The Sunday Game

Started by Jinxy, May 11, 2008, 10:47:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Billys Boots

QuoteWhataboutery? I would have thought that in a discussion where people are calling Brolly and Tohill biased (which they are and I'm not denying that), it should be opened up that pretty much all the pundits on the Sunday Game are biased for their own county...actually none more so than our famous host!

Don't disagree, but that certainly doesn't make it right (and it definitely meets the whataboutery criteria).  Why not take the example of Longford's finest, Eugene McGee, who never 'goes easy' on his own county, and rarely (if ever) defends the indefensible?  Liam Griffin doesn't mind dishing it out to Wexford either, when it's due, as far as I can recall.  I agree that it is rare alright, but it shouldn't be. 
My hands are stained with thistle milk ...

INDIANA

fairness across the board will, if there is consistency in our discplinary procedures, doherty should get a 4 week ban, no more, no less than he deserves. it wasn't too much for joe and tohill to say he struck his opponent. Listening to Joe was a bit like that Simpsons episode where Homer is protesting his innocence to the judge and eventually managed to convince the judge he was the aggrieved party.
Biased or not it wasn't too much to ask for them to call the incident what it was , striking.Poor old Joe thought he was in the High Court. It's amazing how defenisive some of our Northern brethren get when it's their county involved, but if its a dub they should be hung from the nearest gallows. Consistency is that we're looking for if we're to have coherent discplinary procedures.

Will Hunting

I agree Indiana, Doherty is deserving of a 4-week ban, but you can't expect analysts to compare it to other offences when it's not in the same league. The CCC may deem Doherty and McQuaid's offences to both deserve 4 weeks, but I'm saying that there is a world of difference between the two (despite the fact that the rules say it is 'striking' and therefore 4 weeks). But our analysts shouldn't be forced to say they are all the exact same when clearly Doherty's offence was nowhere near as bad as we've seen in other quarters. And expecting Derry pundits to lambast the offence is folly. As other posters said, rightly or wrongly, most analysts will try and look after their own.

Ps, Kavanagh was no angel yesterday himself; some of his antics were disgraceful.

Maguire01

Quote from: Will Hunting on June 02, 2008, 04:25:54 PM
Special mention also to whichever Monaghan poster compared Doherty's actions to Gary McQuaid's last week. McQuaid stamped, kicked and threw a punch straight in front of the referee. This followed an elbow on McCabe only moments earlier (you can see it on the Sunday Game highlights last week). To compare the two is nothing short of ridiculous. I don't even think Doherty extended his arm out to strike!

That would be me.  My point is that even if there hadn't been the kicking incident (re McQuaid), there would have been a red card for the strike alone.
The comparison is not ridiculous - i brought it up because it was so recent and also got a lot of discussion. I can't remember anyone defending it or trying to make excuses. It's irrelevant whether or not the incident took place in front of the ref, save for the fact that in such an instance the ref can take immediate action.

And if Doherty wasn't extending his arm out to strike, what was he doing? Was he about to run his hands through his hair?! It was a blatant strike.  It may not have been the hardest in the world and Kavanagh may have gone down very easily.  But none of that is the issue - it's Brolly and Tohill's unwillingness to call it as it was straight out.

Hardy

It was a strike and merits a suspension. Them's the rules. But there should be a new rule introduced to outlaw face-clutching.

Will Hunting

Tohill said that "it was at the lower end of what we would define striking". This is correct. What is the problem??

I've just watched last night's highlights for the first time there now. I honestly thought Tohill had remained tight-lipped refusing to say the offence even happened, before Davis and Splliane actually pinned him down and pressed him for a response. This is what i though had happened having read this thread. Needless to say, this was not the case.  ::) ::)

Talk about much ado about nothing!

Billys Boots

QuoteTohill said that "it was at the lower end of what we would define striking". This is correct. What is the problem??

