Latest Developments In Galway Hurling Saga Show How Bleak The Situation Is

[Duine Eile]

Loughnane sticking the boot into Galway hurling again, nothing new there then! 

[muppet]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

[Asal Mor]

I don't think they have the money to go outside the county. Daly would add a good bit but how much would he cost in Smoky Bacon Burgers ?

I'd love to see Daly come in. Seems a very clever fella and great with players. I think he'd suit this bunch of players. He looks even better after this year, given how poor Dublin were under Cunningham. But yeah, money is definitely an issue(for the stricken County Board, I have no idea if it'd be an issue for Daly).

[Blowitupref]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

Wasn't Cunningham like but Holmes and Connelly still got the slight dig into their statement

By resigning we wish to remove any obstacle that the players might perceive as preventing them from winning the All-Ireland.

[johnneycool]

Loughnane sticking the boot into Galway hurling again, nothing new there then! 

That stint with the tribesmen has left some emotional scars on the poor Ger and he's having difficulty overcoming them!

[AZOffaly]

I asked before but I'm not sure anyone answered it (apologies if I missed it). The county board statement a few days ago referred to the 'substantive issue'. Does anyone know what that issue is?

Are the players disillusioned with Cunningham because he isn't tactically astute? Is it preparation? Is it motivation? What's the issue they have?

[seafoid]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

He must have been referring to the influence of the GPA.

One of the big things Cunningham did was introduce continuity into the Galway senior setup. He was there for 4 years and had a process for the introduction of younger players, rather than the sloppy introduction and then casting off that was the "system" beforehand . John Culkin was a star minor and  is playing mighty for Abbeyknockmoy this year but he never made it as a senior. There are so many other players who were discarded.  So AC wasn't the best on tactics under pressure. But he did introduce a more solid system. And if that gets thrown out because of the arrogance of certain players he's right to criticise them. If Galway drop back to the mediocrity of the Loughnane years it will all have been for nothing.

[mouview]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

He must have been referring to the influence of the GPA.

One of the big things Cunningham did was introduce continuity into the Galway senior setup. He was there for 4 years and had a process for the introduction of younger players, rather than the sloppy introduction and then casting off that was the "system" beforehand . John Culkin was a star minor and  is playing mighty for Abbeyknockmoy this year but he never made it as a senior. There are so many other players who were discarded.  So AC wasn't the best on tactics under pressure. But he did introduce a more solid system. And if that gets thrown out because of the arrogance of certain players he's right to criticise them. If Galway drop back to the mediocrity of the Loughnane years it will all have been for nothing.

Not entirely sure I agree Seaf.

Greg Lally came in on the basis of good club displays. Shame Maloney was in, dropped out, was brought in to make up numbers for a challenge, impressed and was retained. Whelan came in on the basis of good Intermediate displays. Padraig Mannion, once injury-free, was always good enough to be brought in etc. Think the introductions were more haphazard than structured, don't think AC is (was) that good a judge. Nobody like Cody to spot a diamond in the rough.

Culkin was a great minor, basically because he was strong for his age, Loughnane was blinded by that a bit. He was on the county panel for a while but made no headway, plus rugby coaxed him away for a while too.

[johnneycool]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

He must have been referring to the influence of the GPA.

One of the big things Cunningham did was introduce continuity into the Galway senior setup. He was there for 4 years and had a process for the introduction of younger players, rather than the sloppy introduction and then casting off that was the "system" beforehand . John Culkin was a star minor and  is playing mighty for Abbeyknockmoy this year but he never made it as a senior. There are so many other players who were discarded.  So AC wasn't the best on tactics under pressure. But he did introduce a more solid system. And if that gets thrown out because of the arrogance of certain players he's right to criticise them. If Galway drop back to the mediocrity of the Loughnane years it will all have been for nothing.

Not entirely sure I agree Seaf.

Greg Lally came in on the basis of good club displays. Shame Maloney was in, dropped out, was brought in to make up numbers for a challenge, impressed and was retained. Whelan came in on the basis of good Intermediate displays. Padraig Mannion, once injury-free, was always good enough to be brought in etc. Think the introductions were more haphazard than structured, don't think AC is (was) that good a judge. Nobody like Cody to spot a diamond in the rough.

