Good interview with Joe Sheridan in the Tribune today.
Honest and to the point.
Read that. If anything, I've even less respect for him now....
"I have a lot of sympathy for Louth, but I don't see why I should say sorry. I didn't go out to cheat and I didn't cheat."
"We never cheated."
"People were coming up and talking about a replay. I told them it was never going to happen."
"OK it wasn't a proper goal but it was a penalty anyway".
"I feel very sorry for them (Louth) and I don't mean to sound patronising. But we've worked just as hard as they did so why shouldn't we enjoy winning it".
is the full article available?
Quote from: Nally Stand on August 08, 2010, 03:25:09 PM
Read that. If anything, I've even less respect for him now....
"I have a lot of sympathy for Louth, but I don't see why I should say sorry. I didn't go out to cheat and I didn't cheat."
"We never cheated."
"People were coming up and talking about a replay. I told them it was never going to happen."
"OK it wasn't a proper goal but it was a penalty anyway".
"I feel very sorry for them (Louth) and I don't mean to sound patronising. But we've worked just as hard as they did so why shouldn't we enjoy winning it".
What's wrong with any of that?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 04:00:03 PM
Quote from: Nally Stand on August 08, 2010, 03:25:09 PM
Read that. If anything, I've even less respect for him now....
"I have a lot of sympathy for Louth, but I don't see why I should say sorry. I didn't go out to cheat and I didn't cheat."
"We never cheated."
"People were coming up and talking about a replay. I told them it was never going to happen."
"OK it wasn't a proper goal but it was a penalty anyway".
"I feel very sorry for them (Louth) and I don't mean to sound patronising. But we've worked just as hard as they did so why shouldn't we enjoy winning it".
What's wrong with any of that?
was thinking that myself. Not the meath players fault the ref messed up
the fact that he still maintains that it would have been a penalty anyways is the worst part. Look at the picture below. It reminds me of a scene out of the Omen.
(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ7Gmcdk3vgfHoB77g8Yu5uUamrtQG71omtS9d_bM2LOMSF9pc&t=1&usg=__o4FqbTB8ir1EITJq5_ce1iOwRas=)
Absolute bollox peter
Nally stand you'd make a good tabloid journalist pulling all those quotes out.
It would be more interesting to see the context of each of the quotes.
Quote from: Nally Stand on August 08, 2010, 03:25:09 PM
"OK it wasn't a proper goal but it was a penalty anyway".
At least he's admitted it wasn't a proper goal, although his caveat lessens his admission. Whether the ref would have given a pen anyway is irrelevant.
I firmly believe Meath make a big tactical error in not awarding the replay. The players showed in both their attitude to the replay and their attitude in the 2nd half of Kildare that they were quite happy with their Leinster medals, however devalued.
Joe Sheridan didn't cheat, he pulled a fast one and got away with it. Players from all counties do the same and aren't labelled cheats.
Still can't see a penalty in the whole scmozzle though.
Listen, in a world where frees are awarded for the slightest physical contact it's not unreasonable he would think he was fouled.
Quote from: imtommygunn on August 08, 2010, 04:21:16 PM
Nally stand you'd make a good tabloid journalist pulling all those quotes out.
It would be more interesting to see the context of each of the quotes.
I can see what you are saying but to be fair I have read the article twice and the quotes are not taken out of context. The quotes I gave just show the crux of his attitude after having all this time to reflect. Granted there are plenty of quotes I could put in where he would come across as Mr Nice Guy but as far as his attitude to the events that day, the quotes above summarise the message he obviously wanted to get across when he gave the interview. And as another poster says, the fact that he still laughably maintains that he should have been awarded a penalty says it all.
As for those who say he didn't cheat and that these things happen, well...I know it's been asked many times before but I wonder what all those people had to say about the baul Terry Henry or how many of them joined facebook groups like "Henry is a cheating Cnut" or "Petition to have the Ireland France Game replayed".
I respect him for giving his opinion in a national newspaper, he's entitled to it, I might not agree with his sentiment but if one can't respect another's opinion well then what does that say about that person....
Anyone who compares what Joe Sheridan did to what Thierry Henry did has no credibility.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
Anyone who compares what Joe Sheridan did to what Thierry Henry did has no credibility.
Exactly, Henry had the decency to act embarrassed.
Why should Joe be embarrassed?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
Anyone who compares what Joe Sheridan did to what Thierry Henry did has no credibility.
::)
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 07:34:37 PM
Why should Joe be embarrassed?
Because he's made a fool of himself every time he has opened his mouth to the media since the game. If he hasn't the sense to not speak to the media you think he'd have someone close to him to set him straight.
He's only spoken on the issue twice.
Immediately after the game and now in this interview.
What do you want him to say exactly?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 08:20:06 PM
He's only spoken on the issue twice.
Immediately after the game and now in this interview.
What do you want him to say exactly?
He could say that it wasn't a goal or a penalty!
Question is when is Joe going to stop making a bigger bollox of himself
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 08:33:31 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 08:20:06 PM
He's only spoken on the issue twice.
Immediately after the game and now in this interview.
What do you want him to say exactly?
He could say that it wasn't a goal or a penalty!
He thinks it
was a penalty though.
Hang on. The *ref* said he was going to award the penalty, so Joe is right. It was a penalty. Whether it should have been or not is moot.
I also thought the piece where he explained why he thought it was a goal was interesting. He admits he was wrong, but it might explain why he said it was a good goal in the aftermath.
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 08, 2010, 09:32:19 PM
Hang on. The *ref* said he was going to award the penalty, so Joe is right. It was a penalty. Whether it should have been or not is moot.
I also thought the piece where he explained why he thought it was a goal was interesting. He admits he was wrong, but it might explain why he said it was a good goal in the aftermath.
But he clearly believes (or claims to believe) that it was a penalty as he has claimed to be pushed which is ridiculous because we can all see that he wasn't.
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 08, 2010, 09:32:19 PM
Hang on. The *ref* said he was going to award the penalty, so Joe is right. It was a penalty. Whether it should have been or not is moot.
I also thought the piece where he explained why he thought it was a goal was interesting. He admits he was wrong, but it might explain why he said it was a good goal in the aftermath.
I get it hard to believe he thought that if a forward was pushed over the line it was a goal.
Having watched the replay again just there, the keeper clearly fouls him (00:17).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxq6SofU_38&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxq6SofU_38&feature=related)
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:41:03 PM
Having watched the replay again just there, the keeper clearly fouls him (00:17).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxq6SofU_38&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxq6SofU_38&feature=related)
of course he does, and you're just seeing that now?
::)
So you think he fouled him too?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
So you think he fouled him too?
No, I see innocent Joe dive at the line and then when he finds himself sitting in the net he throws the ball up in the air and swings a leg at it.
The keeper leads with his knee and makes contact with Joes upper back/neck area.
If it happened out the field it would be a definite free.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:49:07 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
So you think he fouled him too?
No, I see innocent Joe dive at the line and then when he finds himself sitting in the net he throws the ball up in the air and swings a leg at it.
