gaaboard.com

It was always a risk. Even if he had lasted the 70, he would have spent the day avoiding tackles.
A physical game on a wet day is not the place to carry a player.
Maybe it was a sign of Cody under estimating Tipperary?

This sort of 'Monday morning quarterback' ( to borrow an Americanism) stuff is easy to do, but it's not fair. It obviously didn't work, but was he right to try? Who knows? They obviously felt it was a risk worth taking. If you were thinking of playing him, it did show it was better to start him than bring him on. Imagine if you brought him on after 40 minutes and had to replace him again after 52 minutes? The fact he aggravated it can't have surprised the team, so I don't think it rattled them as such.

And I don't think it's a sign of Cody underestimating Tipp at all. I think it may actually reflect the fact that Cody hoped against hope that Shefflin would be okay, because he knew he probably needed him.

a bad call from cody.  It made little sense to me as it pyschologically if he went off it would boost tipp and if he had come on with 10 left and 4 points in it, it would have put the fear of God in them.

All that said, even a fully fit shefflin of 3/4 yrs ago wouldn't have won that for them today.

Bogball, I know what you are saying, but I think the conventional wisdom is that if there is a doubt, it's better to start him and take him off, than bring him on, have him break down, and take him off again.

In fairness, he probably shouldn't have been togged out at all.

Quote from: AZOffaly on September 05, 2010, 08:58:10 PM
Bogball, I know what you are saying, but I think the conventional wisdom is that if there is a doubt, it's better to start him and take him off, than bring him on, have him break down, and take him off again.

In fairness, he probably shouldn't have been togged out at all.

no he shouldn't have been and i've been saying all week that the whole circus is great for tipp.  Training sessions etc are all very well, but we all know there's no replacement for the effort you'll put in when it'd for real.
I felt for him when he had to go off, it's never pleasant seeing one of the greats break down like that, and you'd have to wonder if we'll see him back on the big stage again.

I think you will see him back. Shefflin won't want to go out like that.

May be hard to get motivated for the recovery but I don't think he's a boy that would struggle with motivation.

He now has two nightmares to put right - getting wrecked in AIF and also getting beat by Tipp. I imagine he'll want to go out on a high.

A stupid decision, and hopefully there will be no repercussions, he's 31 years old, his second ACL injury, hopefully there will be no long term effects from a stupid, stupid decision. I know it sounded great in the media and the whole 8000 people turning up to see him play, abandoning the cars in the middle of the roads..etc. It was a ridiculous gamble and no ammount of work in less than 1 month will make up the healing and recovery that's supposed to be done by surgery and 7 odd months.

Hopefully there was no more damage done today, he's only 31 and should have a few years left and a lot more to give, so hopefully it'll be all right.

What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

It's the usual auld story - had KK won it would have been a great decision - as it is KK were bate and it's being labelled a bad decision.

It doesn't really matter now.

Henry will have his operation and be back out at it again next year.


Tennyson as Minder says had a great game. Was that a stupid decision as well ?.

Quote from: orangeman on September 05, 2010, 09:37:12 PM
It's the usual auld story - had KK won it would have been a great decision - as it is KK were bate and it's being labelled a bad decision.

It doesn't really matter now.

Henry will have his operation and be back out at it again next year.


Tennyson as Minder says had a great game. Was that a stupid decision as well ?.

No it wouldn't have been a great decission because he lasted feck all time. As a player, it was a terrible decision for him, made by him and agreed to by the KK management.

Quote from: AZOffaly on September 05, 2010, 08:42:23 PM
This sort of 'Monday morning quarterback' ( to borrow an Americanism) stuff is easy to do, but it's not fair. It obviously didn't work, but was he right to try? Who knows? They obviously felt it was a risk worth taking. If you were thinking of playing him, it did show it was better to start him than bring him on. Imagine if you brought him on after 40 minutes and had to replace him again after 52 minutes? The fact he aggravated it can't have surprised the team, so I don't think it rattled them as such.

And I don't think it's a sign of Cody underestimating Tipp at all. I think it may actually reflect the fact that Cody hoped against hope that Shefflin would be okay, because he knew he probably needed him.

I agree. The fact is perhaps Cody knew kilkenny's form better then any of us including me who thought they were playing well. its always on the training pitch where a manager knows how well a team is going. Just maybe Cody felt kilkenny weren't going that well and needed their talisman on the pitch in some shape. The Cork game was no test for kilkenny whatsoever and Cody obviously knew it.
Kilkenny are lacking an inside forward like Eddie Keher that they have been famous for over the years. Eddie Brennan has lost the yard and Power was left on his own. that was their biggest problem today.
However why was TJ taken off
Really feel for Fennelly and tyrell who threw the kitchen sink at Tipp today

Quote from: Minder on September 05, 2010, 09:34:48 PM
What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

was there not a difference in the types of injuries they both had, was it not thought form the outset that henry's was the more serious?  And whilst tennyson lasted, would lyng playing there have been detrimental for Kilkenny in any way?

Quote from: orangeman on September 05, 2010, 09:37:12 PM
It's the usual auld story - had KK won it would have been a great decision - as it is KK were bate and it's being labelled a bad decision.

It doesn't really matter now.

Henry will have his operation and be back out at it again next year.


Tennyson as Minder says had a great game. Was that a stupid decision as well ?.

Men aren't made on a production line. They play different positions and their bodies react differently to stresses and strains. There was no way of knowing whether it was a good decision or not until it became clear it was a bad decision! Cody could have wrecked Shefflin today but the Kilkenny ethos is focused on the collective rather than the individual, so he obviously felt he needed him out there. I thought he might have held him back and fired him on with 10 to go.

