Joe Brolly

Started by randomtask, July 31, 2011, 05:28:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

RedHand88

Quote from: armaghniac on January 31, 2018, 10:12:57 PM
Joe talking to Pat Kenny on TV3. Two of GAABoard's favourites together.

It should have been T Fearon interviewing him.

playwiththewind1st

Quote from: RedHand88 on February 01, 2018, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on January 31, 2018, 10:12:57 PM
Joe talking to Pat Kenny on TV3. Two of GAABoard's favourites together.

It should have been T Fearon interviewing him.

Now that would be my vision of hell.

Avondhu star

Quote from: RedHand88 on February 01, 2018, 11:12:14 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on January 31, 2018, 10:12:57 PM
Joe talking to Pat Kenny on TV3. Two of GAABoard's favourites together.

It should have been T Fearon interviewing him.

His doctors wouldn't recommend that.
Lee Harvey Oswald , your country needs you

Seany

I know I shouldn't, but Joe Brolly's article today has to be a new low, even for him.  He's like that old band who had a few great albums but now is writing just pure shite because he knows he has to and in any case, he'll get paid.  Here's his latest, with annotations in red from me;

I am constantly advising clubs about disciplinary offences and CCC investigations. It is a depressing thing to see the contempt in which volunteers, players and clubs are held by the authorities.
That's right Joe - It's meddlers like you and your like in the legal profession  who have the GAA rule book the way it is because you can find some stupid loophole to get the local thug off breaking a man's jaw.
The GAA's chaotic, complex rule book, with its built-in presumptions, has created a tyranny. It has given the nod to the GAA courts to interpret them - if at all possible - in a way that is against the GAA community.
Not really – Just trying to interpret them in a way that makes the games fair.
This explains why it is virtually impossible to get a fair hearing, and why so many good GAA volunteers are left seething. After a recent case I was involved in, the chairman and secretary of the club left the hearing swearing that they were finished with the GAA. If you're involved with the GAA, you've been there.
I have been there, though I've never been so moved as to want to be finished with the GAA.  See the last paragraph of your article Joe and you'll understand why these 'good GAA volunteers can't always be trusted'.
Take for example the rule that the referee's report is "presumed to be correct in all factual matters and may only be rebutted where unedited video or other compelling evidence contradicts it". This is actually interpreted in the following way: 'You smart-asses might have a video showing the whole episode, and establishing that it was the number 12 and not the 10, but the referee says it was number 10 and so there is nothing we can do. We're sorry that he's the captain and he's going to miss the first under 16 final in the club's history, but our hands are tied. Next case.'
That's actually legally wrong Joe and slightly embarrassing for someone in your profession.  Video evidence, or the witness of a 'person of standing' such as a member of CCC who might have been at the match can and has on many occasions trumped the referee's report.  The referee is also asked to 'clarify' his report which can lead to a greater insight into what actually happened.  But yes – the referee must be respected and his report must be seen as authentic, otherwise it becomes total chaos Joe, when people like you show up to contest it.
If Pope Francis himself appeared in person and said he had witnessed the entire incident and that it was the number 12, they would still suspend the number 10. The chairman of the disciplinary hearing would say, "We fully understand the doctrine of papal infallibility, but, unfortunately, it does not appear anywhere in the GAA rule book. Holy Father, our hands are tied."
You're wrong on that Joe.  As above.  You're embarrassing yourself now.
The same applies to our approach to transfers, which has long been perverse and unfair. I cannot tell you the number of cases I have had to take to the DRA (the independent review body that is outside the GAA) in order to get a fair result. Four years ago, I advised on and drafted the transfer applications of young twins, both of whom were extremely talented sportsmen.


The requests were entirely reasonable. (according to you) The board rejected them of course. They appealed to the Hearings Committee, which expressed great sympathy in that classic GAA way, then sadly rejected them. A few months ago, on my way to another similar travesty, I remembered the twins and rang their father. "They haven't kicked a ball since Joe. They switched to the soccer and are going very well."
Not even playing for their school, Joe? Not knowing the ins and outs of this one, it sounds like a couple of glory hunters who wanted to leave their own club and go after the medals.  I thought you didn't like this Joe – Remember the time you went after Seanie Johnston?