So the keeper didn't touch him then?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:50:07 PM
The keeper leads with his knee and makes contact with Joes upper back/neck area.
If it happened out the field it would be a definite free.
im not 100% on the rules,but if getting hit after diving onto the ground and into the path of another player is a penalty then i'll agree with you and joe that it was a penalty.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:50:41 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:49:07 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
So you think he fouled him too?
No, I see innocent Joe dive at the line and then when he finds himself sitting in the net he throws the ball up in the air and swings a leg at it.
So the keeper didn't touch him then?
There was contact but no foul. If anything, Joe was charging, if you could call diving through the air charging.
I certainly don't see anyone pushing him over the line.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:58:40 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:50:41 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:49:07 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
So you think he fouled him too?
No, I see innocent Joe dive at the line and then when he finds himself sitting in the net he throws the ball up in the air and swings a leg at it.
So the keeper didn't touch him then?
There was contact but no foul. If anything, Joe was charging, if you could call diving through the air charging.
I certainly don't see anyone pushing him over the line.
How can you lead with the knee, make enough contact to spin the player and it's no foul?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:59:57 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:58:40 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:50:41 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 10:49:07 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 10:47:57 PM
So you think he fouled him too?
No, I see innocent Joe dive at the line and then when he finds himself sitting in the net he throws the ball up in the air and swings a leg at it.
So the keeper didn't touch him then?
There was contact but no foul. If anything, Joe was charging, if you could call diving through the air charging.
I certainly don't see anyone pushing him over the line.
How can you lead with the knee, make enough contact to spin the player and it's no foul?
I don't see anything like that.
00:18 in that clip.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
Anyone who compares what Joe Sheridan did to what Thierry Henry did has no credibility.
Jinxy I have sympathy for Joe Sheridan, but I disagree with you.
I see no real difference between the two.
Both chanced their arm and both got away with it.
Personally I don't think either have anything to answer for - but there's no difference Jinxy
I think Joe is foolish to give an interview - in fact when I saw it this morning my first reaction was what was the Tribune doing running a month old story????
He'd have been better say nothing.
Also, dragging this on does Louth more harm than good and more harm to Louth then to Meath.
Just watch the keeper and Joe.
The question is, did the keeper make contact with Joe?
Answer: Yes.
Was the contact made via his knee?
Answer: Yes.
Was this a foul?
Answer: Seen them given, seen them not.
The point is this.
People are accusing Joe of being either stupid or a liar to suggest he was fouled and would have gotten a penalty.
The ref thought he was fouled.
He thought he was fouled.
I think he was fouled (in strict technical terms).
So maybe people should lay off him.
Quote from: Logan on August 08, 2010, 11:22:04 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
Anyone who compares what Joe Sheridan did to what Thierry Henry did has no credibility.
Jinxy I have sympathy for Joe Sheridan, but I disagree with you.
I see no real difference between the two.
Both chanced their arm and both got away with it.
Personally I don't think either have anything to answer for - but there's no difference Jinxy
I think Joe is foolish to give an interview - in fact when I saw it this morning my first reaction was what was the Tribune doing running a month old story????
He'd have been better say nothing.
Also, dragging this on does Louth more harm than good and more harm to Louth then to Meath.
How did Joe chance his arm?
I'm serious here because a lot of people were swept along by the emotion of it all and have yet to actually explain what he did wrong.
Jinxy, come on.
I'm actually on your side here.
He threw the ball into the net.
He knew he was taking a chance.
Authorities did nothing about it.
He got away with it.
Game over.
Henry did the same and both Ireland and Louth better get over it.
There's no more to it.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:26:22 PM
Just watch the keeper and Joe.
The question is, did the keeper make contact with Joe?
Answer: Yes.
Was the contact made via his knee?
Answer: Yes.
Was this a foul?
Answer: Seen them given, seen them not.
The point is this.
People are accusing Joe of being either stupid or a liar to suggest he was fouled and would have gotten a penalty.
The ref thought he was fouled.
He thought he was fouled.
I think he was fouled (in strict technical terms).
So maybe people should lay off him.
I dont see any foul, apart from his.
But he says he was pushed over the line, where's the push?
Quote from: Logan on August 08, 2010, 11:34:05 PM
Jinxy, come on.
I'm actually on your side here.
He threw the ball into the net.
He knew he was taking a chance.
Authorities did nothing about it.
He got away with it.
Game over.
Henry did the same and both Ireland and Louth better get over it.
There's no more to it.
No he didn't.
He was over the line at that stage.
Plus he tried to kick it.
Technically he undoubtedly fouled the ball but he thought the fact that he was 'pushed' over the line made it a legit goal.
The fact that he feels he was fouled made him dig his heels in.
To compare what he did to Thierry Henry reaching out and deliberately touching the ball twice with his hand before crossing it is very unfair.
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 11:38:41 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:26:22 PM
Just watch the keeper and Joe.
The question is, did the keeper make contact with Joe?
Answer: Yes.
Was the contact made via his knee?
Answer: Yes.
Was this a foul?
Answer: Seen them given, seen them not.
The point is this.
People are accusing Joe of being either stupid or a liar to suggest he was fouled and would have gotten a penalty.
The ref thought he was fouled.
He thought he was fouled.
I think he was fouled (in strict technical terms).
So maybe people should lay off him.
I dont see any foul, apart from his.
But he says he was pushed over the line, where's the push?
You can't see the goalkeeper or his knee so what's the point! :D
Surprised this hasn't arisen by now in respect to this debate but the rules only state that the ball must be "played" over the line. What "played" means is open to interpretation. Is carrying the ball "playing" it? If a goalkeeper steps over the line (carries) then it is a goal.
Are we certain that carrying the ball over the line is not a goal?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:43:35 PM
Quote from: pintsofguinness on August 08, 2010, 11:38:41 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:26:22 PM
Just watch the keeper and Joe.
The question is, did the keeper make contact with Joe?
Answer: Yes.
Was the contact made via his knee?
Answer: Yes.
Was this a foul?
Answer: Seen them given, seen them not.
The point is this.
People are accusing Joe of being either stupid or a liar to suggest he was fouled and would have gotten a penalty.
The ref thought he was fouled.
He thought he was fouled.
I think he was fouled (in strict technical terms).
So maybe people should lay off him.
I dont see any foul, apart from his.
But he says he was pushed over the line, where's the push?
You can't see the goalkeeper or his knee so what's the point! :D
The best angle is from the camera behind the goal.
The goalkeeper more turns his arse into Joe, to prevent him from crossing the line with the ball.
If the goalie wasn't there, Joe would have surely crossed the line with the ball, just the same.
A penalty in that mayhem would have been just a slightly less worse decision than awarding the goal.
Because Sludden says he would have awarded a penalty at that moment in the game actually has no value with hindsight. I don't think Sludden thought it was a penalty afterwards.
Just learn to accept it, there were no winners from that game, both teams lost.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:42:35 PM
Quote from: Logan on August 08, 2010, 11:34:05 PM
Jinxy, come on.
I'm actually on your side here.
He threw the ball into the net.
He knew he was taking a chance.