Quote from: INDIANA on September 05, 2010, 09:42:09 PM

Quote from: AZOffaly on September 05, 2010, 08:42:23 PM
This sort of 'Monday morning quarterback' ( to borrow an Americanism) stuff is easy to do, but it's not fair. It obviously didn't work, but was he right to try? Who knows? They obviously felt it was a risk worth taking. If you were thinking of playing him, it did show it was better to start him than bring him on. Imagine if you brought him on after 40 minutes and had to replace him again after 52 minutes? The fact he aggravated it can't have surprised the team, so I don't think it rattled them as such.

And I don't think it's a sign of Cody underestimating Tipp at all. I think it may actually reflect the fact that Cody hoped against hope that Shefflin would be okay, because he knew he probably needed him.

I agree. The fact is perhaps Cody knew kilkenny's form better then any of us including me who thought they were playing well. its always on the training pitch where a manager knows how well a team is going. Just maybe Cody felt kilkenny weren't going that well and needed their talisman on the pitch in some shape. The Cork game was no test for kilkenny whatsoever and Cody obviously knew it.
Kilkenny are lacking an inside forward like Eddie Keher that they have been famous for over the years. Eddie Brennan has lost the yard and Power was left on his own. that was their biggest problem today.
However why was TJ taken off
Really feel for Fennelly and tyrell who threw the kitchen sink at Tipp today

But sometimes they have to put a player, the good of the player ahead of the good of a team, if a player has a serious injury like Shefflin did, no matter how much of a talisman he is, shouldn't have been played, especially when it was only 17 days of recovery, instead of surgery and 7 or 8 months out. It was a stupid decision. Hopefully the decision wont cost Shefflin in any way.
It's so easy to look back and say in hindsight, what a stupid decision, but it was, and Cody's one eye tunnel vision could cost Shefflin a hell of a lot.

I would tend to agree with Reillers here. The word I would use to describe playing shefflin is irresponsible and I hope there is no long term damage.

So Reillers knows better than Gerard Hartmann. Good lad, fair pay to you. And he cares more about KK players welfare than Brian Cody. Would ye go away and cop yourself on and stop making such an eejit of yourself.

Quote from: magpie seanie link=
topic=17290.msg846762#msg846762 date=1283720641
So Reillers knows better than Gerard Hartmann. Good lad, fair pay to you. And he cares more about KK players welfare than Brian Cody. Would ye go away and cop yourself on and stop making such an eejit of yourself.

So it was a total new injury was it. Shefflin lasted 10 minutes, an entire 10 minutes. No amount of work no matter by who, would make up for the actual needed time to recover and heal, surgery and 8 months out (or that about.) No amount of work in 17 days will make up for the time needed.

I don't know where you're getting he cares more about Kk players welfare than Cody. Cody is very one eyed which we all know, and would do anything for KK to win and he took a gamble too far, which is blatantly obvious..well for 90% of people to see.
It was irresponsible and a stupid decision. Cody needed Shefflin and really went on the limb for him to play, so did the player himself and everyone involved, they all put in a massive effort. But it was a poor decision and it could cost Shefflin. it's not like he was tackled badly or anything, there was nobody near him, he pulled up in agony. It just went. It was like putting a plaster on a gun shot wound.

It was a terrible gamble and went terribly wrong, and you don't need to be an expert to figure that out, and to see that 17 days, no matter how much work they do, comes near to the required time out, no matter how fit or strong a player is.

Hopefully it wont cost the player time out.

And by the way everyone else is saying the same, I mean get over it. Build a bridge and move on and go cry into your pint. 

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 10:09:41 PM

Quote from: magpie seanie on September 05, 2010, 10:04:01 PM
So Reillers knows better than Gerard Hartmann. Good lad, fair pay to you. And he cares more about KK players welfare than Brian Cody. Would ye go away and cop yourself on and stop making such an eejit of yourself.

So it was a total new injury was it. Shefflin lasted 10 minutes, an entire 10 minutes. No amount of work no matter by who, would make up for the actual needed time to recover and heal, surgery and 8 months out (or that about.) No amount of work in 17 days will make up for the time needed.

I don't know where you're getting he cares more about Kk players welfare than Cody. Cody is very one eyed and would do anything for KK to win and he took a gamble too far, which is blatantly obvious. It was irresponsible and a stupid decision. Cody needed Shefflin and really went on the limb for him to play, so did the player himself and everyone involved but it was a poor decision and it could cost Shefflin. Nobody near him, pulled up in agony. It was a terrible gamble and went terribly wrong. Hopefully it wont cost the player time out.

And by the way everyone else is saying the same, I mean get over it. Build a bridge and move on.

shefflin knew the risks. And he'd admit it. Do you think cody put a gun to his head. They gambled and it backfired. Doesn't mean thye shouldn't have tried.You honestly think Cork have never gambled on a player

Quote from: INDIANA on September 05, 2010, 10:13:16 PM

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 10:09:41 PM

Quote from: magpie seanie on September 05, 2010, 10:04:01 PM
So Reillers knows better than Gerard Hartmann. Good lad, fair pay to you. And he cares more about KK players welfare than Brian Cody. Would ye go away and cop yourself on and stop making such an eejit of yourself.

So it was a total new injury was it. Shefflin lasted 10 minutes, an entire 10 minutes. No amount of work no matter by who, would make up for the actual needed time to recover and heal, surgery and 8 months out (or that about.) No amount of work in 17 days will make up for the time needed.

I don't know where you're getting he cares more about Kk players welfare than Cody. Cody is very one eyed and would do anything for KK to win and he took a gamble too far, which is blatantly obvious. It was irresponsible and a stupid decision. Cody needed Shefflin and really went on the limb for him to play, so did the player himself and everyone involved but it was a poor decision and it could cost Shefflin. Nobody near him, pulled up in agony. It was a terrible gamble and went terribly wrong. Hopefully it wont cost the player time out.

