Quote from: downtothecore on Today at 07:22:04 PM2 very similar ability teams
I thought it was a decent team with a solid game plan against a slightly better team with no clue,
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: downtothecore on Today at 07:22:04 PM2 very similar ability teams
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on Today at 07:02:10 PMThat last free, he didn't blow for the 'first' foul, blew for the obvious round the neck free, spoke to linesman, free then given for first free (which you can't do) and thankfully he missed
Quote from: tbrick18 on Today at 06:59:33 PMGot out of jail there.
Down played out of their skins.
Armagh are a limited side, a different ref today and they were bate.
Quote from: tonto1888 on April 26, 2024, 07:17:27 AMQuote from: David McKeown on April 25, 2024, 07:38:37 PMQuote from: whitey on April 25, 2024, 04:16:36 PMhttps://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/politics/helen-mcentee-confirms-fewer-100-32663680.amp
So would calling for the deportation of 7200 people "whose asylum applications have been refused" be a far right
Position?
All I say is there was a famous case last year where an asylum seeker in Belfast had his claim for asylum refused at first instance. The reason for his refusal was he had claimed he would be persecuted in his home country because he was involved in guerrilla warfare. The Home Office rejected that this would entitle him to asylum because 'gorillas are an endangered species' and fighting them shouldn't allow him to claim asylum.
So id at least like appeals to be dealt with first
is this true?
Quote from: marty34 on April 25, 2024, 09:31:05 PMDavid, regarding the PPS. How many people work there?
So say a case comes to them from the cops. Do a small group of them look at it and decide to prosecute or is it discussed between a big group and an answer is given?
I was just wondering how it works. I hear PPS mentioned a lot but am just wondering how it is behind the scenes.
Quote from: whitey on April 25, 2024, 04:16:36 PMhttps://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/politics/helen-mcentee-confirms-fewer-100-32663680.amp
So would calling for the deportation of 7200 people "whose asylum applications have been refused" be a far right
Position?
Quote from: tbrick18 on April 25, 2024, 09:57:40 AMQuote from: David McKeown on April 24, 2024, 10:33:49 PMQuote from: tbrick18 on April 24, 2024, 10:29:15 PMQuote from: armaghniac on April 24, 2024, 08:34:36 PMQuote from: tbrick18 on April 24, 2024, 08:25:27 PMOnly thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.
As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.
Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?
I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.
Today was the 1st appearance. I'd be shocked if the PPS even have the full file yet let alone have made a decision. It would be unusual for them to have the full file yet particularly if the allegations only surfaced in March.
So does that mean the PPS could still decide not prosecute?
I've no idea how these things work, I'd made the assumption it only gets this far if the PPS are already in a position to prosecute.
Interesting.
Quote from: tbrick18 on April 24, 2024, 10:29:15 PMQuote from: armaghniac on April 24, 2024, 08:34:36 PMQuote from: tbrick18 on April 24, 2024, 08:25:27 PMOnly thing for sure is that there are no winners, but hopefully justice is service.
As I said before, it is hard to see how you can prove something 20 years ago beyond reasonable doubt, I doubt there were witnesses other than his wife.
Hearing other cases the PPS didn't prosecute due unlikelihood of conviction even when there is evidence, they must feel there's a high chance of conviction based on what ever evidence they have. No?
I've no idea myself - I'm doing a lot of reading between the lines and may well be getting it wrong.
Quote from: square_ball on April 23, 2024, 12:02:19 PMYou're missing the bit 'after they have played the ball away'
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 08:30:34 PMSo no one knows the rules around adding time?
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 04:56:18 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 04:41:02 PMQuote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 04:03:06 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 01:18:14 PMQuote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 12:24:23 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 10:33:12 AMUnless I am misreading the interview Fenton gave about his recent appeal, it seems his challenge was that he had never been sent off before and therefore shouldn't receive the minimum punishment for his sending off. If I am reading that correctly its such a nonsense which can only further undermine referees and the rule book if it were granted.
The other point I wanted to make about standard of refereeing etc is the stupid positions that the association often puts referees in. I want to be very clear I do not think referees are biased or would deliberately do anything that could benefit third parties but why oh why do the association keep selecting referees who it could be said have a vested interest in a particular match.
For example why in all Ireland finals involving Dublin in recent years have they selected a referee who lives, works and as far as I understand is connected to a club in Dublin. I know he is an excellent referee and I dont think he's ever done anything wrong but so selecting him leaves him open to baseless criticism should he make a 50/50 call in favour of Dublin. That's a pressure I don't think referees need. Similarly why select a referee who is from a county that one of the two teams who are playing will meet in the next round. If there's a controversial red card and it then impacts that match, questions will again be unfairly asked. There's no need to put that extra pressure on referees.
In law the test for bias isn't has there been or is there likely to be actual bias. The test is can an individual fully aware of all the facts conclude there is no chance of bias (conscious or otherwise), if they cant then you remove that possibility. I think this is something the association need to look at.
What if you end up with a shit referee?
Get the best ref's for the game, I can't for the life of me see how a ref in front of the thousands watching and viewers on tv be bias.
Of course take that possibility of people thinking that one could be bias because they are x y z but it starts to limit that range of available refs of a certain standard.
It's like club championship, if you only used ref's from a div below to ref senior then you are limiting it, then if he's married someone from another parish then questions will be asked, if he did some work for someone from another parish and so, people will just presume stuff regardless
Now another look at would be this ref has worked his ass off to get an opportunity to referee a final or a big game, but because his ma used to date someone from up the road he's black listed lol!
If the referee is shit what are they doing at that level anyway? My point is I feel sorry for refs who have gotten to the point of being good enough to referee big games then do a good job only for it to be completely undermined by a stupid comment about where they are from or who they are married to etc. I don't think that's fair on referees.
