Messages

See St Galls in Belfast are displaying a Palestinian flag in their club. Presume in solitary and support.  Pic on their Facebook.

Oh dear Reillers.

Very good article indeed. Always remember an old man who looked after kids all his life saying teachers were a curse on the GAA. Makes you wonder.

I take all the points on board and I suppose the question I'm posing is has too much importance been attached to coaching courses? Would we not have any good under age coaches if there wasn't this blueprint for coaching? An issue that needs to be examined maybe is how many young people are doing these courses and coaching kids to have something placed on a cv? I appreciate we can always learn and take something from coaching courses but surely how that's applied is down to how astute the individual is. And would that not mean that the strength is in the individual coach rather than the courses?
Ballymac I don't wish to presume you're implying that coaches who haven't done courses are bad but surely doing a course doesn't necessarily mean some one is automatically a good coach. I'm sure every club has individuals who think they are the next best thing because they've done certain courses and maybe been involved with certain high profile figures but in reality couldn't coach to save their lives.
I appreciate the element of taking what's learned and adapting it to suit but surely a skill of coaching under age is being able to understand and motivate kids in different ways and relative to the individual by being able to read the kids and recognising their individual needs.
And in spite of everyone maybe adapting the courses everyone is still working from a blue print so why is everyone not on a par now or is it just too early?

Does anyone think there is still room for independent thinking coaching kids or is the uniformity of coaching the way to go? Because some one has done foundation and coching levels does that instantly make them a better coach than some one who hasn't? If a club wants to attract kids it might play up that they have 'qualified' coaches as in those who have done the courses of the Association so if for some reason some one has been coaching for quite a while but has never done the courses for whatever reason should they be looked upon as a coach of lesser ability.

No wee piece about the manager leaving Reillers? Maybe about how he he took over a difficult group of players at a difficult time for the county and while not getting any great success managed to steer Cork hurling into calmer waters at least? And perhaps how his introduction of younger players and less reliance on the older ones, as attempted by Ger McCarthy but prevented by a section of players, has given great hope that the county hurlers will be challanging for honours again sooner rather than later.

Have to agree with Indiana, coaching is not the marker for go games. But of course it's relative to the development of all kids and coaching kids to win is different to coaching kids to develop their skills. And while there are many parents thrust into coaching there are many 'qualified coaches' who coach to win and neglect overall development. If a kid is on the pitch for forty minutes but doesn't get a touch of the ball can it be said that he has played a match? Indeed there are plenty of coaches who encourage the by-passing of their weaker player. My concept of go games is inclusion during games and if coaches can grasp that's what it's about they will be of more use to all kids on the practice ground.
And if there's more inclusion all round there will be more development and more enjoyment for more kids who might be more inclined to stick with football and hurling when they get older.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0416/oil_gas.html

Sinn Féin to table oil and gas licences motion
Updated: 18:49, Saturday, 16 April 2011

Sinn Féin is calling for changes to the revenue and licensing terms governing oil and gas exploration.


Aengus Ó Snodaigh - Wants radical change to licencing system

Six One News: SF in oil exploration motion

Sinn Féin is calling for changes to the revenue and licensing terms governing oil and gas exploration.
The party has published the text of a Private Members' Motion it will table in the Dáil on Tuesday.
It will call for the consents and licenses for the Corrib gas field, and exploration license for Lough Allen, to be immediately revoked pending a full review of all license and taxation issues.
The motion also calls for the State to take a 51% share in all gas and oil finds, for the establishment of a state exploration company, and for a 50% tax on profits and a 7.5% royalty to be imposed.
Sinn Féin TD for Dublin South Central Aengus Ó Snodaigh said: 'Oil and gas companies in Ireland are given among the most generous terms in the world, which means only a small proportion of the value of the deposits will come to the Irish people unless there is a radical change.'

A bit draconian for me but still I am glad SF have raised this issue.

More socialist pap from SF. With this country in the biggest recession since the Wall Street Crash it makes perfect sense for a foreign company to take all the risks of exploration and the costs that go with it. And now these clowns want us to run the risk of paying for it

I suppose they will be raising the national pension reserve for exploration costs?

Well you couldn't really say capitalism has been hitting highs recently. But because some one calls for a degree of state profits doesn't have to equate with socialism.
Anyway were the dangers of what's going on not referred to? Isn't the danger to people and disregard of them what the protests have been about?