Authorities did nothing about it.
He got away with it.
Game over.
Henry did the same and both Ireland and Louth better get over it.
There's no more to it.
No he didn't.
He was over the line at that stage.
Plus he tried to kick it.
Technically he undoubtedly fouled the ball but he thought the fact that he was 'pushed' over the line made it a legit goal.
The fact that he feels he was fouled made him dig his heels in.
To compare what he did to Thierry Henry reaching out and deliberately touching the ball twice with his hand before crossing it is very unfair.
I noticed this part from his interview and found it hard to believe that a player at the highest level would be so ignorant of the rules.
I havent played at any decent level, but I thought everyone knew that you cant carry the ball over the line. I think Joe chanced his arm, got away with it and should just keep his head down. He has come up with a few stories trying to explain what happened; it was a goal, it was a penalty anyway, I thought you could carry it over the line if you were fouled... As others have said already, this article doesnt help Joe, Meath or Louth. Why are the Times rehashing this anyway?
Quote from: Jinxy on August 08, 2010, 11:42:35 PM
Quote from: Logan on August 08, 2010, 11:34:05 PM
Jinxy, come on.
I'm actually on your side here.
He threw the ball into the net.
He knew he was taking a chance.
Authorities did nothing about it.
He got away with it.
Game over.
Henry did the same and both Ireland and Louth better get over it.
There's no more to it.
No he didn't.
He was over the line at that stage.
Plus he tried to kick it.
Technically he undoubtedly fouled the ball but he thought the fact that he was 'pushed' over the line made it a legit goal.
The fact that he feels he was fouled made him dig his heels in.
To compare what he did to Thierry Henry reaching out and deliberately touching the ball twice with his hand before crossing it is very unfair.
For God's sake Jinxy ... he threw the ball.
Call it what it is. Sure. He may have tried to kick it, but in the end he threw the ball.
This garbage about whether he was fouled or not or it was a penalty or not is irrelevant too.
I have sympathy or Joe and for what happened.
I don't blame Joe Sheridan in any shape or form for what happened.
But he's been very foolish to give an interview and come across the way he has and with respect your arguments don't do the whole thing any favours either.
Why not call it as it was?
Threw the ball, got away with it and good luck to you, tough luck on Louth, but that's life, life's not fair and get on with it?
Joe didnt do anything wrong. He found himself on the ground holding the ball. He had to throw it towards his foot in an attempt to kick it over the line. He missed the kick, so it was a throw over the line and should have been a free out. But thats the refs fault, not Joes. You cant expect him to do the referees job for him. Anything he says after the event is irrelevant - its a dificult position he found himself in.
Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the incident, I am more concerned about why Joe Sheridan would want to talk to a reporter about this at this stage.
Clearly he was asked to do a piece, or said he would, but only after meath were out of the championship. Arent the gaa all for making players more accessible to the media after all?
I thought it was interesting. I'd disagree with him in a couple of places, but I do think it's interesting.
He felt he was fouled, and the ref said he was going to give a penalty, so I can see the rationale behind the 'so what's the big deal?' attitude.
I actually believe him when he says that 'if a goalie carries the ball over the line, it's a goal', therefore he might believe that if he were pushed/bundled over the line (as he thought he was) then it might be a goal as well. To me, that clears up the issue of how he could say it was a good goal that day.
A mob runs amok around Croke park assaulting the referee and players and savagely attacking a volunteer steward. Yet the only thing some people can find to be outraged about with regard to that occasion is something a player SAID! Why are people here falling over themselves to condemn Joe for simply saying what he thinks but not even bothering themselves about the thugs? And on the very day when the actions of said thugs have caused major developments in the health and safety arrangements at Croke Park. Two posts on that subject on another thread today. It'd make you wonder.
When are we due a report on who is to be prosecuted and when it's to happen?
(Well played Jinxy).
Joe threw the ball up to try and make contact with his foot but he completely missed it. From a technical point of view, it didn't matter that he missed it as the ball was already over the line anyway, but at least it showed he was trying to kick it. There was no personal foul committed by Joe, just a technical foul therefore Joe is as much a cheat as someone who scored a goal despite it being square ball, or someone who took 5 steps, two hops, picked the ball off the ground, etc. I've never heard anyone who's committed any of these technical fouls get called a cheat so neither should Joe.
Joe Sheridan was wrong when he said he had nothing to apologise for though, he should definitely have to apologise for those blue boots
(http://media.tribune.ie/site_media/photologue/photos/2010/Aug/07/cache/inpho_00442866039161_display.jpg)
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 10:20:33 AM
A mob runs amok around Croke park assaulting the referee and players and savagely attacking a volunteer steward. Yet the only thing some people can find to be outraged about with regard to that occasion is something a player SAID! Why are people here falling over themselves to condemn Joe for simply saying what he thinks but not even bothering themselves about the thugs? And on the very day when the actions of said thugs have caused major developments in the health and safety arrangements at Croke Park. Two posts on that subject on another thread today. It'd make you wonder.
When are we due a report on who is to be prosecuted and when it's to happen?
(Well played Jinxy).
It's rank stupid to condemn him for the goal. And he has explained fairly why he would have sincerely thought it was a goal at the time.
All talk of a penalty being awarded is straw clutching, would have been an almost equal injustice.
But at least we have some anecdotal evidence of one of the thugs personally apologising for his actions and offering unlimited compensation :)
Quote from: haranguerer on August 09, 2010, 09:44:27 AM
Joe didnt do anything wrong. He found himself on the ground holding the ball. He had to throw it towards his foot in an attempt to kick it over the line. He missed the kick, so it was a throw over the line and should have been a free out. But thats the refs fault, not Joes. You cant expect him to do the referees job for him. Anything he says after the event is irrelevant - its a dificult position he found himself in.
I'd agree with that.
It all happened in a flash and Joe had no time to think about anything other than getting the ball across the line. I imagine all the players on the field at the time would have done the same if presented with the same opportunity.
I like Joe as a player; he always plays with full commitment from start to finish and I couldn't see him setting out to deliberately cheat anybody at any time.
But, while anything he said after the game is indeed irrelevant to the event, it will have implications for the player himself. It is a pity that he gave his version of what happened so soon after the game.
It's something he can expect to have thrown in his face many times in the future, whereas the main culprits (ie Leinster Council members) will soon be forgotten. Along with Martin Sludden, he will be forever associated with the controversy and, in Sheridan's case, it will be for the wrong reasons.
I did think it was funny to read that Mark Ward had that picture, of the Louth fan punching him on the gob, on his mobile phone. It shows you the type of humour that players have, and how detached from the faux outrage that non-participants exhibit they are.
I think it's only when you stop playing you realise how different the world looks, and how we can be amazed that Mark Ward didn't deck your man and start an all out riot, whereas Ward himself has the picture on his phone, presumably as a joke.
Whats the bets that the louth fan has the same pic on his?
I'd have a lot less respect for him if he came out with some mealy-mouthed apology as a sop to the Joe Duffy whingeline brigade.
You did nothing wrong Joe.
Plough on.