My point on the shit referee is that when you start limiting the reasons to have a referee because of said reasons, you'll end up with a small pool to pick from.
You can, if you want and search it, a reason for not having a particular ref for any game!
Ireland is very small, there'd be some link or two
I accept that it wont always be possible or fair to a referee and If its not possible its not possible I just dont know why its not a consideration when it can be. Its an active consideration in soccer. Mike Dean (the senior referee in English football) only refereed Liverpool 13 times and Everton 11 in his entire career (with 8 of those games being between the 2) apparently because of his known fandom of Tranmere Rovers. He refereed Man Utd 84 times, Arsenal 80, Man City 82, Chelsea 78 etc
Yeah he's a mad tramere fan, but still ref'd them, albeit far less.
I know you're not questioning someone's integrity and feel some by location or work or whatever may have that bitta doubt before blowing the whistle or not blowing it.
At intercounty level they are (believe it or not lol) scrutinised from an application of rules all the way down to how their umpires look!
Would be disastrous for a ref to ruin his/hers name by being bias
Ref's at either football or hurling at intercounty level come championship are picked early doors for Sam/Liam all games are ref'd from that selection. I'm sure all considerations are taken but I'd not be privy to how that's done in fairness
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 04:03:06 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 01:18:14 PMQuote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 12:24:23 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 10:33:12 AMUnless I am misreading the interview Fenton gave about his recent appeal, it seems his challenge was that he had never been sent off before and therefore shouldn't receive the minimum punishment for his sending off. If I am reading that correctly its such a nonsense which can only further undermine referees and the rule book if it were granted.
The other point I wanted to make about standard of refereeing etc is the stupid positions that the association often puts referees in. I want to be very clear I do not think referees are biased or would deliberately do anything that could benefit third parties but why oh why do the association keep selecting referees who it could be said have a vested interest in a particular match.
For example why in all Ireland finals involving Dublin in recent years have they selected a referee who lives, works and as far as I understand is connected to a club in Dublin. I know he is an excellent referee and I dont think he's ever done anything wrong but so selecting him leaves him open to baseless criticism should he make a 50/50 call in favour of Dublin. That's a pressure I don't think referees need. Similarly why select a referee who is from a county that one of the two teams who are playing will meet in the next round. If there's a controversial red card and it then impacts that match, questions will again be unfairly asked. There's no need to put that extra pressure on referees.
In law the test for bias isn't has there been or is there likely to be actual bias. The test is can an individual fully aware of all the facts conclude there is no chance of bias (conscious or otherwise), if they cant then you remove that possibility. I think this is something the association need to look at.
What if you end up with a shit referee?
Get the best ref's for the game, I can't for the life of me see how a ref in front of the thousands watching and viewers on tv be bias.
Of course take that possibility of people thinking that one could be bias because they are x y z but it starts to limit that range of available refs of a certain standard.
It's like club championship, if you only used ref's from a div below to ref senior then you are limiting it, then if he's married someone from another parish then questions will be asked, if he did some work for someone from another parish and so, people will just presume stuff regardless
Now another look at would be this ref has worked his ass off to get an opportunity to referee a final or a big game, but because his ma used to date someone from up the road he's black listed lol!
If the referee is shit what are they doing at that level anyway? My point is I feel sorry for refs who have gotten to the point of being good enough to referee big games then do a good job only for it to be completely undermined by a stupid comment about where they are from or who they are married to etc. I don't think that's fair on referees.
My point on the shit referee is that when you start limiting the reasons to have a referee because of said reasons, you'll end up with a small pool to pick from.
You can, if you want and search it, a reason for not having a particular ref for any game!
Ireland is very small, there'd be some link or two
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on April 21, 2024, 12:24:23 PMQuote from: David McKeown on April 21, 2024, 10:33:12 AMUnless I am misreading the interview Fenton gave about his recent appeal, it seems his challenge was that he had never been sent off before and therefore shouldn't receive the minimum punishment for his sending off. If I am reading that correctly its such a nonsense which can only further undermine referees and the rule book if it were granted.
The other point I wanted to make about standard of refereeing etc is the stupid positions that the association often puts referees in. I want to be very clear I do not think referees are biased or would deliberately do anything that could benefit third parties but why oh why do the association keep selecting referees who it could be said have a vested interest in a particular match.
For example why in all Ireland finals involving Dublin in recent years have they selected a referee who lives, works and as far as I understand is connected to a club in Dublin. I know he is an excellent referee and I dont think he's ever done anything wrong but so selecting him leaves him open to baseless criticism should he make a 50/50 call in favour of Dublin. That's a pressure I don't think referees need. Similarly why select a referee who is from a county that one of the two teams who are playing will meet in the next round. If there's a controversial red card and it then impacts that match, questions will again be unfairly asked. There's no need to put that extra pressure on referees.
In law the test for bias isn't has there been or is there likely to be actual bias. The test is can an individual fully aware of all the facts conclude there is no chance of bias (conscious or otherwise), if they cant then you remove that possibility. I think this is something the association need to look at.
What if you end up with a shit referee?
Get the best ref's for the game, I can't for the life of me see how a ref in front of the thousands watching and viewers on tv be bias.
Of course take that possibility of people thinking that one could be bias because they are x y z but it starts to limit that range of available refs of a certain standard.
It's like club championship, if you only used ref's from a div below to ref senior then you are limiting it, then if he's married someone from another parish then questions will be asked, if he did some work for someone from another parish and so, people will just presume stuff regardless
Now another look at would be this ref has worked his ass off to get an opportunity to referee a final or a big game, but because his ma used to date someone from up the road he's black listed lol!