[I can't help feel a twinge of sympathy for Gadaffi now he has all of these people and their war machines lined up against him. Most of us will have a natural empathy with the underdog.]

Can't blame him. I can't help feel a twinge of sympathy for Gadaffi now he has all of these people and their war machines lined up against him. Most of us will have a natural empathy with the underdog. As this thing drags out, more people will start of voice their concerns over what is happening even if Sky News and BBC are doing their best to cheer-lead the glorious "allies". People will start asking why they are all so keen to get in there - oil?

What was needed was decisive action. If they wanted rid of him, they needed to go in on the ground last week, all guns blazing, set the rebels up in government, get the f**k out before anyone had time to question what was going on and lap up the goodwill from the new government in the form of oil contracts. It's now beginning to look like the old imperialist powers looking to plunder someone else's natural resources. No sympathy here for them...

Are you kidding me?

What about you galls man? Can you throw any light on all this?

[to many]

I know Libya were accused of killing a wpc in England many years ago, that they supplied weapons to the IRA - to many not necessarily a bad thing - and were accused of the Lockerbie bomb, although I heard a relative of a victim of that say on radio recently that the relatives believed now that a Syrian or Syrian backed group was actually responsible and appeal evidence for the appeal that never came clearly pointed to that.
Could any of the posters here list a number of these attrocities that Libyans are supposed to have suffered under Gadaffi or what are the things that he has done which make him so bad, at least in comparison to say George Bush.
And why if he was so bad was there an irrigation system, the largest in the world, put in so that every part of Libya has access to fresh water and why the average wage in Libya when all these attacks started was twice that of Egypt?

You post vague arguments and demand accurate lists in reply? Do it right if you are doing it at all.

I don't really understand why you're saying I'm making vague arguments, I only related a few points. There are some on here who are applauding attacks on Libya and Im only asking for some substance to their posts. Neither do I see the point of highlighting some of my post. What's the point of that. What's your stance muppet? Can you give any details of all Gadaffi's terrible deeds?

Sorry if the ref to George Bush got under your skin Tyrone. Put another leader's name in. Doesn't matter how he's viewed, it's just to compare any leader's actions with Gadaffi. I just think it would be interesting to do but please don't get hung up on George Bush.

I know Libya were accused of killing a wpc in England many years ago, that they supplied weapons to the IRA - to many not necessarily a bad thing - and were accused of the Lockerbie bomb, although I heard a relative of a victim of that say on radio recently that the relatives believed now that a Syrian or Syrian backed group was actually responsible and appeal evidence for the appeal that never came clearly pointed to that.
Could any of the posters here list a number of these attrocities that Libyans are supposed to have suffered under Gadaffi or what are the things that he has done which make him so bad, at least in comparison to say George Bush.
And why if he was so bad was there an irrigation system, the largest in the world, put in so that every part of Libya has access to fresh water and why the average wage in Libya when all these attacks started was twice that of Egypt?

Give her dixie do you think what's happening in Libya is any different to what's happening in other Arab countries. My take on Gaddafi is that his contibution to his country was progressive. Of course like any country at odds with America it has been demonised in the western press, attacked and continually in need to defend itself. But the picture painted of Gaddafi doesn't usually refer to developments within his own country that benefit Libyans or perhaps that he was one of the first Arab leaders to condemn 9/11. Would you know much about him yourself? Could you give us your take on him. Call me cynical but I think the western press are taking a lot of satisfaction from what's happening in Libya where it was more amazement about the other countries and hoping for the worst.

Ah com on lads. If you want to try to criticise Christy you don't know about hurling.

Totally agree with you there lynchboy. There are people you describe in all clubs also. It doesn't always balance out though. I'd say during the 'boom' years there were a few clubs who made some money out of re-locating and selling their grounds. While it mightn't have mattered to any great extent in some cases in practical terms, at the end of the day the motivating factor comes down to money. All clubs need it of course and it's great to have financial security but the true value of a club is the collective effort of its membership. But as more and more people take from the GAA at all levels or the more these 'professionals' convince members of the need for a 'buy and sell' mentality the more the 'volunteer' as you and others put it will be eroded.
Even the term 'volunteer' is patronising and divisive and indicitive of where we have come to.

Maybe in the same way there is a ceiling on costs that any political party can spend during elections the same could be done for the national league. Hence keeping costs down and leveling the playing field.