Messages

Sid Waddell dropping a few truth bombs in here 

As I generally find out when I discuss this sort of thing in the "real" world, most people actually have poor memories, and the bits that are still coloured in tend to be those that have been recently flavoured by media opinion. Its unusually frustrating to explain to people that Gaelic Football has always had a high percentage of its matches either one-sided or low scoring.

I like it. Would prefer 10 teams but there's merit in 8.

The playoffs are essential. They were the reason why teams could play starred fixtures safe in the knowledge that all hands would be on deck for the push to stay up.

I'd suggest that the general apathy to club football the past 5-6 weeks is because the games don't matter. With playoffs you still need a focus after leaving the championship.

We played through to Halloween throughout the 90s and 00s and momentum stayed til the end of the season because of them.

They will be in every final for the next 10 years and will bunk their own propagated myth that they are simply a good one off Dublin team, as they will be on their 3rd midfielder and full back and full forward from when they started cleaning up.

How is it a propagated myth?

10 of the 19 men who played for them in the 2011 final, played in the 2017 final.

No doubt they've brought in new blood from then, but I'd guess the only county in Ireland that has a similar footprint between those 6 years is Mayo.

For al Dublin's advantaged, they can't play more than 15 players and can't "buy" in players for positions.

Their time will come to an end. When the last one-team era like this in football ended, it gave way to the most exciting 15 years in the sport's history. That's when crowds peaked.

It's all cycles.

And Dublin's cycle is coming to an end. They, once again, needed Flynn, Brogan, Connolly to win the title. They'll produce good players forever, but they'll not have 3 like that again for 20 years at least.

For me this isn't really a mattter of what's better for the county, for senior teams or reserve teams. It's a matter of whether it has a chance in hell of succeeding, and is therefore worth the effort involved.

If implemented, I fundamentally believe it would fall flat on its face within a year or two, due to the pre-existing culture / traditions within the clubs of Down.

The reason why, in 2017, Kerry clubs will happily merge to enter a senior championship is because they always have done. The barriers of suspicion, trust, favouritism and family rivalries might still exist, but they're much, much lower than in a county in which this has never (or rarely) happened. It's what you do if you're a smaller club, in Kerry. It's not what you do if you're a smaller club, in Down.

The reason why, in 2017, Crossmaglen and a few others can enter seconds teams in the Armagh leagues is becasue they always have done. There is an ethos within the club to support two senior football sides, and while I'm sure every year it poses a few pressure points, there will be a tranche of people within the club determined to keep it this way. As long as those people exist, two teams can exist.

We don't have that history / tradition in Down (not in the past 30 years anyway), so what this proposal needs for it to work, is clubs that are committed to changing their existing ways of doing things; clubs that can generate the (willing) manpower to split their efforts in two each Friday night, not just in terms of players, but in terms of management, administration, grounds staff, medical teams, and supporters.

From my own perspective, I have family and work commitments that makes it difficult to get to some senior games. But if Ballyholland were playing an ACFLI match in Castlewellan and simultaneously an ACFL4 game in Ballyholland, I'd be attending the former, even though it's an extra hour round trip. And that's me who has been a seconds footballer and mentor my entire life. I'd expect that larger clubs than my own would have a greater level of manpower to call on to run two teams. But, be honest, would they be willing?

I just don't see it myself.

Even if you shaved 1000 words off that I still wouldn't have time to read it.

[it's a fact]

Gaelic football is being played to a superior level now than it has ever been.

The great matches we've seen this decade are the greatest matches of all time.

This won't fit the narrative, but it's a fact.

Its a opinion. My opinion is football played today especially in the latter stages of the championship is more low risk than ever before. Another opinion is Kerry,Tyrone who are two of the current top 4 teams collectively and individually wouldn't be a patch of 00s kerry,Tyrone teams and how good would those teams have been if they were exposed to the high range training and expertise that Dublin seniors are currently getting.

But the inverse of this is that the current Dublin and Mayo teams would absolutely destroy Dublin and Mayo from the noughties. And they both would have been in the top 4-5 teams in the noughties.

I'm sick of telling people this, but I'll do it one more time.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would put an even greater emphasis again on fitness, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would put an even greater emphasis again on pace, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would mean two more players consigned to the sub's bench, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.


Think it out folks.

How does soccer cope with the pressure of 11 a side! The heroes!