Surely having an open panel like that is a good thing, no?

It keeps the current panel on their toes and lets club players, intermediates, u21's know that good performances are being noticed and acted on by the senior management irrespective if there's a clearly defined structure or not.


I also noticed on another forum that there were two lads training the Galway panel, would this have been a Galway CB sanctioned training session or something organised by the 2015 players themselves?

[muppet]

It is amazing how people can adopt positions of such certainty for a distance. They know 100% that one side was completely out of order and the other side is correct.

It is never that simple. We might never know, but you can be sure there is some merit in boths sides of the story.

I know little of Galway hurling, but in my opinion Cunningham's statement does him no favours. If he had the interests of Galway hurling at heart, a subject he raises in his statement, he should have taken it on the chin, for the county, regardless of the rights and wrongs. Compare his statement with the dignified departure of Holmes and Connelly.

Having said that, there appears to be a consistant pattern emerging when the players from any county decide to go down this road. I suspect this is what Cunningham is referring to. I don't know enough about the Galway situation to know if the players simply sought advice as would be sensible, or whether they were led down this path, which wouldn't be smart.

I am naturally inclined to defend the players collective right to an opinion, but I wouldn't like to see this become a regular occurance.

Wasn't Cunningham like but Holmes and Connelly still got the slight dig into their statement

By resigning we wish to remove any obstacle that the players might perceive as preventing them from winning the All-Ireland.

I didn't read that as a dig. They just stated the players' position. And if it was a dig, it was a long way short of Cunningham's.

[Duine Eile]

Surely having an open panel like that is a good thing, no?

It keeps the current panel on their toes and lets club players, intermediates, u21's know that good performances are being noticed and acted on by the senior management irrespective if there's a clearly defined structure or not.


I also noticed on another forum that there were two lads training the Galway panel, would this have been a Galway CB sanctioned training session or something organised by the 2015 players themselves?

That could be connected to the Super 11s business in Boston this weekend I'd imagine.

[Asal Mor]

I asked before but I'm not sure anyone answered it (apologies if I missed it). The county board statement a few days ago referred to the 'substantive issue'. Does anyone know what that issue is?

Are the players disillusioned with Cunningham because he isn't tactically astute? Is it preparation? Is it motivation? What's the issue they have?

It would be really helpful if the players clarified this and you'd hope it's to do with them being unhappy about the preparation and tactics. There have been some stories about players being unhappy with the way some players were treated and spoken to by the management, but you'd hope to God that there's more to it than that. I'm sure Cody isn't always tactful with his lads.

Given how much criticism the players are getting, and how they are being seen by many as unmanageable prima donnas, it would be in their own interest to clarify why they wanted Cunningham gone(assuming the reasons were valid).

[mouview]

Really are damned if they do and damned if they don't though. If they come out with their reasons people may say they're being over-sensitive and petty. From all anecdotal evidence on Bulletin boards, it does seem as if AC had his favourites and wasn't really a good man-manager.

Think they are doing themselves a big favour by not speaking publically on this any more than is necessary, (plus it's pissing off that clod Keith Finnegan big time by not revealing any more info., always a bonus!)

[seafoid]

Really are damned if they do and damned if they don't though. If they come out with their reasons people may say they're being over-sensitive and petty. From all anecdotal evidence on Bulletin boards, it does seem as if AC had his favourites and wasn't really a good man-manager.

Think they are doing themselves a big favour by not speaking publically on this any more than is necessary, (plus it's pissing off that clod Keith Finnegan big time by not revealing any more info., always a bonus!)

Do they have someone in mind to replace Cunningham ?

[Asal Mor]

Really are damned if they do and damned if they don't though. If they come out with their reasons people may say they're being over-sensitive and petty. From all anecdotal evidence on Bulletin boards, it does seem as if AC had his favourites and wasn't really a good man-manager.

Think they are doing themselves a big favour by not speaking publically on this any more than is necessary, (plus it's pissing off that clod Keith Finnegan big time by not revealing any more info., always a bonus!)

Hadn't thought about it from that angle. Very true.