And by the way everyone else is saying the same, I mean get over it. Build a bridge and move on.

shefflin knew the risks. And he'd admit it. Do you think cody put a gun to his head. They gambled and it backfired. Doesn't mean thye shouldn't have tried.You honestly think Cork have never gambled on a player

No absolutely not, Shefflin was no doubt itching to play, would have done just about anything and put in an allmighty amount of work. But he should never have been allowed play, but that's just my view.

There's gambling on a player like hoping someone's hamstring will hold up and there's gambling on an ACL injury after less than a month out.
You'd have to trust his own judgement, he knows his body, he knew the risk, he's 31 years old..he's not a child. He wanted to be part of it, you couldn't bring him on and loose him 10 mins later, as we've said it'd be a boost for Tipp had that happened, so they either had to start him or play him in the last 10 mins.
They were clearly trying to rely on him too much and is it a point of being unfair on a fit player than going on a whim and a prayer. Kilkenny always go on about no one's too good to be dropped, that they've a really strong squad, that anyone's replaceable. But they played 2 players who had terrible injuries.

There's gambling and stupidity. I think they were right to try, if that's what he really wanted, and if there was genuinely any chance, but surely we all knew it was a tiny chance and even than, he was never going to last. It was ridiculous to think it'd hold up in any sort of way, too good to believe and it was.

I'm not going to get into the 'should he shouldn't he have started' arguement but I do wonder, why on earth with such an injury hanging over him was he not wearing a heavy knee support?

looking over the henry injury thread and reillers has been consistent - he said pretty much the same things back then that he's been saying on this thread, that even though henry might think he's ready, he really shouldn't be allowed to play.

just beat me to it there mournerambler- would it not have made more sense for him to try wear some sort of knee brace or support today?it's not like the tipp players weren't aware of the injury or going to target him! maybe he felt it restricted him, i don't know...
he prob was rushed back but hindsight is a wonderful thing, if kilkenny had of won cody would be a hero. fair play to tipp

Quote from: Overthebar! on September 05, 2010, 10:24:58 PM
just beat me to it there mournerambler- would it not have made more sense for him to try wear some sort of knee brace or support today?it's not like the tipp players weren't aware of the injury or going to target him! maybe he felt it restricted him, i don't know...
he prob was rushed back but hindsight is a wonderful thing, if kilkenny had of won cody would be a hero. fair play to tipp

I was thinking the same, you see these soccer lads wearnig all sorts, and you gotta wonder why it wasn't heavily strapped, obviously there was a reason he didn't need it or it would have had no effect. But it's interesting.

Henry says it was right to start - it just didn't work out. There's the answer from the horse's mouth.

Quote from: orangeman on September 05, 2010, 10:37:39 PM
Henry says it was right to start - it just didn't work out. There's the answer from the horse's mouth.

That is it at the end of the day, he wanted to play, he was 31, Cody for me, shouldn't have agreed to it, but he's 31 years old, he's not a child. It's not like you're dealing with a young lad who didn't know any better. It's Shefflin's fault at the end of the day, as much as it is Cody's. It was irresponsible for Cody to play him, but they both agreed to it, Shefflin's old enough and experienced enough to know the risks, they both did, and they'll pay for it, unfortunately.

Quote from: Minder on September 05, 2010, 09:34:48 PM
What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

Exactly. If Shefflin had lasted the 70 minutes people would still be complaining about something.

Quote from: All of a Sludden on September 05, 2010, 10:53:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on September 05, 2010, 09:34:48 PM
What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

Exactly. If Shefflin had lasted the 70 minutes people would still be complaining about something.

But it's not like Shefflin was tackled or landed badly, hit or fell, or his stud got caught in the ground..he was running, going at full pace. Tennyson got lucky and that's about it. It was still irresponsible for him to start.

And I hate to say it, but you've got to wonder, as someone brought up today, would they do the same thing with the soccer in the Premiership? I'm not sure to be honest, but maybe someone who knows the Premier league better could answer that. For me I think, they tend to put players welfare first.

Maybe Henry threatened to go on strike if Brian didn't start him......eh Reillers?  :P

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 10:59:02 PM

Quote from: All of a Sludden on September 05, 2010, 10:53:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on September 05, 2010, 09:34:48 PM
What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

Exactly. If Shefflin had lasted the 70 minutes people would still be complaining about something.

But it's not like Shefflin was tackled or landed badly, hit or fell, or his stud got caught in the ground..he was running, going at full pace. Tennyson got lucky and that's about it. It was still irresponsible for him to start.

And I hate to say it, but you've got to wonder, as someone brought up today, would they do the same thing with the soccer in the Premiership? I'm not sure to be honest, but maybe someone who knows the Premier league better could answer that. For me I think, they tend to put players welfare first.

Gerrard, Torres, Rooney, Terry and a host of others have all been nrushed back after injury for big games. I would say it was more Shefflins doing than Codys. Shefflin wanted to be there for the 5 in a row. If he had lasted the entire 70 minutes and Kilkenny won the game this thread would be about the genius of Cody and the guy who prepared Shefflin and Tennyson.
Thats sport, thems the breaks. Tipperary wont complain.

Quote from: All of a Sludden on September 05, 2010, 11:07:23 PM

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 10:59:02 PM

Quote from: All of a Sludden on September 05, 2010, 10:53:04 PM

Quote from: Minder on September 05, 2010, 09:34:48 PM
What about him starting Tennyson? Who had a fine game.

Exactly. If Shefflin had lasted the 70 minutes people would still be complaining about something.

But it's not like Shefflin was tackled or landed badly, hit or fell, or his stud got caught in the ground..he was running, going at full pace. Tennyson got lucky and that's about it. It was still irresponsible for him to start.

