Haven't heard any outcry against this. Where is the doctors coming out telling us how many people this will kill. Why no media outcry to think of the children etc? That's the two main rugby competitions irish teams play in sponsored by drinks companies. Very different attitude from the Dublin press to rugby than gaa in the country.
It must be very comforting for the IRFU to know that, should they ever lose a sponsor, Guinness or one of the banks will be there to pick up the pieces.
Maybe the fact that it's a nothing competition explains it??
After all, if Guinness were to sponsor a 10k roadrace in Ballynowhere it wouldn't be a big deal but if they sponsored the Dublin marathon it probably would be.
Quote from: macdanger2 on July 11, 2014, 02:19:51 PM
Maybe the fact that it's a nothing competition explains it??
After all, if Guinness were to sponsor a 10k roadrace in Ballynowhere it wouldn't be a big deal but if they sponsored the Dublin marathon it probably would be.
For a nothing competition it gets plenty of coverage by the southern press. The draw for it relating to games next autumn gets greater news coverage than the championships which are in full swing. The European Cup is also sponsored by a drinks company. Very strange that not a negative word about it when you consider the amount of abuse the gaa took and quotes from experts etc.
I've never understood why drinks or fag companies were being banned from sponsorship. Unless they are handing out freebies whats the problem. Doesnt make me want to smoke Marlboro or drink heineken.
In fact if anyone is stupid enough to do so then they deserve to leave the gene pool.
Even at that I have just a big a problem with the likes of Coca-Cola, Kellogs, Heinz and many others with all their dodgy goods linked to GMO's. Are these healthy for you and your kids?
When are these lot going to be banned?
never liked Coca-Cola or McDonalds sponsoring Feíle's etc etc, as they peddle pure muck and tagging their brands onto childrens competitions is just wrong.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 03:23:26 PM
I've never understood why drinks or fag companies were being banned from sponsorship. Unless they are handing out freebies whats the problem. Doesnt make me want to smoke Marlboro or drink heineken.
In fact if anyone is stupid enough to do so then they deserve to leave the gene pool.
Even at that I have just a big a problem with the likes of Coca-Cola, Kellogs, Heinz and many others with all their dodgy goods linked to GMO's. Are these healthy for you and your kids?
When are these lot going to be banned?
Ah jeez the aul Bran Flakes arent bad for ye.
Agree with Coke and Mc Donalds should be banned!!
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 03:23:26 PM
I've never understood why drinks or fag companies were being banned from sponsorship. Unless they are handing out freebies whats the problem. Doesnt make me want to smoke Marlboro or drink heineken.
In fact if anyone is stupid enough to do so then they deserve to leave the gene pool.
Even at that I have just a big a problem with the likes of Coca-Cola, Kellogs, Heinz and many others with all their dodgy goods linked to GMO's. Are these healthy for you and your kids?
When are these lot going to be banned?
Those drink and fag companies must be pretty stupid, spending money that makes no difference to consumption of their product. Or maybe it's possible that they know something about marketing that you don't?
Quote from: deiseach on July 11, 2014, 03:31:30 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 03:23:26 PM
I've never understood why drinks or fag companies were being banned from sponsorship. Unless they are handing out freebies whats the problem. Doesnt make me want to smoke Marlboro or drink heineken.
In fact if anyone is stupid enough to do so then they deserve to leave the gene pool.
Even at that I have just a big a problem with the likes of Coca-Cola, Kellogs, Heinz and many others with all their dodgy goods linked to GMO's. Are these healthy for you and your kids?
When are these lot going to be banned?
Those drink and fag companies must be pretty stupid, spending money that makes no difference to consumption of their product. Or maybe it's possible that they know something about marketing that you don't?
Marketing works if people are suggestible to their offerings. Marketing is based product placement - trying to appear as the leading brand whether their product is good or not. Tie-ins with sports, entertainment, etc enhances this notion. The population seems to fall for it. Fair play to the simpletons, you're living life like the stars do.