I am involved in a case at the moment where the parents (both fanatical GAA people) are seriously considering putting their house on the market so their young sons can transfer to the club they played with under sanction for the last four years. The emotional toll of this is huge. None of this is relevant. Computer says no.
Sanctions Joe.  Yeah – that's the transfer rule that allows wee clubs to survive.  If you can't field at underage, you 'loan' the player out to a bigger club to let him get hurling and then he agrees to come back to you when he's older.  Is that what you're complaining about?
Of all the unsavoury aspects of the rules, perhaps the worst is the rule that requires club officials to identify supporters who might have come onto the pitch or been involved in some sort of incident.
That's right Joe – It's called 'integrity'.  You write quite a lot about that.
I am currently involved in a case where senior club officials had to identify some of their own supporters, whose images had been enhanced by a professional audio-visual company. This had obviously cost the county board a considerable amount, but when it comes to humiliating the clubs and club people, money is no object. As long as the county manager gets everything he wants, nothing else matters.
Imagine the county board trying to drill down to get justice.  And you call this 'humiliating the clubs?'  Really Joe?  A county Board trying to enhance footage of some thug striking a young lad and you call this 'humiliating the club?'  Your sense of justice is quite strange, for a man of the law.
Many years ago, Croke Park held one of the first investigations using video footage into shenanigans during a game. All parties were called to Croke Park, including the respective chairmen and secretaries. When the audience was assembled, the curtains were drawn and the projector was switched on. The chair of the panel paused the film as each fresh outrage occurred.

One of the players in attendance was seen pole-axing an opposing selector. There was really no defence, so he was punished there and then with a suspension of some months. Plainly annoyed, he had to sit there as the rest of the drama unfolded, his chairman and secretary beside him.
Imagine the injustice of asking a thug who 'poleaxed a selector' to wait until the end of the hearing.  What utter nonsense Joe.  Did the Indo really allow you to print that paragraph, or did you get to the end of the article and realise your word count wasn't big enough?
There was, however, one man who could not be identified by the panel. He was a supporter, who could clearly be seen wearing his team's colours under a sheepskin jacket. At one point, he ran onto the pitch and could be seen on the footage throwing a flurry of punches at an opposing player. The footage was paused at the appropriate moment, capturing the offender's face in full technicolor glory. "I am now going to ask the chairman to identify this man to the panel," said the 'judge'. The chairman squinted, and scratched his head and whispered to the secretary beside him.
After a whole palaver, he said, "I am sorry members of the panel, but I have never seen this man before in my life." "The same question to the secretary," said the judge. The secretary went through the same pretence, shaking his head and squinting at the screen, before sadly turning to the panel and saying, "Hand on heart, I cannot identify this man."At which point, the disgruntled player said, "Well that's strange, since you were both at his wedding."

A lovely funny little story to finish Joe and a total contradiction of everything you've written about the 'poor volunteer'.  And of course, the CCC, hearings Committee.  Are they not also volunteers too? And the victims of the thuggery you are making a joke of? And this little story illustrates the very reason the GAA needs its rule book Joe.  Because people like you will take the side of people like those who will defend the actions of thugs in their club.  You talk a lot about values Joe.  If you find that story funny, you don't have any yourself.  This article is your worst ever.  As a man who is involved in law, it is a serious indictment on your own world view.  It is an illogical mess, full of contradictions and plainly legally incorrect.

Not for the first time, but the Indo just loves that the GAA got another boot today form its favourite puppet...

longballin

be better to post that and your critique after... very difficult to follow that

trileacman

Quote from: longballin on February 11, 2018, 07:02:06 PM
be better to post that and your critique after... very difficult to follow that

Not that hard to follow.