And I hate to say it, but you've got to wonder, as someone brought up today, would they do the same thing with the soccer in the Premiership? I'm not sure to be honest, but maybe someone who knows the Premier league better could answer that. For me I think, they tend to put players welfare first.

Gerrard, Torres, Rooney, Terry and a host of others have all been nrushed back after injury for big games. I would say it was more Shefflins doing than Codys. Shefflin wanted to be there for the 5 in a row. If he had lasted the entire 70 minutes and Kilkenny won the game this thread would be about the genius of Cody and the guy who prepared Shefflin and Tennyson.
Thats sport, thems the breaks. Tipperary wont complain.

But there's rushing back, skimming a few weeks off after rehab and surgery or whatever, and there's doing what Shefflin did, 20 odd days instead of surgery and 8 months, that puts "rushing back" from an injury to a whole new level.

Would they allow the likes of Rooney to do what Shefflin did? I guess it's hard to tell because it was one game, at the very end of the season..but you gotta wonder.
Would Manchester Untied have allowed Rooney to play in the World cup final for England if he had the same injury but would f**k him up for a few months and f**k him up for the club?

He didn't look right from the very first minute and looked like he was only 1/2 going in for tackles. Maybe with hindsight Cody should have took a leaf out of James mccartans book and just came out and said shefflin wasn't starting and concentrated on playing without him.  Kilkenny seemed to be focusing too much on shefflin being fit to play.

I'm long past the stage where I ever dare to think I'm qualified to question a decision Brian Cody makes when it comes to managing a game of hurling.

not sure it is right to be comparing the situation to professional footballers, after all they are tied to contracts worth millions of pounds. very few of those players would be half as loyal as Henry Shefflin has been to KK. he owes them nothing and if he wanted to be there for what could have been a historical day then fair play. the rights or wrongs of it don't matter now...

Quote from: gallsman on September 05, 2010, 11:45:45 PM
I'm long past the stage where I ever dare to think I'm qualified to question a decision Brian Cody makes when it comes to managing a game of hurling.

Oh how "dare" we question what Cody does.  ::)

Quote from: Overthebar! on September 05, 2010, 11:50:29 PM
not sure it is right to be comparing the situation to professional footballers, after all they are tied to contracts worth millions of pounds. very few of those players would be half as loyal as Henry Shefflin has been to KK. he owes them nothing and if he wanted to be there for what could have been a historical day then fair play. the rights or wrongs of it don't matter now...

Oh he owes them nothing, absolutely nothing. He wanted to be there, and worked his socks off to get there, and fair play for that, but I think it was irresponsible of Cody to play him, despite how willing he was. Not to mention it was unfair, in a way, on the team, too much going on with his knee, unfair on the team waiting to see whether Shefflin would start, would he, wont he..unfair on the fit players, despite the fact that KK having oh such a strong squad that nobody was irreplaceable.

As for the professional players, they may be worth millions but they are well looked after. You seem to know it better than me anyway, would England have played that lad Rooney in the World Cup final, if the situation was the same, knowing the impact it could have on the player and club?

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 11:51:26 PM

Quote from: gallsman on September 05, 2010, 11:45:45 PM
I'm long past the stage where I ever dare to think I'm qualified to question a decision Brian Cody makes when it comes to managing a game of hurling.

Oh how "dare" we question what Cody does.  ::)

Simply pointing out that I'm nowhere near qualified to question his decisions. He's been there for 12 years, won seven All-Irelands and reached another three finals.

Was listening to Len Gaynor driving home form the match and he pointed out that the psychological boost to the other players of Shefflin starting was definitely worthwhile. If they had torn into Tipp like they did against Waterford two years ago the loss of Shefflin after 15 mins or so might not have a rallying call as opposed to a source of dismay. Tennyson (who admittedly has had a longer recovery period) lasted the full 70 and hurled quite well.

Perhaps you should put yourself forward for the Cork job next year Reillers.

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:00:01 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 11:51:26 PM

Quote from: gallsman on September 05, 2010, 11:45:45 PM
I'm long past the stage where I ever dare to think I'm qualified to question a decision Brian Cody makes when it comes to managing a game of hurling.

Oh how "dare" we question what Cody does.  ::)

Simply pointing out that I'm nowhere near qualified to question his decisions. He's been there for 12 years, won seven All-Irelands and reached another three finals.

Was listening to Len Gaynor driving home form the match and he pointed out that the psychological boost to the other players of Shefflin starting was definitely worthwhile. If they had torn into Tipp like they did against Waterford two years ago the loss of Shefflin after 15 mins or so might not have a rallying call as opposed to a source of dismay. Tennyson (who admittedly has had a longer recovery period) lasted the full 70 and hurled quite well.

Perhaps you should put yourself forward for the Cork job next year Reillers.

But we can question everyone else. FFS.  ::) How dare us average club members question the all mighty Cody.

Cody has tunnel vision, he'll do whatever it takes for KK to win, no matter the cost..and sometimes he can't see where the line is, and he failed to see that this time round.

Think it was unfair on the team to be honest, a bit selfish almost, that everything was concentrating on him, waiting on him, being fit or not being fit, the team was unsure of what was going on, and what does it say about Cody's opinion of Rice, would rather Shefflin with a bad ACL injury start instead of him.
I mean in a way, it was a boost to see such a talisman start, but all the messing around can't have had a good impact on the team.

Tennyson got lucky, Shefflin didn't, that's about the sum of it, and he was out for longer than Shefflin as well to be fair.

They lost him after like 11 mins..whether KK were going well or not would have nothing to do with Shefflin, because he had very little impact on the game, the only major impact he had was the sight of him hobbling off. And that wouldn't have changed, whether they had ripped into Tipp and scored 10 points or 20 points. He lasted 11 mins, that was all. Doing more damage than good.

