Messages

1

GAA Discussion / Re: Ewan McKenna calls for Jack oconnor to step down.

« on: March 12, 2023, 08:38:43 PM »

Its actually a little bit sad to see the direction that he has gone down. A few years ago I thought he was a good sports journalist with a questioning mind who wasn't afraid to ask difficult questions. He really should have stuck to that. 

However since lockdown he has gone into history, politics, epidemiology, social issues and any other topic that he can get a reaction from by holding the contrarian view. I can only put it down to a shortage of work and a lot of frustration at the way his career has panned out. I don't think he is a bad fellow nor does he believe half of what he actually says either but he sure has become an insufferable know it all. This attracts a special little army of sycophantic freedom party types who keep him going. He purports to call out bullshit so the Bryson interview should be a dream for him as there is so much material to call out. It'll be worth listening to see how he gets on.

+1

I used to think he was an exceptional journalist, had serious respect for him

I now genuinely pity him - he just oozes pathetic desperation

2

Hurling Discussion / Re: Hurling 2023

« on: February 09, 2023, 09:53:09 PM »

How feasible would it be to expand the geographical footprint of hurling in Down and Antrim ?
What would you need do? The 2 counties have decent population density even after allowing for religion 
and Belfast is split between the 2 .

Could be wrong but I think they are making decent progress in Down, with a few non peninsula clubs starting to nip at the heels of the big 3?

The higher skill levels required is a huge barrier to entry for clubs - from both a playing and coaching perspective

Non traditional clubs nearly always need a strong core of die hard hurling men to establish themselves

You tend to see someone with drive getting it started, but once they lose interest/circumstances change (or it starts to interfere with the local footballers) then it tends to shrivel away again

That or a well respected blow-in who marries into the parish

3

GAA Discussion / Re: R.I.P. Farrandeelin

« on: February 07, 2023, 09:30:42 AM »

RIP.

Weird thing this board

I know we're all mostly anonymous online personas, but you do feel a sense that you know the person behind it

Condolences to his family

4

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: February 03, 2023, 08:36:48 PM »

After the balls up on the day, this was the best way to handle it for all parties concerned.

Glen assessed that the chances of a win weren’t high and that a defeat could derail another season for them.

But they had a point to make and they’ve now made it.

They now go into next season with the fire in the belly burning bright

They’ve also well and truly taken the moral high ground.

Kilmacud get to keep their cup

Croke Park avoids a massive handling.

Come June this whole episode will be forgotten.

As long as it’s not forgotten to the extent that the rules around subs don’t get changed.  Major tighten up needed.

5

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: February 03, 2023, 08:05:39 PM »

Glen chairman phones relevant GAA mandarin and says - "We're going to appeal, award us a replay and we'll decline it.  BUT, we need something for it."

GAA award replay

Glen decline

Both respective organisations look good in the public eye

Glen get a big cheque.


This is how it should play out if anyone had any sense.

Ahem… just the team holiday to go now.

6

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: February 03, 2023, 10:14:41 AM »

Forgive me if its already been discussed (I haven't read all of the thread), but is there any reason why the GAA can't do substitutions the way they do them in soccer?

At the halfway point on the sideline, players come off before substitute goes on. Ref or linesman oversees it?

You see how long it takes a soccer player to walk off when he wants to waste time? Then treble that as a player at the far corner of a GAA pitch (a smart manager would tell the player coming off to head to the far corner before sub is signalled) would have nearly 3 times as far to go, at walking or limping pace this would take too much time

Gie them 20s to get off then yellow card them if they arent off in that time

They are coming off anyway so unless they are already on a yellow card then they are not going to worry about getting one. It’s not like soccer where yellow cards are totted up and you get suspended once you get a certain amount

You'd imagine the introduction of something like this is an absolute certainty to eventually come out of this mess. I would also introduce no subs in injury time to cut out the knavery that KC were at too - not unique to them obviously.

I'd throw this up for discussion too.