I just read the headline now to see who he's ranting about this week. It's such shocking journalism you'd wonder how he gets away with it. Imagine how poor the journalism  world would be if "I was talking to some nameless fella last week and he agrees with the point I'm about to make" was acceptable by a professional writer. Jesus his methods of persuasion are so poor you'd wonder how he excelled as a solicitor, his presented arguments are only fodder for imbeciles.
Fantasy Rugby World Cup Champion 2011,
Fantasy 6 Nations Champion 2014

Main Street

Quote from: trileacman on February 11, 2018, 08:51:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 11, 2018, 07:02:06 PM
be better to post that and your critique after... very difficult to follow that

Not that hard to follow.
Each part of the article could be
Quotequoted
and the reply inserted under each quote.
As we usually do

Shouldn't this bit should be in red?
'Imagine the injustice of asking a thug who 'poleaxed a selector' to wait until the end of the hearing.  What utter nonsense Joe.  Did the Indo really allow you to print that paragraph, or did you get to the end of the article and realise your word count wasn't big enough?'


Seany


longballin

Quote from: Seany on February 12, 2018, 01:23:14 PM
That's right.

trawled through it... you make good points though expecting club officials to hand in offenders is a bit fanciful...

easytiger95

Quote from: longballin on February 12, 2018, 01:39:13 PM
Quote from: Seany on February 12, 2018, 01:23:14 PM
That's right.

trawled through it... you make good points though expecting club officials to hand in offenders is a bit fanciful...

Well if the rule is there, as officials, they should be adhering to it. And also, the amount of latitude given to head the balls who shouldn't be anywhere near a match is unreal in Gaelic Games - it shouldn't take that much moral courage to call them out.

Great critique Seany, it really is dodgy stuff from Brolly.

Main Street

Quote from: longballin on February 12, 2018, 01:39:13 PM
Quote from: Seany on February 12, 2018, 01:23:14 PM
That's right.

trawled through it... you make good points though expecting club officials to hand in offenders is a bit fanciful...
There was a case not so long ago where some Antrim officials went out of their way and snitched on one of their players,  based on a fuzzy phone video recording they were sent by the Croke Park KGB.
Fortunately, Perry Joe Brolly got on the case after the player texted one of Joe's 10 phones. I mean,  Who you gonna call? (gaabuster). After trawling through all the flattering texts Joe receives on a daily basis and all the texts of support from every top player in the country, this text finally caught Joe's attention and he donned his cape.
Joe made a dramatic entrance in the nick of time just before the appeals 'judge' could bang his gavel and unjustly condemn the player for an eternity. Joe saved the day yet again with an appeal of great genius that only Joe could construct and got the player off.

Seany

...although he actually never appeared at the hearing.

longballin

Quote from: Seany on February 12, 2018, 03:51:26 PM
...although he actually never appeared at the hearing.

he's been called on to advise a lot of clubs and counties though they might not want to admit it.

Keyser soze

Quote from: Main Street on February 12, 2018, 01:07:43 PM
Quote from: trileacman on February 11, 2018, 08:51:12 PM
Quote from: longballin on February 11, 2018, 07:02:06 PM
be better to post that and your critique after... very difficult to follow that

Not that hard to follow.
Each part of the article could be
Quotequoted
and the reply inserted under each quote.
As we usually do

Shouldn't this bit should be in red?
'Imagine the injustice of asking a thug who 'poleaxed a selector' to wait until the end of the hearing.  What utter nonsense Joe.  Did the Indo really allow you to print that paragraph, or did you get to the end of the article and realise your word count wasn't big enough?'

I think you have completely got the wrong end of the stick on this particular point, it appears to me that JB is setting the scene for the offender's remark at the end of the meeting dropping the Chairman in it, rather than showing that him being made to sit through the whole meeting was an injustice.

Not of course that any such scenario ever took place I would imagine, apart from inside Joe's brain lol


Jinxy

Me, when I read Joe's latest anecdote-riddled article.

If you were any use you'd be playing.