Messages

jus finished watching heat, seen before good show. still wondering if the first one was better than the remake

Thought Heat was bit long meself. Michael Mann films usually good - Loved Manhunter (remade as red Dragon recently but nowhere near as good - Ed Norton looked as if he couldn'y be arsed. )

Watchin Hannibal now- poor enough.

yea,sometimes i even scare myself

Well you don't scare me 

But that's only because you are a faceless poster on an internet site. If i met you in the flesh you probably would scare me if you are as bis as your user name makes out 

[catch yourself on]

catch yourself on....the world isnt that simple im afraid.you cant stick to a rigid set of rules in circumstances such as these,its impossible as it will mean that there will be occassions where an offender will get off very lightly and other occassions where an offender will be punished far too severly. (for the same reason,this is why the justice system doesnt have a set prision sentances for crimes eg always 15years for murder) each case must be looked at individually. for example if the rules of the law were to implemented here teague would only have got 12 weeks as that is the standard suspension for a player headbutting but due to the controversy surrounding this incident it got increased. also due to the sheer nastiness of mcginns headbutt and his past history he received a more length suspension which in my opinion is fair. also ward got 8weeks for shoulder a man in the back which lets face it we see at every match and no1 even gets sent off for it.

however,for simplicities sake in a normal club match where no evidence,no cameras are present and the board only have a referees report to go by and it states that a player was sent off for striking or headbutting then yes it makes sense to hand down the standard suspension.

ps theres far too many wishy washy penpushers that have never played football on this site if you ask me., go out and play and game and then come back and see if your of the same opinion....
[/quote]

I think you should take your own advice. I probably would have taken you more seriously if you hadn't added the p.s.

To settle our difference of opinion on this why don't we organise a challenge match. We'l have a bit of a scuffle at half time and me and you can throw a couple of, sneaky, dirty headbutts at each other and whoever knocks the other down can get the longer suspension.

Hang on a minute, that won't work, I'll be too busy pushing a pen to play any football as usual.

As you would say . . .  catch yourself on  

[Gaelic Football]

Certainly more commercially viable than he international Gaelic Football events being touted by some of the usual begrudgers here.

At least we'd be talking about Gaelic Football, not some mange-ridden mongrel of a yoke 

Sure aren't all pedigrees breeds created by crossing with other breeds to capture the best traits of the parent animals.  

Yep, but pedigrees are never inferior to the donor breeds! 

But remember FoSB, pedigrees have a higher tendency to suffer from hereditary defects due to too much in-breeding. Mongrels are generally healthier, it does no harm to add new blood to the gene-pool once in a while  

OK, i think i might be taking the pedigree/mongrel analogy a bit too far now. This sounds more suited to a discussion board on the Kennel Club website.  

I will concede that i would prefer to see the GAA promote Gaelic Football and Hurling as opposed to "some mange-ridden mongrel of a yoke". However i do think a lot more could be done to promote the games in counties where they are traditionally weaker before even thinking of promoting them overseas, but that is probably an argument for a different thread

[Gaelic Football]

Certainly more commercially viable than he international Gaelic Football events being touted by some of the usual begrudgers here.

At least we'd be talking about Gaelic Football, not some mange-ridden mongrel of a yoke 

Sure aren't all pedigrees breeds created by crossing with other breeds to capture the best traits of the parent animals.  

[There you go again, negative, negative, negative...]

I'm all for promoting gaelic games outside ireland and think it is great to see games played between natives of the countries involved (like in your French example). However if you take the a team of the best Native French gaelic footballers and play an 'international' match against the Ireland team that has just beaten the Aussies they would not be able to compete. If you want to call that a glass half-empty viewpoint that's up to you.

There you go again, negative, negative, negative... 

Why can't we look at what we have and look to build upon it, instead of bemoaning what we don't have and stewing upon it?

Why can't we have 100% confidence, faith and belief in our product, the product that is Gaelic Games, a product that has been inherently attractive enough to motivate non-Irish to play and participate fully in it?

Why do we think our product is so inferior that we need to involve the AFL at all?

If Cusack, Davin, Mc Kay, et al had listened to the nay-sayers, pessimists and doom-mongers in 1884 (and there were plenty of them) as they gathered in Hayes Hotel in Thurles we'd all still be playing soccer, rugby or cricket. And they were faced with a much more daunting prospect.

Ok let me put it another way - I'm POSITIVE they wouldn't be able to compete. Happy now 

... Outside Ireland it is just played by ex-pats and some second generation irish.