It is a fuss about very little, in terms of the strike involved - the issue is about Tohill and Brolly telling it like they do about the other counties in Ireland.  As for 'the lower end of what we would define as striking', I'd have said that's what Drogba did; I'd have thought the 'upper end' might be Barry Hall's recent, ahem, performance.  Doherty's was somewhere in the middle, a daycent scelp that deserves a 4-week heels cooling, and let that be an end to it.  Tohill and Brolly should be consigned to the sin-bin until they grow up a bit, or at least sidelined for Derry matches, if they're not capable of doing their job.
My hands are stained with thistle milk ...

ildanach

I felt sorry for tohill last night. The whole incident got hyped up when Brolly made a c**k of himself in the afternoon defending doherty. That meant that once tohill was on the sunday game he was going to be put in the same position by Spillane.
In fairness to Tohill he did admit it was a strike - "all be it at the lower end of the scale". Anyone on here who thinks he is going to come on the sunday game and call for another derry man to get month suspensions is living in cuckoo land. Not one of the panel will do that. (although i think i remember  K mcstay doing it when T mortimer had an altercation with finian Hanley a couple of years back)  The simple solution to this is not to have derrymen analysing derry games or meath men on meath games etc...There is enough analysists to cover games and hi lights wthout this situation arising.

I dont believe in trial by media. It is up to the gaa to get the house in order, take a leaf out og the rugby book and start using some sort of citing commisioner. Anyone who feels they have been hit off the ball or if the  ref has not dealt with the incident can then bring it to the commisioners attention within 48 hours by email. The 'sinner' has another 24 to give there side by email or phonecall and the suspensions handed out appropriately . There should be 48hours to appeall. Then a line drawn under it with the suspension being number of games i.e one /two/ three as against weeks.
The media should be contacted once an incident has been cited and asked not to show it until the approprate actions have been taken.this gives fair chance to all sides - although this maybe a bit of wishful thinking.

Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.

the green man

Quote from: ildanach on June 02, 2008, 10:03:51 PM
I felt sorry for tohill last night. The whole incident got hyped up when Brolly made a c**k of himself in the afternoon defending doherty. That meant that once tohill was on the sunday game he was going to be put in the same position by Spillane.
In fairness to Tohill he did admit it was a strike - "all be it at the lower end of the scale". Anyone on here who thinks he is going to come on the sunday game and call for another derry man to get month suspensions is living in cuckoo land. Not one of the panel will do that. (although i think i remember  K mcstay doing it when T mortimer had an altercation with finian Hanley a couple of years back)  The simple solution to this is not to have derrymen analysing derry games or meath men on meath games etc...There is enough analysists to cover games and hi lights wthout this situation arising.

I dont believe in trial by media. It is up to the gaa to get the house in order, take a leaf out og the rugby book and start using some sort of citing commisioner. Anyone who feels they have been hit off the ball or if the  ref has not dealt with the incident can then bring it to the commisioners attention within 48 hours by email. The 'sinner' has another 24 to give there side by email or phonecall and the suspensions handed out appropriately . There should be 48hours to appeall. Then a line drawn under it with the suspension being number of games i.e one /two/ three as against weeks.
The media should be contacted once an incident has been cited and asked not to show it until the approprate actions have been taken.this gives fair chance to all sides - although this maybe a bit of wishful thinking.



Agreed with everything in that post. One downside to the GAA is that there is never anyone to answer the hard calls r.e suspensions. The whole thing takes far too long to sort out. I had a fella sent off playing for me two years ago and I tried to find out if it ruled him out of a colleges game the next week. I still have yet to hear official conformation.

jodyb

Quote from: the green man on June 02, 2008, 10:14:00 PM
Quote from: ildanach on June 02, 2008, 10:03:51 PM
I felt sorry for tohill last night. The whole incident got hyped up when Brolly made a c**k of himself in the afternoon defending doherty. That meant that once tohill was on the sunday game he was going to be put in the same position by Spillane.
In fairness to Tohill he did admit it was a strike - "all be it at the lower end of the scale". Anyone on here who thinks he is going to come on the sunday game and call for another derry man to get month suspensions is living in cuckoo land. Not one of the panel will do that. (although i think i remember  K mcstay doing it when T mortimer had an altercation with finian Hanley a couple of years back)  The simple solution to this is not to have derrymen analysing derry games or meath men on meath games etc...There is enough analysists to cover games and hi lights wthout this situation arising.

I dont believe in trial by media. It is up to the gaa to get the house in order, take a leaf out og the rugby book and start using some sort of citing commisioner. Anyone who feels they have been hit off the ball or if the  ref has not dealt with the incident can then bring it to the commisioners attention within 48 hours by email. The 'sinner' has another 24 to give there side by email or phonecall and the suspensions handed out appropriately . There should be 48hours to appeall. Then a line drawn under it with the suspension being number of games i.e one /two/ three as against weeks.
The media should be contacted once an incident has been cited and asked not to show it until the approprate actions have been taken.this gives fair chance to all sides - although this maybe a bit of wishful thinking.