I agree with Reillers but ffs reillers lads are allowed to disagree with your point aswell. Agree to disagree. For me the fact he lasted 10mins is proof enough rather than dealing with ifs, buts and maybe. I would of went the caution approach and i also feel it was a EMOTIONAL decision rather than medical. Feel free to disagree.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:12:31 AM
Tennyson got lucky, Shefflin didn't, that's about the sum of it, and he was out for longer than Shefflin as well to be fair.

Exactly. That's how gambles work. If they come off you're a genius. If they don't you're an idiot. The decision is in whether to gamble or not. Cody obviously felt it worthwhile.

What's this bitchy shite about the "all mighty" (sic) Cody? Are you a little bit jealous? Cody has always been humble in victory and gracious in defeat. Heaven forbid anyone ever questions Sean Og or Donal Og Reillers, eh?

SLIGONIAN, I'll take up your offer of disagreeing with you. Cody has never resorted to emotional decisions. Players have always been picked on form. Back in 2003 there was uproar in the Village (his own club) when he dropped both Philly Larkin and Brian McEvoy - he's absolutely ruthless when he needs to be.

Quote from: SLIGONIAN on September 06, 2010, 12:23:39 AM
I agree with Reillers but ffs reillers lads are allowed to disagree with your point aswell. Agree to disagree. For me the fact he lasted 10mins is proof enough rather than dealing with ifs, buts and maybe. I would of went the caution approach and i also feel it was a EMOTIONAL decision rather than medical. Feel free to disagree.

Oh I don't care if they disagree, feel free, it's the ones who have nothing better to do but bring up the strike and have a go for no reason like the clown Magpiesean, when everyone else is saying the same. You think they'd have moved on by now.

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:32:29 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:12:31 AM
Tennyson got lucky, Shefflin didn't, that's about the sum of it, and he was out for longer than Shefflin as well to be fair.

Exactly. That's how gambles work. If they come off you're a genius. If they don't you're an idiot. The decision is in whether to gamble or not. Cody obviously felt it worthwhile.

What's this bitchy shite about the "all mighty" (sic) Cody? Are you a little bit jealous? Cody has always been humble in victory and gracious in defeat. Heaven forbid anyone ever questions Sean Og or Donal Og Reillers, eh?

SLIGONIAN, I'll take up your offer of disagreeing with you. Cody has never resorted to emotional decisions. Players have always been picked on form. Back in 2003 there was uproar in the Village (his own club) when he dropped both Philly Larkin and Brian McEvoy - he's absolutely ruthless when he needs to be.

Ya I agree, Cody put the team ahead of the player, hoping it would pay off, it didn't, not like it would have made much of an impact on the game because Tipp were outstanding, whille KK aren't.
You saying you wont question him because he's won so much, but we can question everyone else, and here we go back to the Cork obsession. Build a bridge..

The irony. You're absolutely pathetic. This has nothing to do with Cork. If it was Donal O'Grady or John Allen I wouldn't consider myself qualified to question them either.

You're right, Tipp were outstanding. You're wrong, Kilkenny are outstanding.

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:41:47 AM
The irony. You're absolutely pathetic. This has nothing to do with Cork. If it was Donal O'Grady or John Allen I wouldn't consider myself qualified to question them either.

You're right, Tipp were outstanding. You're wrong, Kilkenny are outstanding.

Oh why are you turning this into a whining session. You brought up Cork. You think  as club members we can't question someone like Cody, then fine, that's your view. I stop listenining when you start to throw a stroppy fit. I never said Kilkenny weren't outstanding, but go on, keep throwing a tantrum.

I never once said you couldn't question him. I merely pointed out that I personally wouldn't as I fully believe (as you pointed out yourself) that the TEAM is Cody's overriding concern.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:44:38 AM
I never said Kilkenny weren't outstanding

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:35:27 AM
Tipp were outstanding, whille KK aren't.

I suppose this is my old trick of quoting one of your posts out of context again, is it?

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:32:29 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:12:31 AM
Tennyson got lucky, Shefflin didn't, that's about the sum of it, and he was out for longer than Shefflin as well to be fair.

Exactly. That's how gambles work. If they come off you're a genius. If they don't you're an idiot. The decision is in whether to gamble or not. Cody obviously felt it worthwhile.

What's this bitchy shite about the "all mighty" (sic) Cody? Are you a little bit jealous? Cody has always been humble in victory and gracious in defeat. Heaven forbid anyone ever questions Sean Og or Donal Og Reillers, eh?

SLIGONIAN, I'll take up your offer of disagreeing with you. Cody has never resorted to emotional decisions. Players have always been picked on form. Back in 2003 there was uproar in the Village (his own club) when he dropped both Philly Larkin and Brian McEvoy - he's absolutely ruthless when he needs to be.

I agree to a certain extent, that this is the first and last emotional decision he will ever make imo. The pressure put on Cody by Shefflin to start in the AI final that bring the 5 in a row to me is what happened.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:33:05 AM

Quote from: SLIGONIAN on September 06, 2010, 12:23:39 AM
I agree with Reillers but ffs reillers lads are allowed to disagree with your point aswell. Agree to disagree. For me the fact he lasted 10mins is proof enough rather than dealing with ifs, buts and maybe. I would of went the caution approach and i also feel it was a EMOTIONAL decision rather than medical. Feel free to disagree.

Oh I don't care if they disagree, feel free, it's the ones who have nothing better to do but bring up the strike and have a go for no reason like the clown Magpiesean, when everyone else is saying the same. You think they'd have moved on by now.

If you didnt care you wouldnt be replying to every post that disagrees with you. People are going to be split 50/50 on this and there probably both right.