Quote from: fearglasmor on August 09, 2010, 09:46:03 AM
Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the incident, I am more concerned about why Joe Sheridan would want to talk to a reporter about this at this stage.
Indeed
Joe Sheridan did nothing wrong, he didn't cheat. It was up to the referee to make the call. Martin Sludden has a history of making bad calls, note the two Red Cards issued to Armagh this year in the national league against Down and the Championship against Monaghan. The easy option for Sludden was to award a free, out or in, the toss could have been argued either way, whilst some say he should have asked the umpires that also is fraught with problems as technically umpires and linesmen can not call a foul. the GAA need to revisit the powers that linesmen and umpires have to assist referees make decisions. Had the umpires got the powers required they could have called the ref and he could then have made his call based on the evidence given.
Quote from: Logan on August 09, 2010, 12:28:21 PM
Quote from: fearglasmor on August 09, 2010, 09:46:03 AM
Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the incident, I am more concerned about why Joe Sheridan would want to talk to a reporter about this at this stage.
Indeed
Do you honestly think he hasn't been bombarded with phone calls from journalists since the Leinster final?
We're out of the championship so he might as well give his side of the story now.
Then draw a line under it and move on.
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 09, 2010, 10:02:30 AM
I actually believe him when he says that 'if a goalie carries the ball over the line, it's a goal', therefore he might believe that if he were pushed/bundled over the line (as he thought he was) then it might be a goal as well. To me, that clears up the issue of how he could say it was a good goal that day.
I find it very hard to believe that anyone (in particular a forward) who has been playing the game for as long as Joe has, doesnt know that you are not allowed carry the ball over the line.
Quote from: Hound on August 09, 2010, 01:57:57 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 09, 2010, 10:02:30 AM
I actually believe him when he says that 'if a goalie carries the ball over the line, it's a goal', therefore he might believe that if he were pushed/bundled over the line (as he thought he was) then it might be a goal as well. To me, that clears up the issue of how he could say it was a good goal that day.
I find it very hard to believe that anyone (in particular a forward) who has been playing the game for as long as Joe has, doesnt know that you are not allowed carry the ball over the line.
You prefer to believe he's a liar? Why?
Quote from: Hound on August 09, 2010, 01:57:57 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 09, 2010, 10:02:30 AM
I actually believe him when he says that 'if a goalie carries the ball over the line, it's a goal', therefore he might believe that if he were pushed/bundled over the line (as he thought he was) then it might be a goal as well. To me, that clears up the issue of how he could say it was a good goal that day.
I find it very hard to believe that anyone (in particular a forward) who has been playing the game for as long as Joe has, doesnt know that you are not allowed carry the ball over the line.
I as i pointed out on the previous page, that is not clearly the case
"Joe threw the ball up to try and make contact with his foot but he completely missed it".
Meath were more physical back in the old days but all of the players were able to kick the ball. Maybe this is the problem, Hardy? You won't get past the quarters carrying passengers like that.
I played as a corner forward for a good few years, and I knew that carrying the ball over the line, of your on volition, was not a goal. However, I couldn't have told you whether it was a penalty, a goal, or a free out if I was bundled over the line by a goalkeeper/defender.
I don't find it surprising that Joe Sheridan couldn't tell you at the time either. It's not something you expect to happen to you.
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 02:05:23 PM
Quote from: Hound on August 09, 2010, 01:57:57 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on August 09, 2010, 10:02:30 AM
I actually believe him when he says that 'if a goalie carries the ball over the line, it's a goal', therefore he might believe that if he were pushed/bundled over the line (as he thought he was) then it might be a goal as well. To me, that clears up the issue of how he could say it was a good goal that day.
I find it very hard to believe that anyone (in particular a forward) who has been playing the game for as long as Joe has, doesnt know that you are not allowed carry the ball over the line.
You prefer to believe he's a liar? Why?
I didn't call that Hardy, and I don't think he's a cheat. I think he made a mistake in his post match interview in claiming it was a legitimate goal and I think he's made a mistake in trying to justify why he said that.
[/quote]
Do you honestly think he hasn't been bombarded with phone calls from journalists since the Leinster final?
We're out of the championship so he might as well give his side of the story now.
[/quote]
i thought he might have sold it to the News of the World. My score with Louth slappers, by Joe Sheridan NOTW exclusive
Joe Shieridan is not innocent in all this. He threw the ball into the goals and it is a matter of opinion whether he did this while trying to kick it or whether he threw it in and then swung a boot to make it look like an attempt to kick it. I think the former but I could understand in the heat of the moment how someone could do something like that. What is sickening is his behaviour after. He ran after the ref shouting and roaring that it was a legit goal when he knew it was not (unless you believe this bullshit about him not knowing the rules). He then gave the big fists up to the camera with not a hint of shame. He then told rte that the goal was legit as far as he was concerned. Then he got Daddy to ring up the Celt and say how he was a real honest lad - poor Joe. Now we have some revisionism, apparently it was not a legit goal after all, poor Joe didn't know the rules at the time but now he accepts that you can't throw the ball into the goal or roll over the line with the ball. No, instead there was a penalty that Joe should have got that only he and some half blind Meath posters can see and an idiot of a ref trying to cover his hole. QED - Meath should have won anyway. I'm afraid the mans reputation is permantently tarnished just like the joke of a medal he has in his pocket and just like the miserable hoors in the Meath county board that wouldn't do the sporting thing and offer a replay. At least justice was done and a good hammering dealt to Meath by Kildare that went someway to putting things right.
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
Play the man and not the ball Hardy, typical Meath. I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Edit - For what it is worth, and i told you this before, I don't hate Meath or Joe Shieridan or anything as trivial as football. I won't be out on the streets throwing rocks at fans from another county either old chap.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
Play the man and not the ball Hardy, typical Meath. I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
In fairness Myles, you're playing the man a bit yourself. And playing a man that's not here to answer you. Anonymously as well, unless you are actually Flann O'Brien reincarnate.
Edit... Ignore the Flann 'Brien bit. I mixed you up with someone else :D
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
Play the man and not the ball Hardy, typical Meath. I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Edit - For what it is worth, and i told you this before, I don't hate Meath or Joe Shieridan or anything as trivial as football. I won't be out on the streets throwing rocks at fans from another county either old chap.
That's handy.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 09, 2010, 09:14:43 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
Play the man and not the ball Hardy, typical Meath. I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Edit - For what it is worth, and i told you this before, I don't hate Meath or Joe Shieridan or anything as trivial as football. I won't be out on the streets throwing rocks at fans from another county either old chap.
That's handy.
I knew someone would have to say it but heh, we might be shite but as a county we have our dignity intact.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Indeed - as I pointed out before, you're like the man who'd rather his own horse died that that his neighbour would get a horse. Such bitterness is sad to behold, frankly.
P.S. Cavan ARE shite, though, believe it or not, I'm sorry to see that. I'd love to see a resurgence in our neighnours' fortunes as, I'd wager would most of Meath. But that's the difference between sportsmanship and whatever it is that gives rise to your bitterness.
