Messages

[negotiation]

Meant to go to Disney Paris on Monday with the kids, booked it last summer. Disney aren't closing/won't close so can't claim any money back through travel agency. Checked with the travel insurance and you don't have a claim if you decide not to travel because you are worried about the situation as it is, you have to have it to claim! Travel agents are going on like there's nothing happening at all. It stinks. Even the kids are worried about going now. I agree we shouldn't be going but that's a big bill to swallow and no way to claim any of it back. All paid for too - anybody know anyway around it?

Feel your pain, as mentioned it's all about the money, hopefully folk stop booking in advance after this is all over and give the travel and entertainment the kick up the ass it needs. Imagine the money they have a year or so in advance of your trip.

Government is to blame here.  Insurances won't kick in until the Government bites the bullet (and not all insurances will kick-in even then). They are going to need to put in place a hardline approach eventually, and better to do so soon while it has a chance of being effective. 

Anyone with a bit of sense is way ahead of the government and in reality social distancing is already going on with many businesses cancelling meetings and events and individuals / families cancelling holidays and trips. Meanwhile, government is slavishly sticking to the same line and resultingly, so too are many business and people. 

Absolute madness.  Some nonsense from talking heads on TV about the risk of people rebelling against a lockdown and how strong measures now could be counter productive. Most people I know are ready for action now to avert the kind of disaster that is playing out in Italy.

Until government give the kind of leadership that is required, we are going to be sitting in limbo with some people being highly responsible and others being highly irresponsible and people like yourself stuck in a quandry between going on holiday and cancelling and the government advice letting the travel insurer off the hook. 

Being told today that even if the government come out and warn against travel to certain areas you still can't be refunded. They have to ban all travel to whatever country you are heading to. Travel companies make you feel like a dipstick when you try to talk to them - nothing to worry about! Even to rearrange the park/hotel package and lose the flights you have to pick dates now when you've no idea what's ahead of us and you lose your ATOL cover because it's no longer a package. Pricks.

The principle of my child's school is in negotiation with the travel company after school ski trip on Saturday cancelled, bunch of greedy whores, hopefully this whole sorry episode changes the landscape for these companies, they have 50K from this school for a trip that can't happen and they are in negotiations about any possible refund!

Update on this. The bastards have said it going to cost 1.5 times to twice the price if we go in October/November time. You can't say someone isn't taking the piss there.

Meant to go to Disney Paris on Monday with the kids, booked it last summer. Disney aren't closing/won't close so can't claim any money back through travel agency. Checked with the travel insurance and you don't have a claim if you decide not to travel because you are worried about the situation as it is, you have to have it to claim! Travel agents are going on like there's nothing happening at all. It stinks. Even the kids are worried about going now. I agree we shouldn't be going but that's a big bill to swallow and no way to claim any of it back. All paid for too - anybody know anyway around it?

Feel your pain, as mentioned it's all about the money, hopefully folk stop booking in advance after this is all over and give the travel and entertainment the kick up the ass it needs. Imagine the money they have a year or so in advance of your trip.

Government is to blame here.  Insurances won't kick in until the Government bites the bullet (and not all insurances will kick-in even then). They are going to need to put in place a hardline approach eventually, and better to do so soon while it has a chance of being effective. 

Anyone with a bit of sense is way ahead of the government and in reality social distancing is already going on with many businesses cancelling meetings and events and individuals / families cancelling holidays and trips. Meanwhile, government is slavishly sticking to the same line and resultingly, so too are many business and people. 

Absolute madness.  Some nonsense from talking heads on TV about the risk of people rebelling against a lockdown and how strong measures now could be counter productive. Most people I know are ready for action now to avert the kind of disaster that is playing out in Italy.

Until government give the kind of leadership that is required, we are going to be sitting in limbo with some people being highly responsible and others being highly irresponsible and people like yourself stuck in a quandry between going on holiday and cancelling and the government advice letting the travel insurer off the hook. 

Being told today that even if the government come out and warn against travel to certain areas you still can't be refunded. They have to ban all travel to whatever country you are heading to. Travel companies make you feel like a dipstick when you try to talk to them - nothing to worry about! Even to rearrange the park/hotel package and lose the flights you have to pick dates now when you've no idea what's ahead of us and you lose your ATOL cover because it's no longer a package. Pricks.