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:50:21 AM
I never once said you couldn't question him. I merely pointed out that I personally wouldn't as I fully believe (as you pointed out yourself) that the TEAM is Cody's overriding concern.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:44:38 AM
I never said Kilkenny weren't outstanding

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:35:27 AM
Tipp were outstanding, whille KK aren't.

I suppose this is my old trick of quoting one of your posts out of context again, is it?

Weren't on the day. FFS. You're as bad as Heffo.

Quote from: SLIGONIAN on September 06, 2010, 12:50:29 AM

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:32:29 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:12:31 AM
Tennyson got lucky, Shefflin didn't, that's about the sum of it, and he was out for longer than Shefflin as well to be fair.

Exactly. That's how gambles work. If they come off you're a genius. If they don't you're an idiot. The decision is in whether to gamble or not. Cody obviously felt it worthwhile.

What's this bitchy shite about the "all mighty" (sic) Cody? Are you a little bit jealous? Cody has always been humble in victory and gracious in defeat. Heaven forbid anyone ever questions Sean Og or Donal Og Reillers, eh?

SLIGONIAN, I'll take up your offer of disagreeing with you. Cody has never resorted to emotional decisions. Players have always been picked on form. Back in 2003 there was uproar in the Village (his own club) when he dropped both Philly Larkin and Brian McEvoy - he's absolutely ruthless when he needs to be.

I agree to a certain extent, that this is the first and last emotional decision he will ever make imo. The pressure put on Cody by Shefflin to start in the AI final that bring the 5 in a row to me is what happened.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:33:05 AM

Quote from: SLIGONIAN on September 06, 2010, 12:23:39 AM
I agree with Reillers but ffs reillers lads are allowed to disagree with your point aswell. Agree to disagree. For me the fact he lasted 10mins is proof enough rather than dealing with ifs, buts and maybe. I would of went the caution approach and i also feel it was a EMOTIONAL decision rather than medical. Feel free to disagree.

Oh I don't care if they disagree, feel free, it's the ones who have nothing better to do but bring up the strike and have a go for no reason like the clown Magpiesean, when everyone else is saying the same. You think they'd have moved on by now.

If you didnt care you wouldnt be replying to every post that disagrees with you. People are going to be split 50/50 on this and there probably both right.

I am replying to them, that doesn't mean I don't think they can disagree. It's called a debate. FFS.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:51:17 AM

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:50:21 AM
I never once said you couldn't question him. I merely pointed out that I personally wouldn't as I fully believe (as you pointed out yourself) that the TEAM is Cody's overriding concern.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:44:38 AM
I never said Kilkenny weren't outstanding

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:35:27 AM
Tipp were outstanding, whille KK aren't.

I suppose this is my old trick of quoting one of your posts out of context again, is it?

Weren't on the day. FFS. You're as bad as Heffo.

Ah right, so anything out of context is due to your inability to articulate what you mean?

If you'd said "Kilkenny weren't" that might imply you were referring to today specifically. However, the phrase you used was "Kilkenny aren't" which spins things entirely differently and suggests they are not an outstanding side. Forgive my inability to extract exactly what you mean.

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:57:12 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:51:17 AM

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:50:21 AM
I never once said you couldn't question him. I merely pointed out that I personally wouldn't as I fully believe (as you pointed out yourself) that the TEAM is Cody's overriding concern.

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:44:38 AM
I never said Kilkenny weren't outstanding

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:35:27 AM
Tipp were outstanding, whille KK aren't.

I suppose this is my old trick of quoting one of your posts out of context again, is it?

Weren't on the day. FFS. You're as bad as Heffo.

Ah right, so anything out of context is due to your inability to articulate what you mean?

If you'd said "Kilkenny weren't" that might imply you were referring to today specifically. However, the phrase you used was "Kilkenny aren't" which spins things entirely differently and suggests they are not an outstanding side. Forgive my inability to extract exactly what you mean.

Talk about fuckin nitpicking. Get a life. Stop getting so twisted up and upset about one wrong word. I'm sure you've something better to be doing with your time than that..I mean probably anyway.

Getting back to the point of the thread.

Lads the injury which Shefflin had as far as I read was a partial tear of his ACL, so the point being it is as easy to repair a full on tear as it is a partial so the point is he might have been told to go for it by the surgeon and if it goes it goes.

It has been done in other sports such a rugby and rugby league before so it wasnt completely 'out there' as a decision.

But for once I think it showed a level of weakness that Kilkenny have never shown before. Anyone else on the team would just been told thanks for everything this year, now heres the date for your op. I think it put them on the back foot pyschologically from day one.

Interesting discussion, aside from the usual hurling bitches here  :-*, the fact that Henry played at least 2 training games at full training game pace showed that it was a gamble worth considering. When he informed that he felt good to go and that he had also been doing some work back on the Ballyhale pitch along with the intense rehabilitation work things were looking good. Shefflin would have hardly put himself in this position if he didn't feel up to it. I'm sure the Croke park pitch didn't do him any favours either, nor the slippy surface.
This calling Cody stupid and giving out about his single-mindedness is really laughable.

Being on the photo of the team that lined out for a 5 in a row which looked on at 3.30 - I'm not surprised that Shefflin went for it.

Quote from: NAG1 on September 06, 2010, 08:23:51 AM
Getting back to the point of the thread.

Lads the injury which Shefflin had as far as I read was a partial tear of his ACL, so the point being it is as easy to repair a full on tear as it is a partial so the point is he might have been told to go for it by the surgeon and if it goes it goes.

It has been done in other sports such a rugby and rugby league before so it wasnt completely 'out there' as a decision.

But for once I think it showed a level of weakness that Kilkenny have never shown before. Anyone else on the team would just been told thanks for everything this year, now heres the date for your op. I think it put them on the back foot pyschologically from day one.