Hardy almost everyone (there were a few exceptions) here condemned the mob. It is perfectly reasonable to discuss the 'goal' without constantly re-condemning the actions of the mob.
Jinxy your argument that it could have been a penalty is crazy. If a forward dives to the ground and catches a player's knee on the way it is not a foul. Do you expect a goalkeeper to get out of the way in such an event?
AZ, your point (and Sheridan's) that Sludden was going to give a penalty anyway has a flaw. You both seem to assume that a goal would have been scored and Meath would still have won. That is far from certain and can't be used as a 'shur we would have won anyway' argument.
Well then muppet, wasnt there only a point in it and time to play? Why is everyone assuming louth would have won if the goal had not been allowed. There was time for a meath point was there not?
Joe Sheridan did nothing wrong, nor did meath.
If it had been the other way around, there wouldnt have been anywhere as near as much discussion - its patronising I imagine, I know I'd think so if it were my own perennial underdog team who'd been involved.
Quote from: haranguerer on August 09, 2010, 09:34:03 PM
Well then muppet, wasnt there only a point in it and time to play? Why is everyone assuming louth would have won if the goal had not been allowed. There was time for a meath point was there not?
Joe Sheridan did nothing wrong, nor did meath.
None of the bold above contradicts my point that it was not certain that Meath would win if there was a penalty.
The second statement is your opinion, I completely disagree with it. Both Joe and Meath at the very least could have handled the aftermath better.
Quote from: haranguerer on August 09, 2010, 09:34:03 PM
Well then muppet, wasnt there only a point in it and time to play? Why is everyone assuming louth would have won if the goal had not been allowed. There was time for a meath point was there not?
Joe Sheridan did nothing wrong, nor did meath.
yes he did . he dived over the line with the ball knowing he didn't kick it and claimed a goal.
Lets not forget it was meath foul play that started all this. all the ref did was miss what was in front of his eyes
Quote from: muppet on August 09, 2010, 09:22:37 PM
Hardy almost everyone (there were a few exceptions) here condemned the mob. It is perfectly reasonable to discuss the 'goal' without constantly re-condemning the actions of the mob.
Jinxy your argument that it could have been a penalty is crazy. If a forward dives to the ground and catches a player's knee on the way it is not a foul. Do you expect a goalkeeper to get out of the way in such an event?
AZ, your point (and Sheridan's) that Sludden was going to give a penalty anyway has a flaw. You both seem to assume that a goal would have been scored and Meath would still have won. That is far from certain and can't be used as a 'shur we would have won anyway' argument.
Reasonable points, Muppet.
As regards the mob, I was merely pointing out the crazy sense of priorities that saw more criticism directed at Joe for something he merely SAID, than at the thugs and what they DID.
This is not directed at you, of course, but I'm just using this post to get this off my chest: I'm bothered at the venom being directed at Joe. A small number of the crowd at the quarter final even felt moved to boo as his name was called out in the team announcements. That's unbelievable to me.
I feel the same about the abuse meted out to the likes of Galvin, Ó Sé and anyone else who arouses the indignation of the mob. It has no place in our sport and community. We and our organisation stand for better things than that. It offends me that people feel free to come on here and call a player a "tr**p", for instance. I think we should oppose that sort of unacceptable stuff, just as we would chastise somebody who overstepped the mark on the terraces and I'm going to carry on condemning it here.
I especially despise the people who seem to specialise in seeking out the negative and whose only comment on many a game is to point out a foul here or a sly dig there. That sort of small-minded squinting windows mentality really sickens me. Just what are these people in the sport for? What do they get from it? We have a glorious sport to celebrate and some seem determined to use it only as a vehicle for their petty prejudices and hatreds.
I disagree with your opinions on the penalty debate, but we're all entitled to our opinions that's a secondary issue for me just now.
Quote from: muppet on August 09, 2010, 09:22:37 PM
Hardy almost everyone (there were a few exceptions) here condemned the mob. It is perfectly reasonable to discuss the 'goal' without constantly re-condemning the actions of the mob.
Jinxy your argument that it could have been a penalty is crazy. If a forward dives to the ground and catches a player's knee on the way it is not a foul. Do you expect a goalkeeper to get out of the way in such an event?
AZ, your point (and Sheridan's) that Sludden was going to give a penalty anyway has a flaw. You both seem to assume that a goal would have been scored and Meath would still have won. That is far from certain and can't be used as a 'shur we would have won anyway' argument.
I'm assuming nothing, but it is still a valid point. There's no guarantee that Ward (or whomever) would have stuck it away, but it would have been at least probable.
I'm not saying it is a 'shur *they* would have etc' way at all, but I am saying that they would have had a great chance. (I don't think it was a penalty by the way, but if Sludden thought it was he obviously should have given it)
All I'm trying to say is that it's not beyond the realms of possibility that Joe Sheridan did not actually realise that if a forward is bundled over the line it has to be a penalty or a free out, and in no circumstances could it have been a valid goal. I'm not surprised he didn't know that.
Quote from: muppet on August 09, 2010, 09:22:37 PM
Hardy almost everyone (there were a few exceptions) here condemned the mob. It is perfectly reasonable to discuss the 'goal' without constantly re-condemning the actions of the mob.
Jinxy your argument that it could have been a penalty is crazy. If a forward dives to the ground and catches a player's knee on the way it is not a foul. Do you expect a goalkeeper to get out of the way in such an event?
AZ, your point (and Sheridan's) that Sludden was going to give a penalty anyway has a flaw. You both seem to assume that a goal would have been scored and Meath would still have won. That is far from certain and can't be used as a 'shur we would have won anyway' argument.
You make it sound like the keeper was just standing there and Joe dived at him.
The keeper runs
across the goalmouth and the only part of him that makes contact with Joe is his knee.
Like I said before, if the exact same thing happens at midfield it is a free 9 times out of 10.
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 09:40:08 PM
Quote from: muppet on August 09, 2010, 09:22:37 PM
Hardy almost everyone (there were a few exceptions) here condemned the mob. It is perfectly reasonable to discuss the 'goal' without constantly re-condemning the actions of the mob.
Jinxy your argument that it could have been a penalty is crazy. If a forward dives to the ground and catches a player's knee on the way it is not a foul. Do you expect a goalkeeper to get out of the way in such an event?
AZ, your point (and Sheridan's) that Sludden was going to give a penalty anyway has a flaw. You both seem to assume that a goal would have been scored and Meath would still have won. That is far from certain and can't be used as a 'shur we would have won anyway' argument.
Reasonable points, Muppet.
As regards the mob, I was merely pointing out the crazy sense of priorities that saw more criticism directed at Joe for something he merely SAID, than at the thugs and what they DID.
This is not directed at you, of course, but I'm just using this post to get this off my chest: I'm bothered at the venom being directed at Joe. A small number of the crowd at the quarter final even felt moved to boo as his name was called out in the team announcements. That's unbelievable to me.
I feel the same about the abuse meted out to the likes of Galvin, Ó Sé and anyone else who arouses the indignation of the mob. It has no place in our sport and community. We and our organisation stand for better things than that. It offends me that people feel free to come on here and call a player a "tr**p", for instance. I think we should oppose that sort of unacceptable stuff, just as we would chastise somebody who overstepped the mark on the terraces and I'm going to carry on condemning it here.