The ref can add on the time OK, but every bit as much as killing time, teams use the subs to kill momentum in the dying seconds/minutes.

7

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: February 01, 2023, 08:24:52 AM »

If Glen win it through KC refusing to play the replay will it have a big Asterisk or a small one beside it? Would they celebrate it?

What do you think.

Personally I don’t care, we’ve won it already on the pitch

Lol - you asked the question

 

I’m gauging opinion… plenty of interviewers ask questions but don’t need to give answers. I personally don’t care as I’m neither from Glen or KC

Riiiiiight

8

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 09:07:15 PM »

If Glen win it through KC refusing to play the replay will it have a big Asterisk or a small one beside it? Would they celebrate it?

What do you think.

Personally I don’t care, we’ve won it already on the pitch

Lol - you asked the question

 

9

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 08:48:24 PM »

i think most neutrals are bored of the  whole thing now anyway.

Plus one for this

Not sure about this

If this board is anything to go by

I don't know if there's a Glen or Crokes man on here

But we've still had 10-odd pages of discussion today alone


**Edit

Driven, for the most part, by a Galway man

10

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 04:54:56 PM »

Seconds or minutes, they shouldn't have had 16 active players on the pitch

Mullin was literally 2 metres from being off the pitch!!

Absolutely, except for the bit where you take the player off 

Amazing insights lads.
How exactly were Crokes supposed to get word to Mullin?

Crokes management are at the half way line. They fully expect the sub to tell Mullin, but the ref allows the quick 45 to proceed before he gets there.

There's not a single player on either side looking to see what's happening on the sideline, including Mullin. They are all 100% concentrating on the Glen man lining up the 45 and thinking about how to create or stop a scoring chance. 

The ref is obliged to stop play until the process is complete. He failed to do that. He failed to rectify it. He failed to mention it in his report. The DRA will lay all the blame on him,  and deservedly so.

Are you serious?

The big feckin board that the 4th official holds up with the numbers on it
Or the PA system
Or the big screen in CP

I said before - I don't think Kilmacud were deliberately cheating

But they are certainly guilty of being INCREDIBLY careless

To be fair to Mannion he did look up at the screen the player did go to him, he looked a bit bemused at coming off also, but the other lad went to a position and didn't Mullin didn't look up or across to the sideline, there would have been a good bit of noise going on and who actually looks over at the boards or the big screen when playing, its purely for the supporters the board.

Mullin's made the mistake, KC didn't react to the player not coming off the pitch, the 4th official or referee failed to take the sub off before the last kick and that ended up with this cluster f**k which will end up with KC sending the cup up in a bus to Glen.

They'll look over the next time

11

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 04:51:08 PM »

Hypothetical scenario

Mullin comes off but Kilmacud don't get the sub on in time

45 is taken and Glen score a goal

Do Kilmacud just roll over and say nothing

"Refereeing mistake, just suck it up and move on"

Do they fcuk

12

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 04:44:37 PM »

Seconds or minutes, they shouldn't have had 16 active players on the pitch

Mullin was literally 2 metres from being off the pitch!!

Absolutely, except for the bit where you take the player off 

Amazing insights lads.
How exactly were Crokes supposed to get word to Mullin?

Crokes management are at the half way line. They fully expect the sub to tell Mullin, but the ref allows the quick 45 to proceed before he gets there.

There's not a single player on either side looking to see what's happening on the sideline, including Mullin. They are all 100% concentrating on the Glen man lining up the 45 and thinking about how to create or stop a scoring chance. 

The ref is obliged to stop play until the process is complete. He failed to do that. He failed to rectify it. He failed to mention it in his report. The DRA will lay all the blame on him,  and deservedly so.

Are you serious?

The big feckin board that the 4th official holds up with the numbers on it
Or the PA system
Or the big screen in CP

I said before - I don't think Kilmacud were deliberately cheating

But they are certainly guilty of being INCREDIBLY careless

13

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 04:05:01 PM »

The rules apply for the whole of a game, not most of it.
If a rule was broken the appropriate action has to be taken or else the rules become a joke and no-one follows any of them.
No whether or not the GAA cover themselves in glory when it comes to enforcing their own rules is entirely another question, but for the purposes of this game a rule was broken and action had to be take in accordance with the rules as they are written. It's that simple.