I agree, it showed Kilkenny's weakness, they have been praised for and been known for no player being above the team, and that anyone was replaceable, but what happened with Shefflin seems to point to the opposite. That Cody would rather Shefflin with an ACL injury start over a fit player, and that the team needed him that badly, I think it can't have put too much confidence into the team if Cody needed him that much, never mind the messing about and the will he play wont he play, can't have been a good atmosphere to be in, and you're right, if it was any other player there wouldn't have been a question of them playing.

It was a very foolish decision to start or even play Shefflin.
There is NO way the man could have played in that or any game of serious competition.

How Cody thought that I don't know?

People talk about the ACL and how strong it is or not - that's not the point. The fact is a very skilled player took the field with a knee (unsupported) and exposed the cartilage and joint to a dramatically increased risk of career ending injury and a nonprofessional life of pain and discomfort.

Whether the man wanted to play or not is largely irrelevant when you consider the long term health implications. 

KK would have been far better not have him near the team and do 'one for the Gipper' rather than have all the hype and hoopla not to mention the distraction on the players wondering if Henry was fit or not. The effect of Henry Shefflin was a FAR greater blow to Kilkenny hurlers than it would have been had he not started - ignoring the boost it gave to the Tipp players.

Quote from: imtommygunn on September 05, 2010, 09:56:29 PM
I would tend to agree with Reillers here

That is genuinely the first time anyone has ever said that.

Has someone hacked into Reillers account?

Quote from: Reillers on September 06, 2010, 12:12:31 AM

Quote from: gallsman on September 06, 2010, 12:00:01 AM

Quote from: Reillers on September 05, 2010, 11:51:26 PM

Quote from: gallsman on September 05, 2010, 11:45:45 PM
I'm long past the stage where I ever dare to think I'm qualified to question a decision Brian Cody makes when it comes to managing a game of hurling.

Oh how "dare" we question what Cody does.  ::)

Simply pointing out that I'm nowhere near qualified to question his decisions. He's been there for 12 years, won seven All-Irelands and reached another three finals.

Was listening to Len Gaynor driving home form the match and he pointed out that the psychological boost to the other players of Shefflin starting was definitely worthwhile. If they had torn into Tipp like they did against Waterford two years ago the loss of Shefflin after 15 mins or so might not have a rallying call as opposed to a source of dismay. Tennyson (who admittedly has had a longer recovery period) lasted the full 70 and hurled quite well.

Perhaps you should put yourself forward for the Cork job next year Reillers.

How dare us average club members question the all mighty Cody.

Post Removed

Quote from: heffo on September 06, 2010, 04:03:23 PM

Quote from: imtommygunn on September 05, 2010, 09:56:29 PM
I would tend to agree with Reillers here

That is genuinely the first time anyone has ever said that.

Has someone hacked into Reillers account?

;D Someone had to.

I genuinely think it was very irresponsible. Like Konica said it's not just his hurling has to be considered.

What was it they said last night - he'd trained twice? Crazy.

I agree with Konica  ;)

So do I.

Quote from: The Konica on September 06, 2010, 02:55:56 PM
It was a very foolish decision to start or even play Shefflin.
There is NO way the man could have played in that or any game of serious competition.

How Cody thought that I don't know?

People talk about the ACL and how strong it is or not - that's not the point. The fact is a very skilled player took the field with a knee (unsupported) and exposed the cartilage and joint to a dramatically increased risk of career ending injury and a nonprofessional life of pain and discomfort.

Whether the man wanted to play or not is largely irrelevant when you consider the long term health implications. 

KK would have been far better not have him near the team and do 'one for the Gipper' rather than have all the hype and hoopla not to mention the distraction on the players wondering if Henry was fit or not. The effect of Henry Shefflin was a FAR greater blow to Kilkenny hurlers than it would have been had he not started - ignoring the boost it gave to the Tipp players.

I'd say Cody was in a very uncomfortable position, he'd a player who he probably knew wasn't totally 100%, but was insisting he was fit to play. There was a big enough media circus around the five in a row, let alone the will he, won't he position of his talisman and that couldn't have been good for the rest of the squad either.

If he'd have told Shefflin a week earlier that he wouldn't be featuring during the game for his own good in hindsight he'd have done the right thing but he'd have been hung out to dry by the media and Kilkenny people on the 'what if? mentality
Shefflin himself may have been blinded by his own burning desire to get his place on the team and I suppose that's what seperates great hurlers from good ones. This time it didn't work out.

From a managerial POV Cody done the right thing in starting him as if he'd brought him on and as transpired it didn't work out, he'd then have to take him off again using up two substitutes leaving him less room for manouevering in the latter stages.

Who'd be a manager eh?

I actually thought there might be a bit of intentional distraction going on, but I should have known better. I had a suspicion that Cody was happy for all the Henry talk to go on, because that was leading to less '5 in a row' talk going on. I assumed he'd either not play him at all, or else the extent of the injury was far less severe than initially feared.

But in fairness it was straight up. He was in trouble, they did think he'd be okay, it was a gamble and it failed.

How some people with little or no medical knowledge can question Cody or even more importantly someone like Gerard Hartmann who has worked with over 50 Olympic medalists is beyond me. Of course these are the type of people whose style of "debate" includes such arguments as calling people clowns and saying everyone agrees with their point of view (when clearly that's not the case).

Shefflin trained a good few times on it and while I'm sure it wasn't full pelt it was hardly picnic stuff either. It was a calculated gamble which did not come off. The fact that Tennyson came through and played well reinforces the correctness of trying it in my book. Some people would have you think it was done on a whim.  ::) I suppose if you're heros got extra special whippings off KK in recent times you'd be sore too.  ;)

3 similar injuries to key players in recent weeks with the 3 managers taking different approaches.