Enjoy your Heineken. It tastes like piss.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 04:07:39 PM
Marketing works if people are suggestible to their offerings. Marketing is based product placement - trying to appear as the leading brand whether their product is good or not. Tie-ins with sports, entertainment, etc enhances this notion. The population seems to fall for it. Fair play to the simpletons, you're living life like the stars do.
Enjoy your Heineken. It tastes like piss.
So now you are saying that marketing does work. Therefore would you not agree that it would be a good idea to regulate it?
Quote from: Redhand Santa on July 11, 2014, 01:38:56 PM
Haven't heard any outcry against this. Where is the doctors coming out telling us how many people this will kill. Why no media outcry to think of the children etc? That's the two main rugby competitions irish teams play in sponsored by drinks companies. Very different attitude from the Dublin press to rugby than gaa in the country.
+1.
Rubby is of course above reproach. ::)
Quote from: deiseach on July 11, 2014, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 04:07:39 PM
Marketing works if people are suggestible to their offerings. Marketing is based product placement - trying to appear as the leading brand whether their product is good or not. Tie-ins with sports, entertainment, etc enhances this notion. The population seems to fall for it. Fair play to the simpletons, you're living life like the stars do.
Enjoy your Heineken. It tastes like piss.
So now you are saying that marketing does work. Therefore would you not agree that it would be a good idea to regulate it?
If you read what I said - it works on the suggestible. Does the nanny state have to intervene or shouldn't people take responsibility to inform themselves?
If you're stupid enough to buy into it without considering the consequences then you should have no comeback when you try to sue them later on.
As for the GMO food companies I would say that they should be upfront about what they are selling. No need to regulate if they tell people that they are peddling poison to the masses. Again, freedom of choice once you've been made aware of the consequences.
They should be putting those "Eating Kelloggs Frosties are part of a balanced diet but can kill or cause side effects. They're Grrrrrrrrrreat!" stickers on the side of every box.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 04:24:08 PM
If you read what I said - it works on the suggestible. Does the nanny state have to intervene or shouldn't people take responsibility to inform themselves?
If you're stupid enough to buy into it without considering the consequences then you should have no comeback when you try to sue them later on.
As for the GMO food companies I would say that they should be upfront about what they are selling. No need to regulate if they tell people that they are peddling poison to the masses. Again, freedom of choice once you've been made aware of the consequences.
They should be putting those "Eating Kelloggs Frosties are part of a balanced diet but can kill or cause side effects. They're Grrrrrrrrrreat!" stickers on the side of every box.
Thanks for the libertarian spiel. You might think that the solution to the problem of people consuming too many toxins such as alcohol is to ensure that they are well-informed enough about the dangers and if they fall for it, that's their lookout. And I guess that's fine in isolation. But I think not everyone should be treated in such a Darwinian fashion. Some people are 'susceptible' because they're young or they're mentally vulnerable due to loss or poverty. Yes, it is nannyish, I'll admit that. But I think we can have the discussion of what is appropriate levels of 'nannying' without seeing all regulation as an infringement on liberty.
Quote from: deiseach on July 11, 2014, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 04:24:08 PM
If you read what I said - it works on the suggestible. Does the nanny state have to intervene or shouldn't people take responsibility to inform themselves?
If you're stupid enough to buy into it without considering the consequences then you should have no comeback when you try to sue them later on.
As for the GMO food companies I would say that they should be upfront about what they are selling. No need to regulate if they tell people that they are peddling poison to the masses. Again, freedom of choice once you've been made aware of the consequences.
They should be putting those "Eating Kelloggs Frosties are part of a balanced diet but can kill or cause side effects. They're Grrrrrrrrrreat!" stickers on the side of every box.
Thanks for the libertarian spiel. You might think that the solution to the problem of people consuming too many toxins such as alcohol is to ensure that they are well-informed enough about the dangers and if they fall for it, that's their lookout. And I guess that's fine in isolation. But I think not everyone should be treated in such a Darwinian fashion. Some people are 'susceptible' because they're young or they're mentally vulnerable due to loss or poverty. Yes, it is nannyish, I'll admit that. But I think we can have the discussion of what is appropriate levels of 'nannying' without seeing all regulation as an infringement on liberty.
