Recent posts

#1

GAA Discussion / Re: Negativity around current ...

Last post by Rossfan - Today at 04:25:04 PM

Promoted sides akready get a higher seeding than the teams they replaced.
Donegal and Armagh were seeded above Ros and Monaghan this year.

#2

General discussion / Re: Russia invades Ukraine Feb...

Last post by Horse Box - Today at 04:22:32 PM

Same people here who are cheering on Putin will tell you Chavez was a great leader in Venezuela because he stood up to the US. Forget about the fact the country is/was a kleptocratic police state that violently repressed its own citizens.

What a Utopia Iran turned out to be after the Anglo/American covert operation that overthrew the Elected Government in the 1950`s !

#3

GAA Discussion / Re: Negativity around current ...

Last post by Armagh18 - Today at 04:20:33 PM

I think a simple tweak would improve the whole GAA year.

All-Ireland should be restricted to 8 counties. Four provincial winners, (a revamped) Tailteann Cup winners and the next three top placed teams in the league. Two groups of four with top team in each group going through to semi-final and second and third place into quarter finals. These groups would be far more competitive as you have the top 8 teams playing off against each other each week. It would also remove the nonsense we have now of three rounds of group games to reduce the All-Ireland from 16 to 12 teams. It would make the league highly competitive if you brought in a rule that top two teams in division 2 place higher than bottom two teams in division 1 for seeding purposes. Therefore, the likes of Monaghan and Roscommon would have missed out this year. Galway as they finished 6th would have had to win Connaught to stay in the All-Ireland championship (which they did) but it would have added even more excitement and jeopardy to the Connaught Final with the stakes raised knowing the consequences of losing. 

I would then have a second and third national competition for the remaining 25 counties. Tailteann Cup for next 12 teams and a third tier competition for next 12 teams plus New York.

The second tier competition this year would have comprised of Roscommon, Monaghan, Cavan, Cork, Meath, Louth, Fermanagh, Kildare, Down, Westmeath, Clare and Sligo. All very evening matched teams with the carrot and incentive of winning the competition knowing that there is a guaranteed place in the All-Ireland Championship for next year.   

For the third tier you have Antrim, Offaly, Wicklow, Limerick, Laois, Leitrim, Wexford, Longford, Carlow, Tipperary, London, Waterford and New York to be added in a knock-out qualifier game. A criticism of the Tailteann Cup is that with a couple of bigger counties dropping into it, it means that smaller counties such as Leitrim, Carlow etc. still do not have realistic chances of ever winning the competition. In this competition any of the teams named who manage to get a bit of form and momentum has a serious crack at winning it and gaining automatic promotion to the higher grade for the following year.

In this model all of the teams are playing teams of a similar standard, have realistic ambitions of winning a national title at championship level and with an opportunity to advance and move up if they gain success.         

Feck I actually like this!

#4

Tyrone / Re: Tyrone Club Football and H...

Last post by Onthe40 - Today at 04:18:24 PM

this is effectively what we had last year until our ccc went and changed it
From an u16 perspective lads have been training from jan for a march date, which was then moved to may, and has still not started..its absolutely rediculous

the reason club minor was moved to early in year was because it ran too late last year and schools werent happy, so now we have a situation where minors runs from start of year or earlier (preseason training) until sept/oct by looks of it...fekin crazy

#5

General discussion / Re: Russia invades Ukraine Feb...

Last post by Horse Box - Today at 04:17:46 PM

US and many posters here are all in on bringing us closer to nuclear disaster. It's the only way it seems 

100% 

#6

General discussion / Re: Russia invades Ukraine Feb...

Last post by Horse Box - Today at 04:16:07 PM

Moldova unfortunately getting taught how to do democracy just like Ukraine by their US/NATO Overlords :

https://www.eureporter.co/world/moldova/2024/05/15/moldovan-government-shuts-down-7-additional-tv-channels/

More shut down yesterday !

[In the 1990s Ukraine decommissioned its nuclear weapons]

#7

General discussion / Re: Russia invades Ukraine Feb...

Last post by Horse Box - Today at 04:10:13 PM

The shelling of Civilian areas by Ukraine/US/NATO is okay with you then ?

No, of course it is not. Some things will occur in a war that should not and they should be stopped as far as possible. However, the bulk of the blame lies with the country that started the war by invading another one and the war can be stopped by that county withdrawing its forces.

In the twilight zone rambling that we are seeing here, there is a lot of crap about America encouraging Ukraine to join NATO. As far as I know, nobody has ever said that Ukraine should join NATO, but the Ukrainians want to join. In the 1990s Ukraine decommissioned its nuclear weapons and much of its munitions, and it received security guarantees from the US and Russia. Given that Russia has shown every intention of reneging on its agreement Ukraine inevitably sought protection from their other guarantor, WTF do you expect them to do? Lie down and let Russia occupy them?

Ukraine gave up the Soviet nuclear weapons stationed on its soil of which Ukraine had physical but no effective operational control .

[nobody has ever said that Ukraine should join NATO]

#8

General discussion / Re: Russia invades Ukraine Feb...

Last post by Horse Box - Today at 04:05:14 PM

The shelling of Civilian areas by Ukraine/US/NATO is okay with you then ?