Of course the rules should apply for the 6 seconds that Crokes had an extra player.

But Crokes followed the rules to a tee. They did exactly what you are supposed to do when making a sub. However, there was no opportunity for the player to go off. He's standing on the goalline focused on the opponent about to hit the 45 and the ref allows the 45 to be taken before anyone can get word to him. The officials are notified of their error, Mullin is notified and immediately vacates as soon as he's told. Then the officials refuse to allow the 45 to be re-taken and the ref includes absolutely no mention of this fiasco in his report.

But the GAA don't want to throw their ref under the bus, no matter how a big a c**k up he made. And they don't want to go through the hoopla of giving the decision that goes against the social media mobs. So they've made the populist decision.

They've taken the easy way out, knowing full well Crokes will win the appeal, but they've done all they could, so the lawyers and judges can get the blame now when the appeals process is finished and it's confirmed that Crokes won the All Ireland by 2 points and that the ref's (multiple) mistakes, while unfortunate, do not warrant punishment for Kilmacud.

Absolutely, except for the bit where you take the player off 

14

GAA Discussion / Re: Should An Glenn object?

« on: January 31, 2023, 03:26:27 PM »

Crazy, Glen have a right to appeal and no one can take that off them. But personally, I wouldn't want to replay the whole game for 25 seconds of a mistake, that in all probability wouldn't have costed the match. If KC refuse to play and Glen have a walk over that will be the biggest a balls up to the season ever

Really?

Yeah really, the odds are massively stacked against a team looking a last minute goal. My own team gave one up few years ago, heartbreaking as it is it just doesn't happen that often, in all my days playing and ref'ing its rare, we all have memories where it has happened but its not as common.

But look Glen are right to appeal, its in the rules that extra players on the pitch that shouldn't have been there has the option of fine forfeit and replay, personally I wouldn't go looking a replay, old school and all that.

At no point do I think KC cheated in this, this was a mistake by the officials for not ensuring both players left the field like they normally do, no one was instructed to stay on the pitch.

Even if there was no last minute effect, the probability of a last minute goal would not be zero. Last minute goals are tail risk. Here is an example from another sport https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5VZc28Lis4&t=180s

The key point imo is that the match was not decided because of the tail risk. Even if it was for 30 seconds. And Glen couldn't be expected to take their beating if they hadn't been beaten. That's why there has to be a replay. 

Cheating would have to be investigated. I have no idea whether KC cheated or not.  Nobody does.

But you are confident that the result would have changed had the extra player for that amount of time prevented Glen from winning?

I've said already the balls up needed to be looked at and hopefully the main conclusions will be, subs through the middle of the pitch (says in in rules anyway, unless injured, player can leave at nearest point) subs off first before putting subs on.

Adding 20 seconds for each sub, 10 subs overall would put on just over 3 minutes as a bare minimum (should all subs be in the second half) on top of the injury time

Say the chance of a goal in the last minute is 1 in 5. With 15 vs 15 they would have had a 1/5 chance of scoring a goal and winning.
With 15 v 16 they had no chance.

One thing that i'm sick of reading in relation to this is peoples little scenarios  about how the game might have ended if it had of been 15 vs 15 at the end.

Have a laugh every time I see one of these

It's one thing saying it - but the most bewildering thing is that people actually sit and take time to type this nonsense out

15

General discussion / Re: China Coronavirus

« on: January 30, 2023, 02:20:49 PM »

Interesting stuff and not to be discounted

And I'm someone who was/is in favour of the vaccines

Surely a study of excess death rates amongst the vaccinated and unvaccinated by age group would be in order?

It can't be that difficult to conduct and indeed might even be a paperwork exercise in pulling info from some database?

Hypothetically, would the vaccine sceptics out there believe this if no link was found?