Joe Brolly

[macdanger2]

This popped up on FB this morning - maybe Joe was right all along?? 

Is that his real a/c?

[Gabriel_Hurl]

yes

http://gaeliclife.com/2013/09/everything-is-always-fine-in-maurices-world/

[macdanger2]

He's some tool, he might as well post

LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME, I'M RELEVANT, I'M CONTROVERSIAL!!

[gallsman]

I think he's great. f**k the begrudgers.

[Jinxy]

I'm sure Joe will tell us he randomly bumped into some unnamed inter-county player in B&Q this week who told him he was dead right in everything he said.

yes

http://gaeliclife.com/2013/09/everything-is-always-fine-in-maurices-world/

Turns out it was some random Tyrone fella telling him he was dead right in everything he said. 
The script writes itself at this stage.
Edit: Just realised that's an old article, put the point still stands!

[jodyb]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

[BennyHarp]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

My point isn't really about what happened back then. Something that occurred over 20 years ago is hardly relevant when analysing football today, but Joe thought he could throw it in there to back up his little agenda about Tyrone. Having done that he thinks he can smile and laugh it all off and be big mates with everyone. It doesn't always work like that. The accuse in public, apologise in private, method that Brolly has been using for years is beginning to wear thin with people.

Anyway, Peter was about 10 classes above Joe as a player and is 10 classes above him as an analyst without having to stoop to personal insults, that's probably what irks Joe the most.

[jodyb]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

My point isn't really about what happened back then. Something that occurred over 20 years ago is hardly relevant when analysing football today, but Joe thought he could throw it in there to back up his little agenda about Tyrone. Having done that he thinks he can smile and laugh it all off and be big mates with everyone. It doesn't always work like that. The accuse in public, apologise in private, method that Brolly has been using for years is beginning to wear thin with people.

Anyway, Peter was about 10 classes above Joe as a player and is 10 classes above him as an analyst without having to stoop to personal insults, that's probably what irks Joe the most.

Agree with you re 'the accuse in public, apologise in private' point and no doubt Joe is over the top in a lot of ways and definitely not the analyst that Peter is, but his controversy is what keeps him in the limelight. As to the relevance of his point, I think he was just trying to rubbish the sanctimoniousness of Peter's article and, to be fair, it did have more than a touch of sanctimony. (Imho)

[shawshank]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

My point isn't really about what happened back then. Something that occurred over 20 years ago is hardly relevant when analysing football today, but Joe thought he could throw it in there to back up his little agenda about Tyrone. Having done that he thinks he can smile and laugh it all off and be big mates with everyone. It doesn't always work like that. The accuse in public, apologise in private, method that Brolly has been using for years is beginning to wear thin with people.

Anyway, Peter was about 10 classes above Joe as a player and is 10 classes above him as an analyst without having to stoop to personal insults, that's probably what irks Joe the most.

He was ten classes above him in diving terms as well, which is essential Joe's point. The master of the dive, it really does explain the amount of diving Tyrone players do, after all Peter was their idol when these boys were growing up, and as such all kids copy their idol

[BennyHarp]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

My point isn't really about what happened back then. Something that occurred over 20 years ago is hardly relevant when analysing football today, but Joe thought he could throw it in there to back up his little agenda about Tyrone. Having done that he thinks he can smile and laugh it all off and be big mates with everyone. It doesn't always work like that. The accuse in public, apologise in private, method that Brolly has been using for years is beginning to wear thin with people.

Anyway, Peter was about 10 classes above Joe as a player and is 10 classes above him as an analyst without having to stoop to personal insults, that's probably what irks Joe the most.

He was ten classes above him in diving terms as well, which is essential Joe's point. The master of the dive, it really does explain the amount of diving Tyrone players do, after all Peter was their idol when these boys were growing up, and as such all kids copy their idol

I'd say Peter didn't get half the frees that he should have got during his career. As Dick Clerkin said in his article a few weeks ago, sometimes good players have to make sure the ref sees the fouls that are being committed. Yes, Peter was good at that and showing defenders up for what they were doing.

[CiKe]

Given Brolly's article about Peter on Sunday, I'm not surprised Peter blanked him. I'm genuinely surprised that anyone in the game has time for him. He strikes me as the annoying character of a group which everyone puts up with but are glad when he leaves. His "backing" of Tyrone of the penalty incident in my view, like all of his analysis, was premeditated. He was going to take Tyrone's side in any controversial incident to give the impression that, even though he has had a go at Tyrone in recent weeks, he still will call it fair in the game. Unfortunately the bould Colm couldn't even manage that. Joes comments about Rose of Tralee analysis is embarrassing given the lack of insightful tactical analysis that goes on in the Sunday Game. Pure spoofer and I think more and more are cottoning on to it.

Peter can take as much umbrage as he likes Benny, but ars###le or not, what Joe said about Peter and Feargal P is perfectly accurate. Wrecked his club campaign that year too. No DRA exonerations back then or, indeed, no sanctions for feigning. Rooster even appealed to Peter, to exonerate him so that he could play club football, but obviously he was never going to do that.

My point isn't really about what happened back then. Something that occurred over 20 years ago is hardly relevant when analysing football today, but Joe thought he could throw it in there to back up his little agenda about Tyrone. Having done that he thinks he can smile and laugh it all off and be big mates with everyone. It doesn't always work like that. The accuse in public, apologise in private, method that Brolly has been using for years is beginning to wear thin with people.

Anyway, Peter was about 10 classes above Joe as a player and is 10 classes above him as an analyst without having to stoop to personal insults, that's probably what irks Joe the most.

He was ten classes above him in diving terms as well, which is essential Joe's point. The master of the dive, it really does explain the amount of diving Tyrone players do, after all Peter was their idol when these boys were growing up, and as such all kids copy their idol

I'd say Peter didn't get half the frees that he should have got during his career. As Dick Clerkin said in his article a few weeks ago, sometimes good players have to make sure the ref sees the fouls that are being committed. Yes, Peter was good at that and showing defenders up for what they were doing.

He dived and did feign injury - not the first person and not the last person but that is no defense. The diving for a free I can understand to an extent but not condone as what you say contains an element of truth, but feigning injury to get a player sent off is an uncrossable red line that casts a dark, dark shadow over any player and should not just be conveniently forgotten with the passing of time.

In this regard, independently of anything else he ever did, Philly Jordan will always stand out for me as the worst example but it does seem to have been something much more prevalent in Tyrone than elsewhere. There is playing hard and pushing things to the limit with the verbals but for me that shite takes away from anything that team ever did - the shame of it all being that they were such a good team they didn't need to.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Brolly got slaughtered for this but today was a further vindication for him on the matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyAZy4cM8uE

Cooper's status is ridiculously and undeservedly exalted.

[beer baron]

Brolly got slaughtered for this but today was a further vindication for him on the matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyAZy4cM8uE

Cooper's status is ridiculously and undeservedly exalted.

Ah stop.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Brolly got slaughtered for this but today was a further vindication for him on the matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyAZy4cM8uE

Cooper's status is ridiculously and undeservedly exalted.

Ah stop.

Typical of the censure around any sort of reasonable criticism of Cooper. Why is he so protected among the GAA media?

[beer baron]

Today Gooch wasn't brilliant  but he was on a side where no player was,he's 32 years of age and it was generally a dreadful match in desperate conditions. To use that as a stick to try beat a man with that has been a joy to watch for the past decade or so is quite frankly ludicrous to me.