Survival of the fittest? Part of the problem with today's society is making exceptions for these cases and propping them up. This is a whole different thread!
So to get back to the topic - I don't see why the GAA or any organisation should have to exclude any sponsors except in the case of sponsorships relating to minors. If ruggers can do it then why are the GAA not? It's not like people won't drink or smoke because of it.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 11, 2014, 04:45:33 PM
Survival of the fittest? Part of the problem with today's society is making exceptions for these cases and propping them up. This is a whole different thread!
So to get back to the topic - I don't see why the GAA or any organisation should have to exclude any sponsors except in the case of sponsorships relating to minors. If ruggers can do it then why are the GAA not? It's not like people won't drink or smoke because of it.
But people will drink and smoke because of it! If you think people shouldn't be insulated from the consequences of their own actions, fine. We can agree to differ on that one. But you can't say in one breath that it doesn't matter then in the next that it doesn't happen.
Quote from: Redhand Santa on July 11, 2014, 01:38:56 PM
Haven't heard any outcry against this. Where is the doctors coming out telling us how many people this will kill. Why no media outcry to think of the children etc? That's the two main rugby competitions irish teams play in sponsored by drinks companies. Very different attitude from the Dublin press to rugby than gaa in the country.
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
Quote from: Redhand Santa on July 11, 2014, 01:38:56 PM
Haven't heard any outcry against this. Where is the doctors coming out telling us how many people this will kill. Why no media outcry to think of the children etc? That's the two main rugby competitions irish teams play in sponsored by drinks companies. Very different attitude from the Dublin press to rugby than gaa in the country.
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
The President of Ireland attends most home Ireland rugby matches especially in the six nations. Politicians of all shapes and sizes are routinely in the seats of the great and good at the aviva. Rugby has plenty of high profile hangers on too
Quote from: johnneycool on July 11, 2014, 03:25:49 PM
never liked Coca-Cola or McDonalds sponsoring Feíle's etc etc, as they peddle pure muck and tagging their brands onto childrens competitions is just wrong.
Getting picky isn't in the job remit.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Why would it? Rugby isn't an irish sport.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 12, 2014, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Why would it? Rugby isn't an irish sport.
You're right, rugby is a global sport, though not on the same scale as football, obviously. I was maybe careless with my choice of words when I said 'psyche' - I was thinking more of the fact that GAA is part of the Irish establishment in the way that other sports aren't. GAA will never have the potential to capture the interest and imagination of the Irish people in the way that the republic's world cup team did Italia 90, for example. It's too parochial in every sense.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 13, 2014, 12:37:39 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 12, 2014, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Why would it? Rugby isn't an irish sport.
You're right, rugby is a global sport,
Hahahah...it's not a global sport, stop trying to convince yourself. There's about 7 countries that play it.
And in Ireland I don't need to spell out that it's an british imperial sport but theres a lot out there that don't like to hear it.
I'm sure you unionists are fans eh Myles?
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 02:58:38 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 13, 2014, 12:37:39 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 12, 2014, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Why would it? Rugby isn't an irish sport.
You're right, rugby is a global sport,
Hahahah...it's not a global sport, stop trying to convince yourself. There's about 7 countries that play it.
And in Ireland I don't need to spell out that it's an british imperial sport but theres a lot out there that don't like to hear it.
I'm sure you unionists are fans eh Myles?
Here's the rugby world rankings table:
http://www.irb.com/rankings/sportid=1/ranking/index.html
Have you got a similar one for gaelic football or hurling? ;D
When you see the likes of Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Samoa on the top ten of any sporting list you have to know that it's a diddy of a sport.
Hahahaha you said global. I could probably get a game with any team under the top 20 of the list and I don't even know how to play.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 06:39:25 PM
When you see the likes of Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Samoa on the top ten of any sporting list you have to know that it's a diddy of a sport.
