Messages

Lots of faux outrage, mostly from Tyrone supporters. It sounds like staving off relegation wasn't enough to satisfy them today. Most rational people thought the 4 suspensions doled out to Tyrone players was ridiculous at the time and none more so than the Tyrone fans. Now they appear to have had a conscience transplant when it comes to application of the rules just because Armagh were involved. Time to take off the red and white glasses and admit that it was much ado about nothing. Thankfully the game wasn't broadcast live on TV or the reaction would be even worse.

Think you're missing the point, Tyrone folk are merely highlighting the incident so as to see how it's dealt with and whether other counties are held to same standard and punished with as much enthusiasm as Tyrone are. Very similar incidents, with todays possibly a lot more violent. Obviously we know these things happen in games and are hard to get rid of. No one wants to see them and suspensions arising from them are a bit ridiculous. However it's the consistency of investigation that will be interesting.

The major difference between the incidents was that GAA upheld the red cards given to Tyrone and Armagh players by the referee but nothing else was done about the incident.

In this game I don't think any cards were given out at the end.  However, suspensions may come of it if they were able to single out players.

In my opinion it was nowhere near more violent.

The difference you point out is potentially important.

I wasn't at the match and haven't seen it. So I have no idea who is innocent and who is guilty. If there is guilt on any side I hope they are punished. If we are correctly punished I hope we take our medicine instead of any hopeless or Loganesque technical loophole appeal.

But these are all ifs. At this stage I have seen no guilt. Most others haven't either but it hasn't stopped assholes being assholes.

Am I correct in saying that the ref couldn't have issued cards as the game was over? In which case neither team can take any comfort from the fact that cards were not issued?

Tg4 are hardly in a position to broadcast multiple games and the games have to be played at the same time.

It's not about TG4 who  imo do a brilliant service covering the GAA
All the div 1  and some div 2 games (not just the televised live and deferred ones), are being captured on camera live with commentary and are fed into  RTE studios live, what more does it take to stream out these games on GAAGO?
Any other sports association with two morsels of common sense can manage to send out live streams of all their premier games. Even the LOI can manage that to a professional standard and make money. AFAIR the LOI only started streaming games a few seasons ago,  beginning with an amateurish operation.
GAAGO are not doing anything more than streaming some of the games which are already being covered by the tv stations.
They could stream all those games and for other games not being covered by TG4/RTE/Sky,  GAAGO could hire a broadcast unit, a minimalist outfit - 4 people, 2 cameras, computer hardware, HD/SD standard  and stream those games. And afterwards have the games stored in the clouds  for a minimum amount of time. Even I who never pays for anything  would consider subscribing to that.

What would the attendance at those LOI matches be like?

I am all for better quality highlights programmes or deferred coverage being available but supporting attendance has a part to play.

I don't know when the TG4 contract ends but none of the things you mention are a runner in advance of that.

Shamrock Rovers probably get average 3/4k  attendance for games. The rest would be around 2k. Cork City used to get 5k at games when in Premier Division.

With those sort of numbers you can see why LOI want/need to access a wider audience. GAA have much bigger league attendances.

Not sure the LOI example is one for GAA to follow

Tg4 are hardly in a position to broadcast multiple games and the games have to be played at the same time.

It's not about TG4 who  imo do a brilliant service covering the GAA
All the div 1  and some div 2 games (not just the televised live and deferred ones), are being captured on camera live with commentary and are fed into  RTE studios live, what more does it take to stream out these games on GAAGO?
Any other sports association with two morsels of common sense can manage to send out live streams of all their premier games. Even the LOI can manage that to a professional standard and make money. AFAIR the LOI only started streaming games a few seasons ago,  beginning with an amateurish operation.
GAAGO are not doing anything more than streaming some of the games which are already being covered by the tv stations.
They could stream all those games and for other games not being covered by TG4/RTE/Sky,  GAAGO could hire a broadcast unit, a minimalist outfit - 4 people, 2 cameras, computer hardware, HD/SD standard  and stream those games. And afterwards have the games stored in the clouds  for a minimum amount of time. Even I who never pays for anything  would consider subscribing to that.

What would the attendance at those LOI matches be like?

I am all for better quality highlights programmes or deferred coverage being available but supporting attendance has a part to play.

I don't know when the TG4 contract ends but none of the things you mention are a runner in advance of that.

Tg4 are hardly in a position to broadcast multiple games and the games have to be played at the same time.