Sorry TOTH, but that's just plain wrong. For example, a pal of mine (and I know I'm repeating myself here) refereed in France last year, and there wasn't a single native English speaker on either team, not one.

You're symptomatic of the problem here: the glass is always half-empty (where International Gaelic Games is concerned).

Fair enough, i concede the point on that one. I should have said mostly played by ex-pats etc.

But my point was not about who plays Gealic games outside Ireland, it was about the number of people playing and the standard. To say that we should be playing International Gaelic football is not feasible as I don't believe that there is any country that could field a Gaelic (or Hurling) team that could compete with an Ireland team.

I'm all for promoting gaelic games outside ireland and think it is great to see games played between natives of the countries involved (like in your French example). However if you take the a team of the best Native French gaelic footballers and play an 'international' match against the Ireland team that has just beaten the Aussies they would not be able to compete. If you want to call that a glass half-empty viewpoint that's up to you.

[We should be playing international Gaerlic football]

and you'd wonder why the Moy can't win intermediate championships with that man?    Expect the australians to bate the living daylights out of them in Dublin next year and she'll be abandoned again - its a well marketed load of keek that distractyed many of the best players in the land from playing with their clubs.  We should be playing international Gaerlic football not GAA lite or Ozzie rule lite.  Gaelic football is the best of the 2 games so we should not feel inferior to the other - just because some idiots are prepared to pay them to play their  hobbies.  As for Brennan its probably been his biggest success.  

1. How many other countries have enough Gaelic football teams to field an 'International' team to compete. Outside Ireland it is just played by ex-pats and some second generation irish. Why don't we just play the Aussies or the French even the Chinese at international Hurling? We are bound to win those  

2. The Aussies will probably see things differently. Maybe we should just play one game Gaelic football and one Aussie rules and see who wins  

[A headbutt is a headbutt no matter what the result on the victim.]

contrary to what some on this board want to believe, the world isnt made up in black and white.one headbutt canr be counted the same as another. mcginns is unprovoked and totally escalated the situation from a bit of handbags into something much uglier. also the sub was totally innocent and didnt do anything to warrant such a reaction. the clonoe sub however acted in response to this and his headbutt wasnt even in the same league of severity,mcginn didnt even hit the ground.

Big Mickey you seem to be spouting the brown stuff.  I wouldn't say the Clonoe sub was totally innocent in all this either.  He was up in McGinns face but I am not vindicating the headbutt.  As for the Clonoe No.5 - he should get the same suspension as McGinn.  A headbutt is a headbutt no matter what the result on the victim.

I agree with nrico. The rules state it is an offence to strike or attempt to strike with hand, head, knee etc.  . . . . It has to be looked at as black or white. The CB can't apply some imaginary sliding scale of the severity of the headbutt that some people seem to think exists. It is either a headbutt (or attempted headbutt) or not. In which case it is deemed to be a striking offence whether there was contact or not.

To say one is more severe because one victim stayed on his feet and the other didn't is just wrong. If you apply that sort of fuzzy logic from another perspective you may as well say that the headbutt by McGinn is less severe as the Clonoe sub was looking at him at the time so had some chance to defend himself, whereas the Clonoe No.5 (Teague?) hit McGinn from behind, giving him no chance to defend himself. And that too is just plain wrong. They are both straightforward striking offences regardless of the situation, mitigating circumstances or injury caused.

As for the different suspensions handed out to the 2 men, only the CB can clear that one up. Perhaps they took McGinn's previous disciplinary record into account or charged him with another offence as well such as disrepute. And the perpetrators' professions should have no bearing on the punishments either. To say McGinn is a headmaster and should know better is a fair enough point but has no relevance in the GAA disciplinary process. The CB can only deal the matter as it is provided for in their rules and as far as I know there is nothing to say that a person's standing in the community should have a bearing on the length of the ban

Not surprised it was only shown once. Loada rubbish!! 

Did you see the cut of Mark Hamill's face? He is supposed to have had reconstructive surgery after a car crash. That would explain why he looks a bit plastic.

Sweet mother of f.....!!!  

It is like watching an accident about to happen. You don't want to look but somehow you can't help it.

It is just a way of taking people's minds off the fact the economy in knackered. We might all be in financial trouble but spare a thought for poor Manuel off Fawlty towers - 2 overpaid tw*ts have insulted him by making crude remarks about his granddaughter (the very demure miss Voluptua "the satanic slut)