Reducing it to 13 v 13 would be a significant improvement when it comes to opening up the game without question, but it's one of the more nuclear options. It's a seismic change, which means some will be afraid of it and try to irrationally argue against it because they're used to the status quo. Some of these arguments against it are frankly laughable.

Lol, I do wonder  at you. Wembley's pitch Is 57% the size of Croke Park.
Soccer is played in a considerably more congested space.


As for "frankly laughable", your response here is another clear indication that you put little or no thought into generating your opinions.

I'm sick of telling people this, but I'll do it one more time.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would put an even greater emphasis again on fitness, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would put an even greater emphasis again on pace, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.

Reducing teams to 13 a side would mean two more players consigned to the sub's bench, which will only increase dropout rates among players at all levels.


Think it out folks.

There is quite a difference between earning a wage like Brolly and getting a wad of cash sent your direction by way of a one off testimonial.

Is it that it's all coming to Gooch in one payment annoys you? He'll have to work hard planning and executing his testimonial. Okay, not for a long period time. But there is work involved.

Yep and as pointed out previously, there are undoubtedly  hundreds of GAA loving Irish barristers who could present articulate and entertaining insights into our games. But as he's the one who happened to play the (amateur) sport at the highest level, he's the one who gets paid a hefty sum of money for doing so.

I'm still trying to work out how many degrees of separation from the game are necessary before he agrees and it is okay to profit from the game.

I'm not Brolly's biggest fan and disagree with many of his points of view but I've seen it noted in various places previously that he donates his Sunday Game & newspaper fees to charity.

If it were true Brolly would make sure it was well known!

It is widely known that this is the case and that he never charges for appearances at Club's either I'm prettu sure it was mentioned on the sportsjoe.ie podcast he was on.

He's a barrister sure what difference would 500 quid a few weeks of the year make to him for his RTE gig or for writing his column? I'm pretty sure he's in it for the notoriety more so than the money.

Screen it's widely known that he doesn't charge for club appearances or for helping clubs out with legal issues. The truth is that on the whole Brolly is a good egg and a genuine Gael.

But I would have a fairly strong  inkling that this generosity doesn't extend to include his RTE salary. And really, nor should it. He does actually work for the money. Hence the Socrates and Sigerson statement. A few crossed wires, a dollop of romanticism, and no clear denial, makes it an "internet truth".

By the way I've no interest either in Brolly denying it. That's his business.

Yep and as pointed out previously, there are undoubtedly  hundreds of GAA loving Irish barristers who could present articulate and entertaining insights into our games. But as he's the one who happened to play the (amateur) sport at the highest level, he's the one who gets paid a hefty sum of money for doing so.

I'm still trying to work out how many degrees of separation from the game are necessary before he agrees and it is okay to profit from the game.

I'm not Brolly's biggest fan and disagree with many of his points of view but I've seen it noted in various places previously that he donates his Sunday Game & newspaper fees to charity.

I can't help sense there's a touch of Socrates winning a Sigerson about this deed, every time I read it. Its origins would be interesting.

Yep and as pointed out previously, there are undoubtedly  hundreds of GAA loving Irish barristers who could present articulate and entertaining insights into our games. But as he's the one who happened to play the (amateur) sport at the highest level, he's the one who gets paid a hefty sum of money for doing so.

I'm still trying to work out how many degrees of separation from the game are necessary before he agrees and it is okay to profit from the game.

[I'm still trying to work out why it's okay for one former player to make a large six figure sum indirectly from the Association i.e. himself, but not for another]

I pretty much always enjoy Brolly's column, even when I don't agree with him.

But this wasn't a good one. It's basically telling the same average joke in each of 20 consecutive paragraphs. I understand that humour is often based on repetition, but this was dull.

- -

Plus, I'm still trying to work out why it's okay for one former player to make a large six figure sum indirectly from the Association i.e. himself, but not for another.

The reason is that he ''works'' to earn his money. Gooches money is a handout!

The reason he can "work" for that money is because he played Gaelic Football. No other reason.

I pretty much always enjoy Brolly's column, even when I don't agree with him.

But this wasn't a good one. It's basically telling the same average joke in each of 20 consecutive paragraphs. I understand that humour is often based on repetition, but this was dull.

- -

Plus, I'm still trying to work out why it's okay for one former player to make a large six figure sum indirectly from the Association i.e. himself, but not for another.