They aren't but during the Monaghan v Dublin game they will have a Live vision updates from Donegal v Armagh and Mayo v Kildare.

TG4 do so much with feck all! Like even this is innovative and I don't remember a Red Zone before?
I think Kildare will be relying on other results on Sunday but it would be amazing to stay up.

TG4 have been unreal in their GAA coverage over the years between club, college and National League. Absolutely fantastic coverage for the budget they're on.

They have raised the profile of these 3 without doubt then other sponsors like AIB boosted them even further.

RTÉ on a Sunday evening with the old boys club is a joke.

True, RTÉ's coverage of our national games is nothing short of disgraceful. Just on that...you wouldn't mind TG4 having their live game pundits outside in the cold given the budget they're on, but having RTÉ analysts out is terrible. Surely there's some sort of a studio room in Montrose they could use. I think the rugby analysts have a studio.

If it made commercial sense for RTE to show more do you not think they would do it? There are plenty of other calls on their limited budget other than GAA. But as for the quality of their output, I offer no defence.

Tg4 are hardly in a position to broadcast multiple games and the games have to be played at the same time.

They aren't but during the Monaghan v Dublin game they will have a Live vision updates from Donegal v Armagh and Mayo v Kildare.

Yip. They are doing a very good job. And they have the rights so no point in complaining about the other broadcasters

Tg4 are hardly in a position to broadcast multiple games and the games have to be played at the same time.

[IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.]

Indeed [the FAI are] not even providing a stadium...    ....seeing as how the IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.

Try that again...

When the stadium was rebuilt, along with the government, the FAI and IRFU both put up funding in return for a share of the receipts from their respective events. I can't remember what the split was, but I do know the FAI needed/chose to borrow their share against future ticket sales etc.

Meanwhile, at the end of the 50 year agreement, stadium ownership would revert to the IRFU, which is not so unfair as it might seem, since they own the freehold and 50 years is generally considered to be the working life of a sports stadium, after which it will have to be rebuilt again.

Which was all hunky dory until the crash of 2008/09, premium tickets sales for the FAI slumped and the debts rose.

Then when Delaney was finally ousted and the FAI got a proper look at the accounts, they were revealed to be in deep doo-doo (accountant's term)i, the only way the FAI could avoid bankruptcy was by selling their sole real "asset" i.e. their stake in the AVIVA :
https://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/fai-chiefs-admit-liquidation-possible-21181196

I'm not sure of the exact details, but I'm fairly sure the IRFU played hard ball by declining to buy out the FAI's stake - they were sitting pretty as it was, still are in fact.

While the government was also reluctant, since they were already putting enough money in just to keep the lights on, they didn't want to have to put up any more public money on behalf of an organisation which still might fail.

That was nearly 2 1/2 years ago and I don't know exactly how the FAI got themselves out of the bind they were in, since it was all kept very hush hush. But a quick google reveals the following - I'm not a Times subscriber, but the headline looks to give a good steer:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rugby-hold-aviva-stadium-dublin-spccx0ngh

The split was 50/50, as it remains. They both own the building but the egg chasers own the land. Standard enough The Times article breathlesslytells us what's in the piblic domain.

I thought politicans were pushing for the also broke IRFU to buy the FAI out rather than it be a serious solution.

I don't think it's hush hush. There was a book and tv show. They refinanced the mortgage on LR and were less aggresdive with the repayment schedule.

Unusually for you, mostly correct except the FAI only have a 50 year lease on the stadium as EG stated, not a 50% ownership.

But good to have EG (temporarily) suspend whatever lingers from historic dna embedded unionist privilege and throw his weight behind "Let's get Casement built now"  albeit for IFA self interest.

50 year lease on the land, 50% ownership of the building on said land. Why would the FAI have a mortgage on a lease?

Because they needed one presumably

If you buy an apartment do you get ownership of the land it's built on?

Relevance here?

If the FAI don't own half of LR, nobody owns their apartment. Because it's the exact same construct

The thing that you don't understand is that well you don't understand.

The owner of a third floor apartment owns a third floor apartment. They don't own the ground below it or the 2 apartments in between.

FAI have a medium to long term lease on the Aviva. What they own is a lease. Which is valuable. What they own at the end of the lease is nothing. If the stadium is worth very little at that juncture then that very little belongs to IRFU. If the IRFU and FAI decide to go again they go again. If IRFU are in a position to go it alone then FAI can go somewhere else or seek some sort of rent paying agreement.

Now tell me again the relevance of the apartment?

[IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.]

Indeed [the FAI are] not even providing a stadium...    ....seeing as how the IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.

Try that again...

When the stadium was rebuilt, along with the government, the FAI and IRFU both put up funding in return for a share of the receipts from their respective events. I can't remember what the split was, but I do know the FAI needed/chose to borrow their share against future ticket sales etc.

Meanwhile, at the end of the 50 year agreement, stadium ownership would revert to the IRFU, which is not so unfair as it might seem, since they own the freehold and 50 years is generally considered to be the working life of a sports stadium, after which it will have to be rebuilt again.

Which was all hunky dory until the crash of 2008/09, premium tickets sales for the FAI slumped and the debts rose.

Then when Delaney was finally ousted and the FAI got a proper look at the accounts, they were revealed to be in deep doo-doo (accountant's term)i, the only way the FAI could avoid bankruptcy was by selling their sole real "asset" i.e. their stake in the AVIVA :
https://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/fai-chiefs-admit-liquidation-possible-21181196

I'm not sure of the exact details, but I'm fairly sure the IRFU played hard ball by declining to buy out the FAI's stake - they were sitting pretty as it was, still are in fact.

While the government was also reluctant, since they were already putting enough money in just to keep the lights on, they didn't want to have to put up any more public money on behalf of an organisation which still might fail.

That was nearly 2 1/2 years ago and I don't know exactly how the FAI got themselves out of the bind they were in, since it was all kept very hush hush. But a quick google reveals the following - I'm not a Times subscriber, but the headline looks to give a good steer:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rugby-hold-aviva-stadium-dublin-spccx0ngh

The split was 50/50, as it remains. They both own the building but the egg chasers own the land. Standard enough The Times article breathlesslytells us what's in the piblic domain.

I thought politicans were pushing for the also broke IRFU to buy the FAI out rather than it be a serious solution.

I don't think it's hush hush. There was a book and tv show. They refinanced the mortgage on LR and were less aggresdive with the repayment schedule.

Unusually for you, mostly correct except the FAI only have a 50 year lease on the stadium as EG stated, not a 50% ownership.

But good to have EG (temporarily) suspend whatever lingers from historic dna embedded unionist privilege and throw his weight behind "Let's get Casement built now"  albeit for IFA self interest.

50 year lease on the land, 50% ownership of the building on said land. Why would the FAI have a mortgage on a lease?

Because they needed one presumably

If you buy an apartment do you get ownership of the land it's built on?

Relevance here?

I expect Donegal to crush Armagh. The flowing, attacking football we've played all year will allow us to dominate ... we are playing in a ground that's a total fortress for us ... we have a great balance across our whole team and are not dependent on any one player. Easy home win for us.

Very good. Spoken like a Russia Donegal Today broadcaster

[IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.]

Indeed [the FAI are] not even providing a stadium...    ....seeing as how the IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.

Try that again...

When the stadium was rebuilt, along with the government, the FAI and IRFU both put up funding in return for a share of the receipts from their respective events. I can't remember what the split was, but I do know the FAI needed/chose to borrow their share against future ticket sales etc.

Meanwhile, at the end of the 50 year agreement, stadium ownership would revert to the IRFU, which is not so unfair as it might seem, since they own the freehold and 50 years is generally considered to be the working life of a sports stadium, after which it will have to be rebuilt again.

Which was all hunky dory until the crash of 2008/09, premium tickets sales for the FAI slumped and the debts rose.

Then when Delaney was finally ousted and the FAI got a proper look at the accounts, they were revealed to be in deep doo-doo (accountant's term)i, the only way the FAI could avoid bankruptcy was by selling their sole real "asset" i.e. their stake in the AVIVA :
https://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/fai-chiefs-admit-liquidation-possible-21181196

I'm not sure of the exact details, but I'm fairly sure the IRFU played hard ball by declining to buy out the FAI's stake - they were sitting pretty as it was, still are in fact.

While the government was also reluctant, since they were already putting enough money in just to keep the lights on, they didn't want to have to put up any more public money on behalf of an organisation which still might fail.

That was nearly 2 1/2 years ago and I don't know exactly how the FAI got themselves out of the bind they were in, since it was all kept very hush hush. But a quick google reveals the following - I'm not a Times subscriber, but the headline looks to give a good steer:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rugby-hold-aviva-stadium-dublin-spccx0ngh

The split was 50/50, as it remains. They both own the building but the egg chasers own the land. Standard enough The Times article breathlesslytells us what's in the piblic domain.