Meant to go to Disney Paris on Monday with the kids, booked it last summer. Disney aren't closing/won't close so can't claim any money back through travel agency. Checked with the travel insurance and you don't have a claim if you decide not to travel because you are worried about the situation as it is, you have to have it to claim! Travel agents are going on like there's nothing happening at all. It stinks. Even the kids are worried about going now. I agree we shouldn't be going but that's a big bill to swallow and no way to claim any of it back. All paid for too - anybody know anyway around it?

Have a PCP deal coming to an end after 4 yrs in April.  Car is in good shape, almost, apart from needing a new bonnet due to an O'Neill's ball  Going to cost approx 550 for fixing it going by prices I've got so far.  Car is under the 4 yr mileage allowance by approx. 1k miles, so no issues on that front.  When I check the price of a like for like car, same miles, in good shape, they're between 6250 and 7000 at dealerships.  (I can buy it outright as part of the PCP deal for 4700)

So my options are:

1: Use car as a trade in for a new one at same dealership.  Don't fix bonnet, when bringing it back and see what they say.
2: Use car as a trade in for a new one at same dealership.  Fix bonnet before returning it.
3: Hand car back and walk away, with bonnet fixed.
4: Buy car outright, will cost 4700, and own the car (prob get that back as a trade-in elsewhere hopefully)

I'm preferably looking for a change, and not necessarily with the same car type/dealership. 

Any thoughts on the most efficient way financially to exit a PCP deal?

I had a similar problem on PCP, couple of marks on different parts of the car. Dealer tried to take about 2k off the lowest value instead of money off the car value when I went to get another car off them. Told him to stick and bought the car outright. I'll get it fixed myself sometime before I trade in again. Put me off PCP completely. Think the salesman was being a knob though as opposed to the system - the dealers manager phoned me flat out after to get me to change my mind.

Anybody any good experiences with PCP? Maybe the car I bought at the time wasn't worth it. Might have been better if it was with a new or newish Merc/BMW/Audi to make it worthwhile

If a club can't put out two adult teams, then they've got fundamental problems, and that's maybe another issue. The thirtysomethings should be hanging in there for the sake of the club to keep the thing rolling. And yes, any 18-year-old should be able to join the Junior panel. Why wouldn't he? If he does need to be minded in training, fine ... the club and team managers should be mature enough to handle something like that. Any 18-year-old who wants to keep playing football is only itching to play with the big boys surely?

That's ideally what you want, a reserve/junior team made up of a mix of young lads coming up, thirty something senior players giving it you their last couple of years and then your eternal reserve players. Old fellas look after the young lads and brings them into the scene nicely. It just doesn't happen anymore though, young lads don't see reserve football as a way in to senior and older lads are holding on at senior longer and retiring out of football completely. It takes a big panel of players to keep 2 teams going throughout a full year.

[Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues]

I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.

Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.

Coaching under 10s last year and between go games fixtures midweek and a plethora of blitz's most weekends it actually was difficult to fit in training sessions to help develop skills.

I realise this is different to other age categories.

I'd agree with that. Someone pointed out in our club the U10s played more matches/blitzes than most other teams in the club seniors included.

If the same effort was put into fixtures at 14-17 maybe there wouldn't be the same drop off.

Reading horror stories of the u19 league in Monaghan and how it fell on its arse last year due to constraints with senior team. I think we have been sold a dud here and it seems clubs in Ulster are voting against it now. There was 8 teams in the ACMFL in 2019 and I would say at a push that only Burren, Mayobridge, Clonduff, Carryduff and Kilcoo would definitely be able to partake in an u19 league in 2020. I hope clubs can push something true at convention to leave age grades as it is, there is no paper or framework out on this yet so I think it should be stopped. 2 years to get ready for this changeover and nothing it print yet! And we complain about brexit! Does anyone involved in club committees or county board level know what's going on with this?

Devil's advocate.

Why do we need an under 19 league?

Why can't 18 year olds play B football until they're ready for the step up, instead of being pulled in two directions?

That would be my thinking on it and I know the hurling clubs in the county are thinking like that. There's a lot of demands at that age, sporting wise and socially too.

Put some effort back into making reserve football a step towards playing senior. Personally I've never thought that playing against your own age group really prepares you for playing adult football but different people/clubs will look differently at that.

any lad in our club who turns 18, ie is no longer U17 will automatically play adult hurling, that's just the way it is as we've poor numbers for a year or two.
No big change in that regard for us, but there's no denying that there's a drop off on lads coming out of the juvenile ranks not playing adult hurling and this new format expedites that by a year...