I especially despise the people who seem to specialise in seeking out the negative and whose only comment on many a game is to point out a foul here or a sly dig there. That sort of small-minded squinting windows mentality really sickens me. Just what are these people in the sport for? What do they get from it? We have a glorious sport to celebrate and some seem determined to use it only as a vehicle for their petty prejudices and hatreds.
I disagree with your opinions on the penalty debate, but we're all entitled to our opinions that's a secondary issue for me just now.
Well said Hardy.
Hardy I predict that way in the future this event will take on a romantic hue and big Joe will gain cult status as a result. But you might have to live with the flak for a while longer.
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 09:40:08 PM
It has no place in our sport and community. We and our organisation stand for better things than that. It offends me that people feel free to come on here and call a player a "tr**p", for instance. I think we should oppose that sort of unacceptable stuff, just as we would chastise somebody who overstepped the mark on the terraces and I'm going to carry on condemning it here.
I especially despise the people who seem to specialise in seeking out the negative and whose only comment on many a game is to point out a foul here or a sly dig there.
Personal insults are over the top but sport in general is degraded by incidents of gamesmanship and cheating and the GAA is hardly a vacuum in which such behaviour finds no place. Here is a very good article I came across today regarding the carry on at the World Cup which also disappointed a lot of fans.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/aug/19/shame-world-cup/
I'm afraid big Joe doesn't come across to me as particularly sporting, any more than Luis Suarez was.
As someone who regularly berates Morrissey & Cannings "commentary", I can now add reading to the list of inadvertent mannerisms, thanks to that article in the Tribune yesterday. I can't believe how many weeks after the event that Sheridan is peddling the lie that he was pushed over the line, incredulous. Players say & do things in the heat of the moment & I think Sheridan was unfairly pillared for his interview directly after the game but to come out weeks later and still maintain he was pushed, well the mind boggles... Anyways apart from that I thought it was a very interesting interview & you'd have to worry about the mentality of the Facebook brigade. Fair play though to the Westmeath lads he worked with saying that Canterbury had been calling about a potential sponsorship deal & his Louth bosses for not firing him :D
You know, its funny when I think back on how people were castigating the ref and the umpires but here we are weeks later with the benefit of tv replays, time to analyze rulebooks and, still, there are vastly differing opinions on what happened and how what happened should have been interpreted wrt rules of the game.
I was thinking about what AZ said about how I would react if I was was bundled over the line and he's right, I really would't know whether it was a legit goal. Then I thought a bit more and realized that the first thing I would have done if the defenders started roaring would be to get up and roar that it was a goal..which is exactly what Sheridan did. It wouldnt be "dishonest" as such..it would be instinctive human behavior. If I thought it might be a goal the competive spirit would convince me, in the moment, that it was definitely a goal. I've played in games, and reffed games, where it happens time and again with points that go over the top of the post and nobody is quite sure (including umpires) that it was a goal. Yet 100% of the time the way people view the incident seems to folllow which team they are on. This means everybody is blind or everybody is a lying baxtard. The truth is in between. We hallucinate the result we want to see so its a bit of being blind and a bit of lying (to oursleves as much as anyone else).
The only way to even attempt a comprehensive solution is the Rugby method. I've watched games and seen the way they replay the incidents..this primes the crowd for the decision as , most of the time, it is clear enough what happens. It gives the video ref plenaty of time in a calm environment to see the incident and if needed review the rules for weird situations. Plus it takes the heat off the ref who, after all, has to continue to ref the game or who is the one at risk from angry fans. Has there ever been major controversy or disagreement about a video refs decision ?
And yes, this would only be practical for the big games and would not be feasible at club games etc but , in that case, people have to just cop on and realize that mistakes will be made or that incidents will occur that are just extremely difficult to adjudicate on , especially, in the heat of the moment.
btw, in an ideal world everybody would be forced to referee and umpire a game or two. That would shut a lot of people up.
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Indeed - as I pointed out before, you're like the man who'd rather his own horse died that that his neighbour would get a horse. Such bitterness is sad to behold, frankly.
P.S. Cavan ARE shite, though, believe it or not, I'm sorry to see that. I'd love to see a resurgence in our neighnours' fortunes as, I'd wager would most of Meath. But that's the difference between sportsmanship and whatever it is that gives rise to your bitterness.
No Hardy, you misunderstand. I'll try and put it simple to you. Football is a sport. Winning football matches or medal through cheating is anti-sport. I would rather lose and be sporting than win by cheating. Your horsey analogy is balls. Whether you would like Cavan to win or not is irrelevant. You seem to think I have something against Meath, I didn't have anything against Meath prior to this match other than a local rivalry and you could also say I would have admired their spirit and never say die attitude. But I abhor cheating and poor sportsmanship which is what Joe Shieridan, the Meath Co Board and most Meath posters on this board have demonstrated. So you can keep posting crap about me being negative, bitter about Meath or whatever other rubbish you want - you are only doing to yourself in my eyes what Big Joe is doing to himself in the media.
Just a reminder that some sportsmen can do the right thing...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:14:42 PM
Just a reminder that some sportsmen can do the right thing...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo
you mean do the right-wing thing........
(http://bestfootballers.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/dicanio1.jpg)
(http://claudiocaprara.ilcannocchiale.it/mediamanager/sys.user/38949/Paolo%20Di%20Canio.jpg)
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/00608/news-graphics-2005-_608378a.jpg)
maybe his actions for West Ham were laudable but since Joe Sheridans goal celebration is an issue for you then maybe di Canio wasn't the best choice overall
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:14:42 PM
Just a reminder that some sportsmen can do the right thing...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo
What would have been 'the right thing' for Joe to do then?
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on August 09, 2010, 10:08:42 PM
You know, its funny when I think back on how people were castigating the ref and the umpires but here we are weeks later with the benefit of tv replays, time to analyze rulebooks and, still, there are vastly differing opinions on what happened and how what happened should have been interpreted wrt rules of the game.
I was thinking about what AZ said about how I would react if I was was bundled over the line and he's right, I really would't know whether it was a legit goal. Then I thought a bit more and realized that the first thing I would have done if the defenders started roaring would be to get up and roar that it was a goal..which is exactly what Sheridan did. It wouldnt be "dishonest" as such..it would be instinctive human behavior. If I thought it might be a goal the competive spirit would convince me, in the moment, that it was definitely a goal. I've played in games, and reffed games, where it happens time and again with points that go over the top of the post and nobody is quite sure (including umpires) that it was a goal. Yet 100% of the time the way people view the incident seems to folllow which team they are on. This means everybody is blind or everybody is a lying baxtard. The truth is in between. We hallucinate the result we want to see so its a bit of being blind and a bit of lying (to oursleves as much as anyone else).