Hahahaha you said global. I could probably get a game with any team under the top 20 of the list and I don't even know how to play.
I'd say that a diddy of a sport is one that hasn't been able to catch on outside its own backyard, despite the fact that Irish people are to be found in numbers all over the globe.
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 13, 2014, 06:46:49 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 06:39:25 PM
When you see the likes of Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Samoa on the top ten of any sporting list you have to know that it's a diddy of a sport.
Hahahaha you said global. I could probably get a game with any team under the top 20 of the list and I don't even know how to play.
I'd say that a diddy of a sport is one that hasn't been able to catch on outside its own backyard, despite the fact that Irish people are to be found in numbers all over the globe.
Where did I ever boast that Gaa was a global sport. You said that about rugger and shown up that your facts are bullsh*t. Fiji, Samoa and Ireland indeed.
Again begs the question why you are on a Gaelic Website if you hate GAA so much. I trust you had fun yesterday at Orangefest 2014?
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 02:58:38 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 13, 2014, 12:37:39 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 12, 2014, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 12, 2014, 09:20:52 AM
The difference is that the GAA is about more than just sport. You don't see the IRFU promoting the Irish language, national reunification, etc etc. You won't see hoardes of high ranking Catholic clergy, Irish army officers, etc sitting in the best seats at a big rugby match. GAA is tied up in the national psyche in a way that rugby and football aren't. For that reason, whatever the GAA does, it'll always be scrutinised much more than other sports.
Why would it? Rugby isn't an irish sport.
You're right, rugby is a global sport,
Hahahah...it's not a global sport, stop trying to convince yourself. There's about 7 countries that play it.
And in Ireland I don't need to spell out that it's an british imperial sport but theres a lot out there that don't like to hear it.
I'm sure you unionists are fans eh Myles?
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport? You only interested in games / sports invented outside of Britain?
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Nobody is denying that it's a British sport. Was merely enquring as to how it was an imperial sport? Also, is it just rugby you have a problem with? What about other sports / games invented in Britain e.g. netball, darts, snooker, ice hockey, tennis, baseball, association football etc?
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:12:00 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Nobody is denying that it's a British sport. Was merely enquring as to how it was an imperial sport?
Because they took it to their colonies. Read a little history why don't you.
Next you'll be saying India and the West indies accidentally started playing cricket for no reason!
anyway, just to reiterate. Rugby = Imperial sport.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:21:06 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:12:00 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Nobody is denying that it's a British sport. Was merely enquring as to how it was an imperial sport?
Because they took it to their colonies. Read a little history why don't you.
Next you'll be saying India and the West indies accidentally started playing cricket for no reason!
anyway, just to reiterate. Rugby = Imperial sport.
Surely they took all the other games / sports they invented to their colonies too? As such, are they not all imperial sports too?
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:37:57 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:21:06 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:12:00 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Nobody is denying that it's a British sport. Was merely enquring as to how it was an imperial sport?
Because they took it to their colonies. Read a little history why don't you.
Next you'll be saying India and the West indies accidentally started playing cricket for no reason!
anyway, just to reiterate. Rugby = Imperial sport.
Surely they took all the other games / sports they invented to their colonies too? As such, are they not all imperial sports too?
I don't care - we were talking about rugby. Not sitting well with you eh?
michaelg / myles na g - related by any chance?? ;)
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:40:52 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:37:57 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:21:06 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:12:00 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 09:20:55 PM
What a crock of shite. So every game / sport invented in the UK is a british imperial sport?
No
I was referring to rugby...so in this case yes.
Rugby football is a style of football that developed at Rugby School. I note that it isn't called Mullingar Union or Ballyjamesduff Union.
What what old chap...tally ho.
Seems like theres a few out there in denial that it's a british sport.
Nobody is denying that it's a British sport. Was merely enquring as to how it was an imperial sport?
Because they took it to their colonies. Read a little history why don't you.
