Messages

If people really believe the mass is sectarian, would these people not be with-drawing their support for the organisation and indeed membership.

Translation: "Anyone who isn't a practicing catholic or who has a problem with the GAA officially endorsing a specifically catholic act of worship can f*** away off and leave the association. It's for catholics only."

where did I say any of that? I'm just trying to follow a bit of logic.
You believe this action is sectarian, and it's obviously endorsed by the GAA heirarchy. Therefore this makes the GAA sectarian? Simple yes or no?

If yes, then how why would you continue to support a sectarian organisation?

Try and answer the question this time. And not go of on a rant. I never mentioned anything about the GAA being pro catholic.

If people really believe the mass is sectarian, would these people not be with-drawing their support for the organisation and indeed membership.

I know I would not be happy to be a part of an organisation that would be considered sectarian.

and then they should have changed his first name to Christian.

The daftest idea in a long time to allow this to happen. The psni and the parades commission have to bear the responsibility of what happens.

They alone dont bear the responsibility. They have given the platform for any d**kheads to cause trouble however.

True, you can't resolve these people if (when) it kicks of, from their actions. However you would expect little more from these people if they are looking for trouble. However I would have expected better from the PC. And I think they will have a lot of explaining to do after this and have made a rod for their own back.

Crazy decision.

Aye I wasn't aware of the time constraints either. And it's only now that I have started to try and claim it back that people have told me about it.

Tony how long after your final completion did you claim the VAT back?

In the North Johnny.

But from speaking to a couple of people and spoke to Building control they are saying it has to be done within 3 months of cert of completion?

If you have any info to the contrary I would be very interested to hear. Could be the difference of the guts of £1500.

Just a quick question, and unfortunately I think I know the answer. Built a house and it was signed of completed by building control. I was looking to claim the tax back on a few bits and bobs but have passed the 3 months deadline (By quite a bit in fairness). So was just wondering if there is any chance of getting it back? Or is there any way around it at all? Completely my own mistake to be fair.

Two strategies to allow SF bashing.

1) Chose to ignore as much as possible actions taken by none SFers despite how deceitful they are.
2) If forced into comment on none SF TD's actions, try and link it back to SF as much as possible.

Nally raised a valid point that there was more interest in bashing O's than there was of Quinn on here. Despite Quinn's much worse actions.

And I'd agree with Nally's reasons behind it. One's a shinner and one isn't.

I disagree.

He hasn't hidden behind any actions. Here's his first post on this one before other people came running in with their whataboutary.

So O'Snodaigh is rightly taking flack for his printing addiction, but I can't help but feel Ruairi Quinn must be sitting up in his office for the past couple of days laughing at how nobody cares that he has managed to:

• put in a claim for 2,800km mileage expenses for a month when he spent nine days at work. Around 1,800km more than his own diary would account for;
• and on another month claimed mileage expenses covering over 5,100km despite his his official diary during that month only justifying payment for about 884km in expenses.

A handy little bit of personal profiteering from the taxpayer. Does anybody care though?

So I would ask, is Nally not allowed to critise a wayward TD as he see's fit aswell without people running into the what about O'S's? And I would disagree about the sematics of the two issues. The issue of a TD defrauding the taxpayers for his own benefit is much worse than what has happened in O's' case in which case the TD was incompetent but not deceitful.
Things are bad if people can't see the difference in the two.

I can't believe people on this thread are tying the two things together as if they were both wrong on the same level. One with legitimate ( All be it ridicules) costs and one where it would allegedly look like fraud for personal game.

And yet Nally is being chastised for pointing out one is a hell of a lot worse than the other. 

On which latter point, so long as you express the opinion that the blowing to pieces of a nine year old boy out playing in his garden is "not a black and white issue", then you'll get no respect from me.

Just out of interest do you feel the same about civilians killed by the British Army or indeed any civilians killed at war?

Not sure if that was for me or not DK? But yeah I played senior level. Not any more tho.

( I'm now guessing that this might be for MR  )

[If you have an athlete, you can make him into a footballer.]

Jaysus - leave the thread alone for half a day and look what happens.....

All I meant in my original point is that while you need to spend plenty of time preparing for football to prosper, a lot of that time is spent giving yourself the physique and the fitness to survive, something that doesn't require any God-given skills. If you have an athlete, you can make him into a footballer.
Equally, as AZ alluded to, if I get 12 men back into the scoring zone and make sure they don't foul, no matter how good you are, you'll struggle to run up a big scoring total. Since the scoring zone in hurling is half the field, that's not an option.

I agree completely about the whole demystification of hurling as a game you have to be born into - but on the other hand, there's no point ignoring the fact that it's still a game with a lot more unique skills to master than football.

Not to go into all Hardy's points again, but I have real issues with this line which is often trotted out. It's nonsense. I've seen plenty of fit men who can't do the very basics of football skills. You can train a Donkey to run, you can't train it to play football.

Don't get me wrong - if you have fifteen athletes with no skill you'll get nowhere. But equally there are a lot of players out there with no great level of skill and they're making it as half backs or box to box midfielders. Of course you need a Brogan/Cooper/O'Neill character to take scores, but if you have two or three of them, you can do a lot with a pack of willing workhorses behind them.

You see I don't agree with this at all. We're a Div 3 side who thankfully has no shortage of players out this year. We're having turn outs at training of roughly 30-40 boys each night. All would be solid trainers and would be relatively fit at this stage of the year and should be going into the start of the season flying. But realistic hopes for this year would be midtable. We just don't have enough good footballers. It takes more than 3-4 good players to make a team successful. I honestly believe this myth of only needing two or three good footballers is put forward by people who have this romantic notion of hurling. A good football team needs the same good spine that a hurling team team needs.

[If you have an athlete, you can make him into a footballer.]

Jaysus - leave the thread alone for half a day and look what happens.....

All I meant in my original point is that while you need to spend plenty of time preparing for football to prosper, a lot of that time is spent giving yourself the physique and the fitness to survive, something that doesn't require any God-given skills. If you have an athlete, you can make him into a footballer.
Equally, as AZ alluded to, if I get 12 men back into the scoring zone and make sure they don't foul, no matter how good you are, you'll struggle to run up a big scoring total. Since the scoring zone in hurling is half the field, that's not an option.

I agree completely about the whole demystification of hurling as a game you have to be born into - but on the other hand, there's no point ignoring the fact that it's still a game with a lot more unique skills to master than football.

Not to go into all Hardy's points again, but I have real issues with this line which is often trotted out. It's nonsense. I've seen plenty of fit men who can't do the very basics of football skills. You can train a Donkey to run, you can't train it to play football.