on: February 09, 2023, 08:52:12 AM »

Galway and Annaghdown forward Damien Comer has received some good news from the results of a scan on the leg he injured in a collision with two Roscommon players last Sunday in Pearse Stadium. The injury happened in the early stages of a National League game in Pearse Stadium, which Galway ultimately lost by 0-9 to 0-8. The game was held up for almost 6 minutes as Comer was stretchered off, but it now appears there was no damage to the cruciate ligaments, but severe bone swelling will require a recovery period of 6 to 8 weeks, almost certainly ruling him out of the remainder of the league. With no surgery required, the Galway football management will be confident of having their All-Star forward back for their opening championship game on April 23rd against Mayo or Roscommon in a Connacht semi-final.

A huge relief its not his cruciate but Comer does take a while to get back to his best after returning from injury. Galway are due to play the winners of Mayo & Roscommon 11 weeks from him getting injured, wouldn't be too optimistic about him having much of an impact.

Agreed, I wouldn't bank on any impact in April but hopefully in the new fangled round robin system (I'm assuming that Galway should be there even if relegated from Div one and missing a Connacht final, is there any possible scenario where we miss out?) we'll see Comer back playing well.

If provincial finals panned out like this, last team in Div 1 would not make it.

1st 9 spots
Westmeath - qualified.
Mayo v Sligo
Kerry v Limerick
Kildare v Meath
Derry v Cavan

Div 1 - current standings

Roscommon 10
Armagh 11
Kerry - ranked from provincial
Tyrone 12
Mayo - ranked from provincial
Donegal 13
Dublin promoted 14
Cork promoted 15
Galway 16
Monaghan 17 - Talteann Cup

Many thanks. Interesting to see how it's possible at least.

If that scenario there played out but Galway finished last in Division One and, hypothetically speaking, had managed to win the AI final last July, would we be in a situation where the defending AI champs wouldn't be able to participate in the AI series but the winners of the Tailteann Cup would be?

You would really need probabilities for the provincial finals. The probability of galway, Mayo and ros on the same side of the Connacht draw was 6/20  in the last 20 years.
The probability of Dublin not playing in the Leinster final was 4/20  in the last 20 years.
So 6/20*4/20 = 24/400 = 6%
Multiply by the Munster and Ulster  probabilities  to get less than 1%. So once in a century.

Anything is possible, but the chances of that panning out are way less than 1% (ie once in a century).
For that to happen Dublin have to not get to a Leinster final. Cork have to get promoted ahead of Derry and Meath and then get beaten by Limerick in Munster, and Derry then have to get to the Ulster final where Cavan beat both Armagh and Donegal to get there.
If the current format is maintained I don't see a situation where a Division 1 team misses out on the All Ireland series.

14

General discussion / Re: Lurgan

« on: February 03, 2023, 09:31:16 AM »

I think those warnings go to far to be honest. You are perfectly entitled to discuss anything in the public domain. That is anything that has been said in court and isn’t banned by law. For example the court may in certain cases impose reporting restrictions. Or by law you can’t discuss anything said in court that could lead to the identification of a child defendant, witness, complaint in any trial or a complaint in a sexual case.

For justice to be done it must also be seen to be done. The information disclosed today was wild. The level of sophistication and planning that has allegedly gone into this murder was considerable.

From fake living streams to concocting ways to deliberate contaminate the crime scene so that any evidence linking the defendant to the crime has to be ignored is all very chilling.

What was the deliberate contaminating the crime scene actions? I don't think I read about that in the reports.

15

GAA Discussion / Re: Minor, U17 or U18.. Croke Parks take on it....

« on: February 01, 2023, 01:44:06 PM »

What a mess, yet again.

If the decision was to let counties decide why was this not made prior to Christmas?
It is now too late for this year.  For example, Armagh had already decided to go with the odd numbered years (same as last year) as it would have been too late to change following the anticipated decision from Congress last week.