Messages

You can love thy neighbour without condoning his or her sinfulness.No problem with that,love the sinner but hate the sin.As I said before love thy neighbour doesn't imply condoning or approving their sinful actions and/or lifestyle.

Does that apply to Seamus Coleman but not Thiery Henry?
Both sinners in equal measure.
Well at least MOTD has more relevance than a set of 2000+ year old writings that have been retranslated and reinterpreted to suit a morally bankrupt patriarchal institution.

The Bible has remained intact with very few changes since it was first written in Greek so you are wrong fear.

That's interesting stew. When did the Greeks write it ? I assume you are saying I am wrong about the retranslations / interpretations rather than the relevance or the nature of the institutions of religion.

You can love thy neighbour without condoning his or her sinfulness.No problem with that,love the sinner but hate the sin.As I said before love thy neighbour doesn't imply condoning or approving their sinful actions and/or lifestyle.

Does that apply to Seamus Coleman but not Thiery Henry?
Both sinners in equal measure.
Well at least MOTD has more relevance than a set of 2000+ year old writings that have been retranslated and reinterpreted to suit a morally bankrupt patriarchal institution.

Has anyone watched Peaky Blinders ?
Just watched first two episodes on Netflix.

This is actually funny. Its the most stereotypical Irish attitude to problem that you could come up with.
The rules are there, literally in black and white.
But do ya know what I dont like them rules.
Ah sure we'll work it out as we go along. It'll be grand.

Instead it should be these are the rules this is how it goes.
If the rules are an ass then they will be changed.

Ah but sure.....that d be an awful lot of bother. Isnt it grand the way it is.

You can have all the colours of the rainbow if you like but the only conclusion I can come to is that referees choose not to implement the rules as they are written because they know they would probably be left with only themselves and the goalkeepers on the field.

So what you get is the worst thing possible, referees making it up as they go, leading to  inconsistency from ref to ref, game to game and even by the same ref within one game.

I dont know how it will ever change.

Offaly played the most attractive football of all eight teams in the 4 League finals. A joy to watch.

All four finals were blighted by shocking refereeing decisions. How can refs get so many decisions wrong.....

I just watched a recording of the game. I cant understand what decision making process was going on in that ref head. Th eone that annoys me most, and he did it several times was to penalise the player in posession when they were surrounded by opponents and tied up with arms around the chest and upper arms.
Is this not a foul on the man with the ball ? I thought the only tackle on the man was a shoulder, everything else has to be directed at the ball.

If thats the case why dont referees implement the rules.

Do they not know the rules ? Do they know them and just make up their own as they go ?  Are they unable to make proper decisions in the heat of a match ?

I have never been a ref so I dont know the answer to any of these.

Also both sendings off would have been avoided if the ref had spotted that the Longford number 2 hopped the ball twice immediately before the schemozzle with Anton Sullivan.

I learned my football through the 70's and 80's when Gaelic Football was predominantly a man to man game where the primary emphasis was to deliver fast accurate ball into your forwards who were expected to get out in front and win their own ball. The only defensive tactic we ever employed apart from man to man marking was if we were playing against a wind in the second half and had something to defend,  we brought a corner forward back to play sweeper between full and half back lines.

The only other sport I see with a similar nature to this now is Aussie Rules. Looking at gaelic football now it seems to have much more in common with rugby than anything else. When defending having 13 players behind the ball with tackling being done by at least 3 defenders to the man in possession and when in possession moving the ball laterally until you find an opportunity to break the defensive line and get a score.

Does anyone who watches a lot of Aussie Rules know if they employ anything like the blanket defence that is so popular now in GF. If not, what is it about AR that makes a blanket defence ineffective ?

Thanks Cullen.

Walsh Island in Offaly

Donegal fully deserved their win against Dublin.
But no way will Kerry indulge in the criminally insane non defending that Dublin did.
Donegal wont steamroll through the middle of Kerry defence like they did in the second half against Dublin.
Much tighter game than DonvDub.
Kerry by a nose.
Kerry for the Sam Maguire and for your Holidays.

Doesn't matter. The GAA and rules/laws are incompatible.
Hard decisions are often made on sentiment and personal interpretation rather than rules.
Not the referees fault that no one would tolerate literal application of whats written as "rules"

Got a lift once from Rhonda Paisley. Big Ian's young wan. I was thumbing from Nth Co Dublin to Dundalk RTC
Think she was doing a tv show on RTE at the time. Nice lady.

Just listened to John Kerry on BBC World News defending Americas defence of Israels right to "defend" itself.
The world is no place for innocents.
But no surprise, ask Japan about the principle of proportionality.
We truly are capable of being a disgusting species.

I think the Hamas charter is calling for the obliteration of the state of Israel, and any other Jewish controlled state that would be created in its stead. (Not necessarily Jewish people although it's hard to see how an entire nation could be subsumed into a Muslim country without major issues).

I can't see this working. The only solution I can possibly see is the two state solution, along the lines of the UN 1967 charter, with the borders being policed by an international armed force to ensure Israel does not breach the borders or try to attack or settle Palestinian land again, and to also make sure the more hardline, obliterate Israel, crew don't try and do just that.

But the solution has to be parked for the moment, the immediate priority has to be to stop the Israeli slaughter of Palestinians, and I am disgusted with the international community. Politicians really are c***ts.

Can a y student of the rulebook tell me if incidental physical contact is specifically allowed under the tackling rules.
Listened to Tom Carr today claim it was ok for 3 or 4 players to slap an opponent round the head because it was part of a physical contact sport.

What can ya say ?

Whats the point.............