I thought politicans were pushing for the also broke IRFU to buy the FAI out rather than it be a serious solution.

I don't think it's hush hush. There was a book and tv show. They refinanced the mortgage on LR and were less aggresdive with the repayment schedule.

Unusually for you, mostly correct except the FAI only have a 50 year lease on the stadium as EG stated, not a 50% ownership.

But good to have EG (temporarily) suspend whatever lingers from historic dna embedded unionist privilege and throw his weight behind "Let's get Casement built now"  albeit for IFA self interest.

50 year lease on the land, 50% ownership of the building on said land. Why would the FAI have a mortgage on a lease?

Because they needed one presumably

If you buy an apartment do you get ownership of the land it's built on?

No. You can still get a mortgage secured loan though

[IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.]

Indeed [the FAI are] not even providing a stadium...    ....seeing as how the IRFU effectively owns the AVIVA.

Try that again...

When the stadium was rebuilt, along with the government, the FAI and IRFU both put up funding in return for a share of the receipts from their respective events. I can't remember what the split was, but I do know the FAI needed/chose to borrow their share against future ticket sales etc.

Meanwhile, at the end of the 50 year agreement, stadium ownership would revert to the IRFU, which is not so unfair as it might seem, since they own the freehold and 50 years is generally considered to be the working life of a sports stadium, after which it will have to be rebuilt again.

Which was all hunky dory until the crash of 2008/09, premium tickets sales for the FAI slumped and the debts rose.

Then when Delaney was finally ousted and the FAI got a proper look at the accounts, they were revealed to be in deep doo-doo (accountant's term)i, the only way the FAI could avoid bankruptcy was by selling their sole real "asset" i.e. their stake in the AVIVA :
https://www.irishmirror.ie/sport/soccer/soccer-news/fai-chiefs-admit-liquidation-possible-21181196

I'm not sure of the exact details, but I'm fairly sure the IRFU played hard ball by declining to buy out the FAI's stake - they were sitting pretty as it was, still are in fact.

While the government was also reluctant, since they were already putting enough money in just to keep the lights on, they didn't want to have to put up any more public money on behalf of an organisation which still might fail.

That was nearly 2 1/2 years ago and I don't know exactly how the FAI got themselves out of the bind they were in, since it was all kept very hush hush. But a quick google reveals the following - I'm not a Times subscriber, but the headline looks to give a good steer:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rugby-hold-aviva-stadium-dublin-spccx0ngh

The split was 50/50, as it remains. They both own the building but the egg chasers own the land. Standard enough The Times article breathlesslytells us what's in the piblic domain.

I thought politicans were pushing for the also broke IRFU to buy the FAI out rather than it be a serious solution.

I don't think it's hush hush. There was a book and tv show. They refinanced the mortgage on LR and were less aggresdive with the repayment schedule.

Unusually for you, mostly correct except the FAI only have a 50 year lease on the stadium as EG stated, not a 50% ownership.

But good to have EG (temporarily) suspend whatever lingers from historic dna embedded unionist privilege and throw his weight behind "Let's get Casement built now"  albeit for IFA self interest.

50 year lease on the land, 50% ownership of the building on said land. Why would the FAI have a mortgage on a lease?

Because they needed one presumably

I think Newbridge has more chance than Russia

Some asshole comments are Brollyisms and some are not.

Main Street chose to post what he posted. I don't think it does this forum any harm if those making dickhead comments are called out for being dickheads.

Forker is not a man.

Well that certainly gives us an insight into the quality of your contributions.

That is just rank poor.

Who's to say they wouldn't have scored them anyways? Hampsey then on that lost the game for his county by being stupid, not once but twice

So you would have yellow carded Hampsey too for Costello acting the prat?

Is your issue that Costello fell over? He was wearing studs, standing on concrete and got a shoulder into the chest. I'd challenge anyone not to fall over.

What was he at though? He squared up to Hampsey as he came in to retrieve, so tough shit I'd say.

You are a bit of a disease on this forum.

Fair enough to have a pop at Costello's cynicism in palming the ball away. But the idea that he squared up to Hampsey is a figment of your imagination. Was he not walking back through the gate when Hampsey hit him? No more.

He is under no obligation to retrieve the ball. The insinuation that a player that does not retrieve a ball is fair game for a dig is bollocks of the first order.

Watching the game and maybe making the odd sensible comment is enough for most. If your mind needs something else try sudoku. But don't poison this place with your shite