Messages

Keaney was Terenure

I wouldnt be too sure about that, these schools are slowly opening up to GAA due to the number of club members attending them, it's a real sign of the growth of the GAA in south Dublin.

Or is it a sign of celtic tiger wealth and prosperity having  more effect on the gah than other sporting classes?

check the Indo archives for each Monday in Sept/Oct/Nov - they usually make some mention of the various county finals.

It's only Terenure junior school, the senior school does not and will not play.  Also, I think Pillar had a nephew on both sides playing in the final, not 2 at Terenure.

probably 20, but fate was waiting in the wings to rear her ugly head, had to retire from senior football the following year - still not many of us get to retire at 22 having had 7 seasons of senior action!!  Won a few medals and was involved in underage county squads for about 4 yrs in total but never got a sniff of the John McLaughlin (Derry SFC).

Perhaps that pension, meagre as it is should be diverted to his victims, from whom he has managed to avoid paying damages due his clever use of the law - you would think that he would at least try and make some sort of reparations at this stage?

without thinking about this at all, McDonald and Gardiner's effort in the drawn mayo final was none too shabby either

The GAA has done well enough out of the public purse - they shouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth and comments from people on here proclaiming their concern to be about the granting of taxpayers' money to a 'failed' business stink of self righteous hipocracy, if not not self serving bigotry. If it was anything else ye'd not be bothered.

Paddy, the taxpayers thing is what gets me, this is actually a huge issue and one which many league of ireland clubs fail to face up to.  They are businesses, they do not act like businesses - time after time clubs go into receivership, pay their creditors 1c in the €1 and reform the club as a new business.  It's not good enough, they should be forced to comply with normal business rules by their organisation - rovers should have been finished last year - they owed €3.6m to creditors - maybe that's where the alleged €2m they paid into the new stadium came from.  Of this 1.5m was owed to the revenue, an offer of 2% was accepted by the revenue, they owed their other creditors 1.7m, they accepted 4% - these other creditors could be any small businesses in the locality who they owed money to (they could have been anybody actually - but this is a more emotive example).  So, they totally fcuk up their finances and the business essentially closes down, then a bullshit takeover is facilitated by the 400 club, to all intents and purposes the club was finished, but the FAI and the govt saved them by bending the rules and giving favours that other businesses would not get.
Whilst we're on the subject, Shels are also getting treated with kid gloves by the revenue currently, they have also decide that paying paye/prsi (which they have already deducted from player's salaries) is not for them, well not regularly anyway, afaik they owed approx 600k - now what other business would get away with that - apparently it's only Ozzie Kilkenny and a few others who are keeping the club afloat, and thats just because they're paying in advance for Tolka Park (which they now own and will develop once planning is sorted out).
So, looking at those figures, Rovers owed the govt 1.5m, paid them 30K so we could say the govt actually granted them 1.47m. 
If clubs are not responsible enough to budget properly, they should not be in business imo - it's very simple, revenue received is pretty much the amount of money they should spend every year, nothing more.

If it goes to supreme court, that'll be another year - and then they'll lose - the supreme court are hand picked by the govt, so generally they do what the govt. tell them - ah, tis great that the judiciary and the state are so disparate.

Does anybody on this board really believe think that this action is more about making things better for South Dublin GAA than about making things difficult for a soccer club?

I do, but my info on it is limited to what i've read on this board and its previous incarnation.

I would have thought the last place someone who is underage is going to get served is in the bar at a GAA club. After all, everyone is aware of what age they are!

It's not just as simple as that deiseach, up round north derry for example, you'd get many's the lad playing for the u14's when he's actually about 19   What's the barman to do then?

never kickt a ball,
would you not agree that the teenagers who play sports are the ones who are less likely to be drinking excessively, simply because they are playing sports? 

the first time i have heard any sports body bring the dept to the high court to stop them funding a rival and as a side show has the potential to open all GAA grounds.

What do you mean stop them funding a rival?  You know what TD want, why do you not think it is fair?  As for the opening of all gaa grounds etc, as explained before, that's nonsense - gaa clubs by and large own their own grounds.

if south dublin needs a stadium so bady, why wait in the wings until Shamrock Rovers (and why do you refer to them as a business just out of intereast?) hit a snag?

Or alternatively, if rovers need a stadium so badly, why not build it themselves?  If they're not a business what are they? 
It's fairly obvious you a very different agenda to the majority of posters on this board on this one Dublinfella, and that's fine, to me, this issue is pretty cut and dry as regards natural justice - i have no idea how the courts will rule, because I haven't seen the various affidavits, there may be enough in there to allow sdcc to proceed, but that does not mean that the sensible decision will have been taken.

Great goal, better team won.  Congrats

Ballinderry 1.15 EC 3.7 result

Dublinfella,
read the article again, it does not say that the submission says "youth of Tallaght will be restricted to a diet of association football", that might or might be a direct quotation from the submission, I would assume not.  You really should not believe everything written in the papers, they tend to put certain spins on things.
As for your fury re the wasting of the association's money, i'd be more furious that the govt. should have decided to build a stadium exclusively for the use of a business that has failed several times now, despite the windfall taken by the clubs then owner for the Milltown lands. 
Obviously the fair approach here would be to build a proper stadium that would accommodate all codes, that may well be the outcome of the judicial review.  As for your other argument re other grounds being forced to open up to other sports - no, that's utter bollocks.  The difference being ownership of said grounds.