The only way to even attempt a comprehensive solution is the Rugby method. I've watched games and seen the way they replay the incidents..this primes the crowd for the decision as , most of the time, it is clear enough what happens. It gives the video ref plenaty of time in a calm environment to see the incident and if needed review the rules for weird situations. Plus it takes the heat off the ref who, after all, has to continue to ref the game or who is the one at risk from angry fans. Has there ever been major controversy or disagreement about a video refs decision ?
And yes, this would only be practical for the big games and would not be feasible at club games etc but , in that case, people have to just cop on and realize that mistakes will be made or that incidents will occur that are just extremely difficult to adjudicate on , especially, in the heat of the moment.
btw, in an ideal world everybody would be forced to referee and umpire a game or two. That would shut a lot of people up.
This is a very honest post and I think anyone that ever kicked a ball would be of a similar mind. However it shows how we put winning above integrity in our games. I don't know if the philosophy was always that way but it probably was. By contrast golf and sometimes snooker have philosophies where players often call fouls against themselves even when no one else has seen an offense. It might be naive though to demand similar culture in the Gaa.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 09, 2010, 10:56:42 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:14:42 PM
Just a reminder that some sportsmen can do the right thing...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWdf5ZLbtYo
What would have been 'the right thing' for Joe to do then?
You should have declined post match interviews. :D
Well fair enough, if Di Canio was making what looks like Nazi salutes then he is a sc**bag - I wasn't aware of this. I was looking for some acts of sportmanship that are out there and that one sprung to mind. Muppet said it better when he spoke of snooker and golf.
What should Joe have done,
Admitted after the game that the goal should not have stood
Not flaunted his winning by a foul goal in front of cameras
Called on his county board to offer louth a replay
That was all he could do and you know i'd be the 1st one here saying he was a decent lad if he had done that.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 11:09:03 PM
Well fair enough, if Di Canio was making what looks like Nazi salutes then he is a sc**bag - I wasn't aware of this. I was looking for some acts of sportmanship that are out there and that one sprung to mind. Muppet said it better when he spoke of snooker and golf.
What should Joe have done,
Admitted after the game that the goal should not have stood
Not flaunted his winning by a foul goal in front of cameras
Called on his county board to offer louth a replay
That was all he could do and you know i'd be the 1st one here saying he was a decent lad if he had done that.
But he didn't think that so why would he say it.
Lads, ye well know that golf and snooker are completely different. They are individual sports. Its a different scenario in a team sport and especially a team sport with a tribal component. There are more people who care about the result. If I recall, redknapp was managing West Ham at that time and they went on to win the game. If they hadn't the I'm sure there would have been plenty of west ham fans queuing up to bash Di Canio, thats if they could get past Harry Redknapp.
Also, golf and snooker are played in a much slower pace without rabid fans. Much easier for officials to "ref" them, so to speak.
At the end of the day its us, the fans, that have much of the responsibilty to bear. If winning wasnt so important to us then
maybe the players could relax a bit and play the game in a better spirit.
also, you only have to go back to the Ryder cup when the US players ran across Olazabals (??) line to see what can happen when the team sports/tribal aspect is brought into the equation.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on August 09, 2010, 11:44:58 PM
Lads, ye well know that golf and snooker are completely different. They are individual sports. Its a different scenario in a team sport and especially a team sport with a tribal component. There are more people who care about the result. If I recall, redknapp was managing West Ham at that time and they went on to win the game. If they hadn't the I'm sure there would have been plenty of west ham fans queuing up to bash Di Canio, thats if they could get past Harry Redknapp.
Also, golf and snooker are played in a much slower pace without rabid fans. Much easier for officials to "ref" them, so to speak.
At the end of the day its us, the fans, that have much of the responsibilty to bear. If winning wasnt so important to us then
maybe the players could relax a bit and play the game in a better spirit.
It was at the end of a 1-1 draw, WH were pressing for the winner.
Quote from: Jinxy on August 09, 2010, 11:10:58 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 11:09:03 PM
Well fair enough, if Di Canio was making what looks like Nazi salutes then he is a sc**bag - I wasn't aware of this. I was looking for some acts of sportmanship that are out there and that one sprung to mind. Muppet said it better when he spoke of snooker and golf.
What should Joe have done,
Admitted after the game that the goal should not have stood
Not flaunted his winning by a foul goal in front of cameras
Called on his county board to offer louth a replay
That was all he could do and you know i'd be the 1st one here saying he was a decent lad if he had done that.
But he didn't think that so why would he say it.
Of course he didn't jinxy ::)
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Indeed - as I pointed out before, you're like the man who'd rather his own horse died that that his neighbour would get a horse. Such bitterness is sad to behold, frankly.
P.S. Cavan ARE shite, though, believe it or not, I'm sorry to see that. I'd love to see a resurgence in our neighnours' fortunes as, I'd wager would most of Meath. But that's the difference between sportsmanship and whatever it is that gives rise to your bitterness.
No Hardy, you misunderstand. I'll try and put it simple to you. Football is a sport. Winning football matches or medal through cheating is anti-sport. I would rather lose and be sporting than win by cheating. Your horsey analogy is balls. Whether you would like Cavan to win or not is irrelevant. You seem to think I have something against Meath, I didn't have anything against Meath prior to this match other than a local rivalry and you could also say I would have admired their spirit and never say die attitude. But I abhor cheating and poor sportsmanship which is what Joe Shieridan, the Meath Co Board and most Meath posters on this board have demonstrated. So you can keep posting crap about me being negative, bitter about Meath or whatever other rubbish you want - you are only doing to yourself in my eyes what Big Joe is doing to himself in the media.
Sorry, Myles. That's an unconvincing attempt to recover face, hilariously ruined by your hapless choice of ideal sportsman that followed. Bullseye in the foot, I'm afraid.
You try to make a misguided point by choosing a nazi-saluting hero of soccer as a paragon of sportsmanlike conduct while going out of your way to excoriate a neighbour. Enough said and demonstrated about your pathetic sporting values.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:10:41 PM
Winning football matches or medal through cheating is anti-sport.
I defy you to find a football game where someone hasn't tried to cheat in some shape or form. Utopia would be great, but it never can exist.
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on August 09, 2010, 11:44:58 PM
If I recall, redknapp was managing West Ham at that time and they went on to win the game. If they hadn't the I'm sure there would have been plenty of west ham fans queuing up to bash Di Canio,
The match ended in a draw - that's why there was so much made of it - if West Ham had been running away with it, it wouldn't have mattered
Is Joe so tall that merits the tag "Big Joe", or is there another (smaller) Joe on the team?
Is there a 'Small Dick' on the Monaghan team?
Myles, as a Cavan man you must be outraged that Cavan didn't offer Derry a replay after the ulster final in '97:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU)
1.30: Wide given as a point. I'm sure the No.12 knew it was wide, do you think he should have told referee or umpires?
2.55: Reilly double bounce before hitting a point, should he have told the referee it was a free out?
Both these players would've known that they "cheated"! Is that ulster final victory tainted?
Quote from: Rick O Shea on August 10, 2010, 11:47:06 AM
Myles, as a Cavan man you must be outraged that Cavan didn't offer Derry a replay after the ulster final in '97:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU)
1.30: Wide given as a point. I'm sure the No.12 knew it was wide, do you think he should have told referee or umpires?