No, of course it is not. Some things will occur in a war that should not and they should be stopped as far as possible. However, the bulk of the blame lies with the country that started the war by invading another one and the war can be stopped by that county withdrawing its forces.

In the twilight zone rambling that we are seeing here, there is a lot of crap about America encouraging Ukraine to join NATO. As far as I know, nobody has ever said that Ukraine should join NATO, but the Ukrainians want to join. In the 1990s Ukraine decommissioned its nuclear weapons and much of its munitions, and it received security guarantees from the US and Russia. Given that Russia has shown every intention of reneging on its agreement Ukraine inevitably sought protection from their other guarantor, WTF do you expect them to do? Lie down and let Russia occupy them?

  https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-ukraine-must-join-nato/

#9

General discussion / Re: Westminster General Electi...

Last post by smelmoth - Today at 03:56:36 PM

That really is lazy analysis.

What has defined the 14 years of the Tories in government? How much of that overlaps with Starmer.

The Tories took us out of Europe. Would Starmer have done that?

The Tories have fixated on immigration. Has Starmer?
The Tories have dreamed up bullshit, red meat policies like Rwanda. Has Starmer? Will he back out of the Tory mess?
The Tories are obsessed with Culture Wars and "anti-woke". Has Starmer stoked those issues?
The Tories brought us austerity. As tight as the fiscal situation is, there is no prospect of Osborne era austerity.
The Tories have cosied up to Meloni, Orban etc. No indication or even prospect of Starmer doing likewise.
The big issue of our time is what the Tories are describing as "the green crap". Starmer is miles ahead of the Tories on this.

I don't think anyone even believes that there is a significant overlap between Labour and the Tories on these issues.

Is the Starmer-is-a-Tory trope really just a dissatisfaction with his stance on Gaza? Or is it the failure to recognise that whilst in "ming vase" mode Labour are highlighting the economic shitshow they will inherit and dampening down expectations of what they can achieve, and more importantly, how quickly?

Maybe it's easier not to think about these things and roll out the lazy analysis?

I know I posted some of this before, but Starmer is very much in step with tory style politics on a lot of issues.

He rowed back on his pledge to nationalise water, energy and rail.

He rowed back on a pledge to abolish tuition fees.

In November 2022, he announced his intention to end 'immigration dependency', a stance so right wing that he won the priase of Nigel Farage (he also complained that there are too many foreigners working in the NHS).

He pledged that he would "work shoulder to shoulder with trade unions to stand up for working people". Since taking the party leadership, he banned Labour frontbenchers from attending picket lines and even sacked one of his MPs for standing alongside striking RMT workers.

He has efectively led a purge of as many lef wing/socialists as possible form his party.

He backs the torys on a cap on child benefits and on bedroom taxes.

He has a looong history of antagonism towards the trans community, and backs the tories on a range of trans exclusionary policies.

When the tories announced their intention to cut their spening on tackling climate change, Saarmer was quick out of the blocks to criticise them, and pledged Labour would spend £28bn on it. Within a few months, he slashed that figure to £4.7bn.

Labour pledged to support "whatever measures the government takes" on covid and later praised the Tory response to the crisis as "an amazing piece of work".

He has refused to support calls to rejoin the EU single market or customs union.

He has refused to overturn the two child benefit rule.

Nobody is suggesting that he is identical to the tories, nor worse than them, but the fact is that on a lot of issues you could barely slide a cigarette paper between them. He certainly is not the personification of the sort of centre-left, union supporting Labour party that most people traditionally would have had.

Is your argument that the economic circumstances are there to a) buy back to those utilities? b) they should be bought back whether they are affordable or not or c) there should be enforced confiscation?

I assume you are not arguing that the economy has improved or stayed the same. What is your view on the policy of taking the rail franchises back for free as they expire? Maybe that's a policy you agree with?

Are you against GBE perse or it is the full nationalisation of the energy industry you want? Have you a costing and funding proposal for that? I don't think Starmer ever promised to nationalise that whole industry. I could be wrong? Surely someone would've accused him of talking bollix at the time if they thought that was what he meant?

Immigration dependency is a bad thing. Immigration is not. His stance on immigration is very far from the Tories.

The £28bn pledge has been cut. But not to £4.7bn. GBE alone is over £8bn.

Is it appropriate for font benchers to be on picket lines alongside people you have to negotiate with if you get into to power? The unions seemed pretty happy last week with Starmer. What are they getting wrong?

What is the long history antagonism on trans? I know the Tories lambaste him for being pro Trans. Don't know the wider story you refer to.

#10

General discussion / Re: The Many Faces of US Polit...

Last post by Muck Savage - Today at 03:45:29 PM

Not sure about that.  Inflation and (in Michigan particularly) genocide are his electoral issues.  Short of standing aside for one of The Squad, not sure any fresh faces would have handled either of these issues differently.

I think you're overestimating the effects of Gaza inside the US. Especially as Trump is even worse.

May not mean people vote for Trump but a lot of die hard democrats and anti Trumpers in this area saying they won't vote for Biden ever again. If that sentiment is in some of the swing states it might be all That is needed.