I know what you're saying, there's a danger that after finishing at u17 there'll be a perceived jump into the senior squad, whereas at the minute they're at least crossing over between minors/reserves/seniors at a point, be it only for that last season.

On the other end of the spectrum, I actually think the U7, U9 and U11 groupings might work better for development because the ages grouped together at that point works well running along side the primary school classes.

Reading horror stories of the u19 league in Monaghan and how it fell on its arse last year due to constraints with senior team. I think we have been sold a dud here and it seems clubs in Ulster are voting against it now. There was 8 teams in the ACMFL in 2019 and I would say at a push that only Burren, Mayobridge, Clonduff, Carryduff and Kilcoo would definitely be able to partake in an u19 league in 2020. I hope clubs can push something true at convention to leave age grades as it is, there is no paper or framework out on this yet so I think it should be stopped. 2 years to get ready for this changeover and nothing it print yet! And we complain about brexit! Does anyone involved in club committees or county board level know what's going on with this?

Devil's advocate.

Why do we need an under 19 league?

Why can't 18 year olds play B football until they're ready for the step up, instead of being pulled in two directions?

That would be my thinking on it and I know the hurling clubs in the county are thinking like that. There's a lot of demands at that age, sporting wise and socially too.

Put some effort back into making reserve football a step towards playing senior. Personally I've never thought that playing against your own age group really prepares you for playing adult football but different people/clubs will look differently at that.

I think people are overestimating the potential strength of second string teams in the ACFL structure.
Remember that if a seconds' team enters into this structure then their games will be at the same time on a Friday night as their senior game.
Take for example if Kilcoo 1sts were in Division 1 and Kilcoo 2nds were in Division 4. Top 13 rule is applicable.
Say the Kilcoo 1sts manager has an injury list of 4/5 and yet still, as most do, wants to bring a panel of 25-28 to the senior game. That's the guts of 33 -35 players out of commission for the 2nds team for their game.
Not withstanding the 2nds squads' own potential injury list/unavailability. That would probably leave half of a 2nds team made up with 3rds players. Consistently this sort of team may be competitive enough at times in Division 4 but definitely not in Division 3.

Mayobridge are the only one with a 3rds team strong enough for that.

[A very difficult watch but don't know how thats a new low, a draw against a team who are only a point behind their league leaders Ajax is hardly a bad result.]

A very difficult watch but don't know how thats a new low, a draw against a team who are only a point behind their league leaders Ajax is hardly a bad result.

Matic & Fred the 2 biggest disappointments, I was happy for Fred to get his chance but he's shown nothing to suggest he's even a premier league player; He can get about the pitch quickly enough but thats all he's shown so far. Matic is finished, he'll be lucky to get a decent deal when he leaves United next summer. A midfielder is a must in Jan, there'll be average players available for loan who are better than those two, everyone keeps talking about lack of goals but we're not creating any chances although Rashford spends far too much time outside the areas when United are attacking. Ole may well be out of his depth but it does't matter who's in charge of this lot at the moment.

The result isolated isn't that bad, but as a sequence of terrible performances it doesn't help his case. I'm 100% behind not changing the manager again at this point but the questions are stacking up. There's a bit of revisionism already with how people are looking at Jose's time there but when you look at the performance of the players that he bought, they're all shite to put it mildly.

I can understand the thought process behind keeping Mata and Young around a youthful squad but playing them all the time is madness. Matic is done completely done and when he's the same team as those other 2 the whole thing is way too slow. Lingard has been useless too. Rashford isn't a 9 no matter how much he wants to be. McTominay is a good lad but he needs a top layer alongside him to let Pogba push up. But he'll not be at the club next season either I don't think. Saying that I don't know who'll take him unless he starts playing a bit. He's not the biggest problem but he completely disappears at times.

There would be a lot of speculation rugby is rife with it too.

I think athletics has more stringent testing - reading various things over the years I think methods can be advanced enough.

Athletics lends itself more to improvement from performance enhancing drugs than other sports. Whether that means it is any more rife I don't know. I doubt we will ever know to be honest.

Apparently they don't test for Human Growth Hormone in rugby, not sure about football. I heard directly from a former rugby player that using HGH is big in rugby. Helps massively with recovery from injuries. Also gives you huge abdominal muscles and an oval belly button because of where they inject it. Have a look at the South Africa team before they left for the world cup. Of course some of those guys are just specimens and have great genes and haven't done anything wrong

So you thought Falloon had a good game but now your saying he missed incidents?  Which is it?