McGeeney named the team with Earley starting then didn't start him.
McCartan said Rodgers wouldn't be playing from early on and Fitzpatrick was taking his place and did exactly that.
Cody said Shefflin would be starting and all the focus in Kilkenny was on whether Shefflin would be playing.  Was there 2 much focus on Henry Shefflin considering some of the other players on the Kilkenny team?

Shefflin was not fit to start, they where 1-5 to 0-1 (or something like that) down when Shefflin came off, he missed a couple of frees (difficult frees) by quite a distance that he would normally have got at least 1 of and there was a few breaking balls around the 1/2 forward line that he would normally been first on to where he looked like he was only 1/2 going for the ball and 1/2 wondering should he be out there at all. 

No one can know for sure what would have happened if Cody had told Michael Rice and the rest of the team at the start of the week to forget about Henry and start focusing on the final without him.  I think Cody made a mistake, there is a good chance Cody with hindsight will think it was a mistake as well.  It is very unlike Cody as well.  He is usually totally ruthless with players like Charlie Carter in terms of dropping them, it looks like he made an exception for Henry Shefflin.

Is it OK if I agree with the points made by maiden rather than regurgitate the same arguments  ???

Looking at henry in the warm up he just didn't look right to me and it was even more pronounced the first few balls he went for. All very subtle but I didn't like the look of how he was slowing down/turning. As maiden has said Cody is normally ruthless when it comes to these type of decisions. I think him not doing so on this occasion showed weakness and affected the rest of the teams preparation going into the game

We all knew from the very first free that he was not fit. He didn't swing through it at all - he seemed to be afraid of it.

Quote from: magpie seanie on September 07, 2010, 01:15:05 PM
How some people with little or no medical knowledge can question Cody or even more importantly someone like Gerard Hartmann who has worked with over 50 Olympic medalists is beyond me. Of course these are the type of people whose style of "debate" includes such arguments as calling people clowns and saying everyone agrees with their point of view (when clearly that's not the case).

Shefflin trained a good few times on it and while I'm sure it wasn't full pelt it was hardly picnic stuff either. It was a calculated gamble which did not come off. The fact that Tennyson came through and played well reinforces the correctness of trying it in my book. Some people would have you think it was done on a whim.  ::) I suppose if you're heros got extra special whippings off KK in recent times you'd be sore too.  ;)

A few points on the above.
1. Hartmann may have 'worked with' over 50 olympic medalists - Not many would have been ACL's. They are a completely different family of injury.
2. Training and playing in an AI final are not the same (as Larry said himself today) - How hard do you think the KK boys pushed or tackled Henry Shefflin in training? You think you'd want to have been the man to be labelled the guy who crippled HS and ruined the 'Drive for 5'? Not a hope.
3. Thirdly, the position is important - stopping, twisting and turning are the key protective roles of the ACL. While CHB is not a role where twisting and turning is non-essential - the positioning of HS with back to goal is far more predicated on such demands.

Quote from: Maiden1 on September 07, 2010, 01:59:23 PM
3 similar injuries to key players in recent weeks with the 3 managers taking different approaches.

McGeeney named the team with Earley starting then didn't start him.
McCartan said Rodgers wouldn't be playing from early on and Fitzpatrick was taking his place and did exactly that.
Cody said Shefflin would be starting and all the focus in Kilkenny was on whether Shefflin would be playing.  Was there 2 much focus on Henry Shefflin considering some of the other players on the Kilkenny team?

Shefflin was not fit to start, they where 1-5 to 0-1 (or something like that) down when Shefflin came off, he missed a couple of frees (difficult frees) by quite a distance that he would normally have got at least 1 of and there was a few breaking balls around the 1/2 forward line that he would normally been first on to where he looked like he was only 1/2 going for the ball and 1/2 wondering should he be out there at all. 

No one can know for sure what would have happened if Cody had told Michael Rice and the rest of the team at the start of the week to forget about Henry and start focusing on the final without him.  I think Cody made a mistake, there is a good chance Cody with hindsight will think it was a mistake as well.  It is very unlike Cody as well.  He is usually totally ruthless with players like Charlie Carter in terms of dropping them, it looks like he made an exception for Henry Shefflin.

Excellent post.
You've clearly outlined the difference between the team knowing and the outsiders knowing and the fact that Cody perhaps should have been much more ruthless in his approach and not fooled into thinking that Henry could have recovered.

Quote from: theskull1 on September 07, 2010, 02:30:16 PM
Is it OK if I agree with the points made by maiden rather than regurgitate the same arguments  ???

Looking at henry in the warm up he just didn't look right to me and it was even more pronounced the first few balls he went for. All very subtle but I didn't like the look of how he was slowing down/turning. As maiden has said Cody is normally ruthless when it comes to these type of decisions. I think him not doing so on this occasion showed weakness and affected the rest of the teams preparation going into the game

Exactly see my post above.

Before the game I was of two minds
1. It's not an ACL injury at all - it's been completely misdiagnosed. There is some cartilage damage and muscle injury but no ACL injury. This was supported by no one clearly coming out and saying for definite or being quoted (after about the Monday after the game) that it was 100% an ACL injury. All that there was was Ian O'Riordan cheerleading about the Lazarus recovery he had.

2. It is a partial ACL injury and he'll last 10 minutes. An ACL injury or more correctly the symptoms of one (swelling etc) can actually die down quite quickly, and the player with correct recovery can resume exercise quite fast. But twisting, turning etc are never at full pace for quite some time.

Sadly 2 it was.

I think Cody did make a mistake, but I certainly think he deserves far more credit for getting KK to that stage - the Drive for 5 was a great testament to his ability not to mention his players.

It's easy being wise after the event.
I sure as hell couldn't have even got into Cody's position to even make that 'mistake'.

Cody staying on according to KK board tonight.

Shite