Next you'll be saying India and the West indies accidentally started playing cricket for no reason!
anyway, just to reiterate. Rugby = Imperial sport.
Surely they took all the other games / sports they invented to their colonies too? As such, are they not all imperial sports too?
I don't care - we were talking about rugby. Not sitting well with you eh?
michaelg / myles na g - related by any chance?? ;)
We were talking about rugby, however, I also asked you on a couple of occasions about your views on other sports / games invented in Britain which you chose not to respond to. GAA the only sports you follow?
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:47:43 PM
We were talking about rugby, however, I also asked you on a couple of occasions about your views on other sports / games invented in Britain which you chose not to respond to. GAA the only sports you follow?
We are talking about rugby. You're just trying to change the subject because you don't like it being linked with britishness.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 11:01:56 PM
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 10:47:43 PM
We were talking about rugby, however, I also asked you on a couple of occasions about your views on other sports / games invented in Britain which you chose not to respond to. GAA the only sports you follow?
We are talking about rugby. You're just trying to change the subject because you don't like it being linked with britishness.
Why would I not like it being linked with Britishness? The game was invented in Britain ffs.
Quote from: michaelg on July 13, 2014, 11:04:19 PM
Why would I not like it being linked with Britishness? The game was invented in Britain ffs.
So you are agreeing it's an imperial sport. And there's you defending it. keep squirming :-*
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 07:44:22 PM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 13, 2014, 06:46:49 PM
Quote from: foxcommander on July 13, 2014, 06:39:25 PM
When you see the likes of Ireland, Wales, Scotland, Samoa on the top ten of any sporting list you have to know that it's a diddy of a sport.
Hahahaha you said global. I could probably get a game with any team under the top 20 of the list and I don't even know how to play.
I'd say that a diddy of a sport is one that hasn't been able to catch on outside its own backyard, despite the fact that Irish people are to be found in numbers all over the globe.
Where did I ever boast that Gaa was a global sport. You said that about rugger and shown up that your facts are bullsh*t. Fiji, Samoa and Ireland indeed.
Again begs the question why you are on a Gaelic Website if you hate GAA so much. I trust you had fun yesterday at Orangefest 2014?
So the fact that rugby is played in Fiji and Samoa and Ireland means that rugby isn't isn't a global sport??
I don't hate GAA at all, it's just not my favourite sport. And I'm posting on the non GAA discussion part of the message board, in case you hadn't noticed. ;)
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 14, 2014, 12:06:48 AM
So the fact that rugby is played in Fiji and Samoa and Ireland means that rugby isn't isn't a global sport??
I don't hate GAA at all, it's just not my favourite sport. And I'm posting on the non GAA discussion part of the message board, in case you hadn't noticed. ;)
It's fairly dishonest to call it global if they are top teams in a particular sport. Just shows that it's not really been taken up worldwide seriously.
Of course GAA is not your favourite sport. And for someone who doesn't like GAA you spend a lot of time here. I can't guess why. Hope you had a nice day yesterday with your tea and sermons in the field. Youse didn't cause as much hassle this year.
Quote from: foxcommander on July 14, 2014, 02:09:37 AM
Quote from: Myles Na G. on July 14, 2014, 12:06:48 AM
So the fact that rugby is played in Fiji and Samoa and Ireland means that rugby isn't isn't a global sport??
I don't hate GAA at all, it's just not my favourite sport. And I'm posting on the non GAA discussion part of the message board, in case you hadn't noticed. ;)
It's fairly dishonest to call it global if they are top teams in a particular sport. Just shows that it's not really been taken up worldwide seriously.
Of course GAA is not your favourite sport. And for someone who doesn't like GAA you spend a lot of time here. I can't guess why. Hope you had a nice day yesterday with your tea and sermons in the field. Youse didn't cause as much hassle this year.
I'm still waiting for you to post the GAA world rankings list. And if the fact that Ireland is one of the top sides in world rugby means, in your view, that rugby can't be a global sport, what the fcuk does that make GAA??