Personally I thought John Boyle shipped a few late hits on Friday. I didn't think on any occasion he hauled a player down.

But again you deliberately miss the point being made. It is the job of The Referee to ensure a game is officiated in a fair manner, with the rules applied accordingly.

If a Referee does that, the cynical tactics employed by some are stamped out from the outset.

Too many have the view "it's a mans game". There is nothing manly about opportunistic cheap shots that are all too common in Today's game.

At no point did I say he had a good game. Just that on the balance of decisions, CPN shouldn't really complain about his performance.

While I largely agree with what you want referees to do, ultimately the off the ball stuff you're describing is not going to be seen by him unless he's looking in the wrong direction.

It requires linesmen and umpires to intervene for that to happen. At which point the referee has a judgement call to make, whether to trust the opinions and recommendations of the umpire, or not. It's wonderfully easy for you to say he should. It's not so easy for the man who actually has to dole out the cards. Especially if the precedent he sets means he has to evaluate every off the ball incident in unison with up to 6 different opinions, each of which is formed by a person with their own biases and a slightly different disposition towards aggression than the next man.

None of us want the referee to be the most visible man on the field. He (well, most of them) doesn't want this either. Do we really want 7 men adjudicating continually?

I can see what you're after. But I'm really sure anyone wants what it would bring.

When you listen to people watching football, especially when you are a neutral at games, they don't want the referee to be fair. They want a free called every time a hand is laid on their player and they want no frees gave against them. The amount of times you hear a ref being called all sorts for a completely correct call at a game is a joke. I'm sure I've done it myself in the heat of it too but it's getting worse. I know we don't have the best crop of refs in Down but who'd do it? I wouldn't do it for £500 a game.

So it seems the club have decided on a complete reset which absolutely tallies with what I suspected and Solskjaer's actions in the offseason. No quick fixes. Apparently determined to add a Director of Football too. I despise the Glazers and Woodward as much as anyone, probably more than most, but this is undoubtedly the correct approach. Not guaranteed to be successful or that OGS will see it through the whole way but I'm absolutely 100% behind him.

Hopefully a good performance tonight and a win with a young side.

I completely agree with a reset needed but the club should have bought a midfielder and striker during the summer to make things a bit easier for him. I think Ole is going to commit career suicide to try and make things better down the line. Some of the bullshit reaction from fans has been disgusting.

As for the director of football thing, I think that's bullshit - if they were serious about it and not just looking a fall guy in the position they would have got one by now. Woodward wants control over everything. I saw someone on one of the fan pages mentioned that they thought OGS could end up being DoF and another manager brought in.

Went to a under 10 Blitz with the young Lad a few weeks ago. He made the 'A' team. We won the Cup competition. There were 4 subs. He was one of the 4 and played little or nothing in any of the games. He got a medal and got to stand in the team photo with the team and the Cup. Looked great on Facebook. I know he would have rather play with the 'B' Team get more playing time, probably get hammered in all games, win feck all, but leave the Blitz with a sense of having taken part. But hey, he got a nice medal. That's all that matters.

There shouldn't be an A and a B team at under 10, that's feckin madness streaming players at that age.  Teams should be equal ability up until about U14 (for Feile etc).  I would hope that coach is the exception in your club FTB.

Go games there are no A and B teams but when you go to these competitive blitz's there are certainly strong and weak teams selected.  One expected to compete for the cup and another for the shield.  I'd say that's very common among all clubs (unless only bringing one team to the blitz).

On those blitzs at U10.  Far too many of them. They've become money makers for some clubs.

You can't win with that type of split. We tried it just by age and the older group always nabbed the best players from the younger team but the older lads wouldn't play with the younger group or else mummy and daddy give off about it.

There is way too many competitive blitzes at the football. It's great when they win one but they can't deal with losing a final. Saw wee lads at 8s kicking balls away after losing a final a few weeks ago. I'm involved with the hurling here in Down and there's no issue with that at all. No competitive stuff at all.

I agree Aristo. He offers something different to that Down forward line and looks more of a threat than most forwards. 5 points in 55 minutes from play is great going.. Is Cory a relation to John Quinn? A great player for Mayobridge when they were winning championships and you can see similarities in their play!

He's John's nephew. Seems a great prospect. Very smart on the ball but willing to take a risk with it for the score at the same time - too many players now go for the easy option every time.