2.55: Reilly double bounce before hitting a point, should he have told the referee it was a free out?
Both these players would've known that they "cheated"! Is that ulster final victory tainted?
I was on the hill that day right behind cunninghams kick and I was not sure whether it was over or not. Doubt cunningham was himself. But cunningham didn't try and cheat, he just took a shot. If it had been waved wide I doubt he would have chased after the ref roaring like a clown.
Likewise, I doubt Larry even realised he hopped it twice. If you played football you'd know that could easily happen. Again, he fouled the ball but did not consciuosly try to cheat. And I doubt if he had been blown he would have went roaring at the ref and denying what everyone seen with their eyes like certain Meath players and supporters.
Quote from: Hardy on August 10, 2010, 09:25:23 AM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 10:10:41 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 09:20:16 PM
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 09, 2010, 09:10:36 PM
Quote from: Hardy on August 09, 2010, 08:59:55 PM
So much venom and hatred. That stuff will gnaw away at you and it will end badly.
Try to find a team to support, a cause to champion, something positive to espouse. Take my word for it - it's much more fulfilling than scouring the internet for people to slander and things to spit on. I know you haven't got much going for you up there with your arse to the slurry-scented wind, but broaden your self image a bit, align yourself with the wider Ulster identity and cheer for Down or something. Cheer, now. That's different to jeer.
I'd rather Cavan were shite than behave like ye did and have a medal.
Indeed - as I pointed out before, you're like the man who'd rather his own horse died that that his neighbour would get a horse. Such bitterness is sad to behold, frankly.
P.S. Cavan ARE shite, though, believe it or not, I'm sorry to see that. I'd love to see a resurgence in our neighnours' fortunes as, I'd wager would most of Meath. But that's the difference between sportsmanship and whatever it is that gives rise to your bitterness.
No Hardy, you misunderstand. I'll try and put it simple to you. Football is a sport. Winning football matches or medal through cheating is anti-sport. I would rather lose and be sporting than win by cheating. Your horsey analogy is balls. Whether you would like Cavan to win or not is irrelevant. You seem to think I have something against Meath, I didn't have anything against Meath prior to this match other than a local rivalry and you could also say I would have admired their spirit and never say die attitude. But I abhor cheating and poor sportsmanship which is what Joe Shieridan, the Meath Co Board and most Meath posters on this board have demonstrated. So you can keep posting crap about me being negative, bitter about Meath or whatever other rubbish you want - you are only doing to yourself in my eyes what Big Joe is doing to himself in the media.
Sorry, Myles. That's an unconvincing attempt to recover face, hilariously ruined by your hapless choice of ideal sportsman that followed. Bullseye in the foot, I'm afraid.
You try to make a misguided point by choosing a nazi-saluting hero of soccer as a paragon of sportsmanlike conduct while going out of your way to excoriate a neighbour. Enough said and demonstrated about your pathetic sporting values.
Again you attack me Hardy. It is you who can't argue the points but just attack the man. It is you that is pathetic. It is you that can't even engage on any of the issues. Did you ever think of running for governemnt in Israel. Look if you are happy to win by cheating and if you place any value on that Leinster title then great for you.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 10, 2010, 12:18:01 PM
Quote from: Rick O Shea on August 10, 2010, 11:47:06 AM
Myles, as a Cavan man you must be outraged that Cavan didn't offer Derry a replay after the ulster final in '97:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU)
1.30: Wide given as a point. I'm sure the No.12 knew it was wide, do you think he should have told referee or umpires?
2.55: Reilly double bounce before hitting a point, should he have told the referee it was a free out?
Both these players would've known that they "cheated"! Is that ulster final victory tainted?
I was on the hill that day right behind cunninghams kick and I was not sure whether it was over or not. Doubt cunningham was himself. But cunningham didn't try and cheat, he just took a shot. If it had been waved wide I doubt he would have chased after the ref roaring like a clown.
Likewise, I doubt Larry even realised he hopped it twice. If you played football you'd know that could easily happen. Again, he fouled the ball but did not consciuosly try to cheat. And I doubt if he had been blown he would have went roaring at the ref and denying what everyone seen with their eyes like certain Meath players and supporters.
Myles, you haven't a leg to stand on here.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on August 10, 2010, 12:22:56 PM
Again you attack me Hardy. It is you who can't argue the points but just attack the man. It is you that is pathetic. It is you that can't even engage on any of the issues. Did you ever think of running for governemnt in Israel. Look if you are happy to win by cheating and if you place any value on that Leinster title then great for you.
I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking the bitterness that pervades your posts and renders them unworthy of consideration as any sort of contribution to the debate. I detest that kind of attitude to sport, as I'm tiring of pointing out to you.
I would have thought your soccer example that backfired like a rusty blunderbuss would have caused you to stop making a spectacle of yourself here, but no. You're back for more with a breathtaking piece of hypocrisy when Rick points out to you the obvious dishonesty in your attitudes. Sorry, but that's any lingering vestige of credibility utterly shredded.
Are you going to go for the hat-trick?
Lads, calm down. There is a reason for having a referee arbitrating games.
For what it's worth Meath (usually canny people) erred badly in allowing JS to speak to media after the match. This imo is the biggest and only booh booh made by JS.
HE IS NOT A CHEAT.
Quote from: Rick O Shea on August 10, 2010, 11:47:06 AM
Myles, as a Cavan man you must be outraged that Cavan didn't offer Derry a replay after the ulster final in '97:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2e2EV8vNDU)
1.30: Wide given as a point. I'm sure the No.12 knew it was wide, do you think he should have told referee or umpires?
2.55: Reilly double bounce before hitting a point, should he have told the referee it was a free out?
Both these players would've known that they "cheated"! Is that ulster final victory tainted?
The whataboutery has been done to death. In this case the referee admitted he was wrong to give the goal, seemed to know it at the time when he said he was going to give a penalty (which was also probably wrong) and then as we were over time blew up straight after the kick-out.
The likelihood that many many Louth careers could be defined as 'never won Leinster' because of the above should have nothing to do with the merits of the argument but unfortunately it magnifies the significance of the error.
As Roy Keane might say for feck's sake let it go!!
FYI "Big Joe" is Joe Kernan, Joe Sheridan was "Cheating Joe" and now he's "Idiot Joe". Of course based on the Kildare game and the last 2 semi finals he could be "Bottler Joe".
::) Why? He was very good against Kildare.
He was good when Meath were good but when they needed someone to stand up in the second half he went missing, as he did against Louth
There's a spot for you on the Sunday Game. You could take over from Davis. At least your accent can't be as bad.
Quote from: The face on August 11, 2010, 02:31:56 PM
He was good when Meath were good but when they needed someone to stand up in the second half he went missing, as he did against Louth
He wasn't missing when it counted!! :D
Quote from: The face on August 11, 2010, 02:31:56 PM
He was good when Meath were good but when they needed someone to stand up in the second half he went missing, as he did against Louth
Did you not see him being pushed over the line? ???