Agreed with everything in that post. One downside to the GAA is that there is never anyone to answer the hard calls r.e suspensions. The whole thing takes far too long to sort out. I had a fella sent off playing for me two years ago and I tried to find out if it ruled him out of a colleges game the next week. I still have yet to hear official conformation.
How'd he do in the college game??

the green man

Quote from: jodyb on June 02, 2008, 10:24:40 PM
How'd he do in the college game??

Never played. Dungannon rung Maghera about 10 mins after the game and said that he was suspended. Maghera wouldn't risk it to play him. The intriguing thing was I talk to the ref after the game and he said his ban only counted for the tournament he played in (N.I youth games). 5 mins after that the opposition manager came to me and said he couldn't play for Maghera the following week. Never found out who he knew he played for the college?

Zapatista

Whats all this talk on the Sunday Game about McFadden and Bradley being Donegal and Derrys main Strikers? Is that a new position in the game? I though Brollys reply to O'Rourkes comparison with Chelsea and the penatly was briliant :D O'Rourke was embarrased.

Minder

Quote from: Zapatista on June 03, 2008, 08:32:45 AM
Whats all this talk on the Sunday Game about McFadden and Bradley being Donegal and Derrys main Strikers? Is that a new position in the game? I though Brollys reply to O'Rourkes comparison with Chelsea and the penatly was briliant :D O'Rourke was embarrased.

What did they say, i hate to see soccer analogies/comparisons in GAA.
"When it's too tough for them, it's just right for us"

Zapatista

Quote from: Minder on June 03, 2008, 08:35:56 AM
Quote from: Zapatista on June 03, 2008, 08:32:45 AM
Whats all this talk on the Sunday Game about McFadden and Bradley being Donegal and Derrys main Strikers? Is that a new position in the game? I though Brollys reply to O'Rourkes comparison with Chelsea and the penatly was briliant :D O'Rourke was embarrased.

What did they say, i hate to see soccer analogies/comparisons in GAA.

I don't remember the exact words but he made some referance to Chealsea and Donegal whan talking about the penalty. HE looked at Brolly and Brolly said - I don't know why you're looking at me, I don't know what your're talking about - O'Rourke tried to laugh it off but it was clearly an nervous laugh and brolly just shaked his head :D

Hardy

I seriously think it's time the GAA took RTÉ to task on their slanted negative reporting on the games. They're in a competitive market now and if they wish to seize every opportunity to present the games in a bad light, they should understand that there will be consequences.

I'm not suggesting Sky-type hype, but we're at the other extreme at his stage, on the Sunday night programme at any rate, where the concentration on scelps and rows and the like is offensive. As I said elsewhere, they gave about 25 minutes to Donegal-Derry on Sunday. Of this, about 15 minutes were action, and ten discussion, or as they laughingly call it "analysis". Of this ten minutes, I'd say about three were spent talking about one fairly innocuous clout. That's 30% of the discussion devoted to one pretty minor negative event that constituted less than 1% of the game.

Contrast that with the coverage of, say the sending off in the European Soccer final in Moscow. As I understand it, that had a crucial effect on the outcome of the game, but I'm sure those who paid more attention to it than I did will verify that it didn't take up 30% of the studio discussion in RTÉ - even from a crew who apparently pride themselves on pointing out the warts on the face of their particular game.

More tellingly, contrast it with the coverage of the Ireland-Barbarians rugby game last week, which featured a series of incidents that were genuine thuggery - assaults with intent and violence that would get you a jail term in the real world. I don't recall them even being mentioned in the studio discussion, even though, like the scelp on the Sunday game, they seemed to escape the notice of the referee and the Sunday Game crew will no doubt give that as their reason for highlighting the GAA incident. Where were the slow motion replays of one player repeatedly pounding another's face with his fist while he was pinned the ground?

The televising of big matches is probably the most important weapon in the GAA's PR and games promotion armoury. Maybe we'll see a more active approach from the new PRO, when Danny Lynch goes out to pasture, but I think it's a disgrace that Lynch and everybody else whose job is promote the image of the games allows RTÉ to get away with this routine, week after week from the outraged, sanctimonious, unctuous ould wans in the studio, masquerading as analysts and dancing to the looney tunes of that clown in the presenter's chair.