Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Angelo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41
1
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 19, 2019, 08:59:14 PM »
Personally think it would be insane not to have Ciaran Kilkenny in the team of the year. I'd have him a strong contender for Footballer of the Year also. Also not entirely convinced Fenton gets an allstar - he had two of his worst games ever in the two finals (high bar but still). That said I can't think of a midfielder that deserves one over him bar Moran perhaps. There's always a bit of a fudge and they might drop Murphy or Howard into midfield and leave McShane out. Below is harsh on McShane and Fenton but in my opinion is fairer overall.....couldn't have Kilkenny or one of Howard/Seán O'Shea missing out either.

                 Cluxton
Fitzsimons   McNamee    O'Sullivan
Durcan    McCarthy    McCaffrey
        Howard        Moran
M Murphy    Kilkenny    Sean O'Shea   
Mannion  Con O'Callaghan  Clifford

Dubs 8, Kerry 4, Mayo 1, Donegal 1, Tyrone 1.
Fenton is nailed on. McShane and Rock ahead of Kilkenny and Mannion too. Howard into half forward with Murphy missing out.

Murphy will get one. Arguably his best ever season. You rarely see players completely dominating championship matches like he did for large stretches of the summer.
Where though? Both midfielders are a cert and theres at least 6 forwards from Dublin and Kerry more deserving, plus McShane.

Can't agree.

Murphy deserves one. He was outstanding throughout the Championship, his display against Kerry in the Super 8s was the best individual display in the season. He should be nailed on for one at 11.

For me it would be:

Howard Murphy O'Brien
Clifford McShane O'Callaghan
O'Shea is a nailed on All Star. Won the sigerson with UCC as top scorer, 2nd top scorer in National League with Kerry finishing runners up, Munster winner and All Ireland finalist, 2nd top scorer in the Championship playing 2 less games than McShane and produced 2 good displays in both finals

1 less game than McShane and he got much more of his scores from placed balls than McShane.
Whats the placed ball argument got to do with anything? All count the same. If McShane was as accurate as SoS Tyrone might have beat Kerry. (Thats not a slight on McShane btw who I really rate, but O’Shea on different level)

Not really.

Placed balls are free shots, you don't have to worry about about being blocked down or forced away from goal, being shown your wrong side, being forced to overcarry, have to make split second decisions with players converging on you from all angles. You put the ball down, take your time and put it over the bar. By the time the free is awarded it might through the endevaour and leadership of a teammate and the free taker can tap over a gimmee.

O'Shea is a fantastic free taker, the best in the game along with Rock but a free taker for Kerry is going to score a barrowload, that's given. O'Shea had an excellent game in the drawn final but I don't think he lit up any other game bar maybe the Super 8s games with deflated Meath where he seemed to score well.




2
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 19, 2019, 03:51:38 PM »
Personally think it would be insane not to have Ciaran Kilkenny in the team of the year. I'd have him a strong contender for Footballer of the Year also. Also not entirely convinced Fenton gets an allstar - he had two of his worst games ever in the two finals (high bar but still). That said I can't think of a midfielder that deserves one over him bar Moran perhaps. There's always a bit of a fudge and they might drop Murphy or Howard into midfield and leave McShane out. Below is harsh on McShane and Fenton but in my opinion is fairer overall.....couldn't have Kilkenny or one of Howard/Seán O'Shea missing out either.

                 Cluxton
Fitzsimons   McNamee    O'Sullivan
Durcan    McCarthy    McCaffrey
        Howard        Moran
M Murphy    Kilkenny    Sean O'Shea   
Mannion  Con O'Callaghan  Clifford

Dubs 8, Kerry 4, Mayo 1, Donegal 1, Tyrone 1.
Fenton is nailed on. McShane and Rock ahead of Kilkenny and Mannion too. Howard into half forward with Murphy missing out.

Murphy will get one. Arguably his best ever season. You rarely see players completely dominating championship matches like he did for large stretches of the summer.
Where though? Both midfielders are a cert and theres at least 6 forwards from Dublin and Kerry more deserving, plus McShane.

Can't agree.

Murphy deserves one. He was outstanding throughout the Championship, his display against Kerry in the Super 8s was the best individual display in the season. He should be nailed on for one at 11.

For me it would be:

Howard Murphy O'Brien
Clifford McShane O'Callaghan
O'Shea is a nailed on All Star. Won the sigerson with UCC as top scorer, 2nd top scorer in National League with Kerry finishing runners up, Munster winner and All Ireland finalist, 2nd top scorer in the Championship playing 2 less games than McShane and produced 2 good displays in both finals

1 less game than McShane and he got much more of his scores from placed balls than McShane.

3
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 19, 2019, 03:49:14 PM »
Sean O’Shea has got to win one. His performance in first final was one of the best all year.

He had a great game in the drawn final but he wasn't even the best player on the pitch. I think O'Brien had a better Championship from the games I saw. I think Murphy is more deserving of one this year than both of them though. There's a lot of competition in the forward line.

4
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 18, 2019, 10:10:34 PM »
Personally think it would be insane not to have Ciaran Kilkenny in the team of the year. I'd have him a strong contender for Footballer of the Year also. Also not entirely convinced Fenton gets an allstar - he had two of his worst games ever in the two finals (high bar but still). That said I can't think of a midfielder that deserves one over him bar Moran perhaps. There's always a bit of a fudge and they might drop Murphy or Howard into midfield and leave McShane out. Below is harsh on McShane and Fenton but in my opinion is fairer overall.....couldn't have Kilkenny or one of Howard/Seán O'Shea missing out either.

                 Cluxton
Fitzsimons   McNamee    O'Sullivan
Durcan    McCarthy    McCaffrey
        Howard        Moran
M Murphy    Kilkenny    Sean O'Shea   
Mannion  Con O'Callaghan  Clifford

Dubs 8, Kerry 4, Mayo 1, Donegal 1, Tyrone 1.
Fenton is nailed on. McShane and Rock ahead of Kilkenny and Mannion too. Howard into half forward with Murphy missing out.

Murphy will get one. Arguably his best ever season. You rarely see players completely dominating championship matches like he did for large stretches of the summer.
Where though? Both midfielders are a cert and theres at least 6 forwards from Dublin and Kerry more deserving, plus McShane.

Can't agree.

Murphy deserves one. He was outstanding throughout the Championship, his display against Kerry in the Super 8s was the best individual display in the season. He should be nailed on for one at 11.

For me it would be:

Howard Murphy O'Brien
Clifford McShane O'Callaghan

5
General discussion / Re: The SDLP
« on: September 18, 2019, 09:46:58 AM »
Still take the money though, at the end of the day, gonna show principles go the full nine yards. Not we not going to Westminster but please give us the money!!
And there was a time when SF wouldn't sit in Stormont or Leinster House either, but those principles were jettisoned by them over time.

Anyway the posts by Shinner heads here conform to type, everything their guys do is right, anything the SDLP does is wrong. So predictable.

You haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about.

6
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 15, 2019, 02:32:31 PM »
Murphy will only get 1 if at midfield, why give him 1 in the forwards when he played about 30mins total up front all year

He played most of his football around the half forward line this year.

7
GAA Discussion / Re: Football All Stars 2019
« on: September 15, 2019, 01:52:27 PM »
over the years, the all Ireland winners, sometimes very ordinary teams, have dominated the all stars, winning a disproportionate 8 to 10 gongs.
this Dublin team winning a 5th in a row is unique and I think they will deserve at least 8 or 9 of the all stars.

contrasting versus the sunday game pick, I am certain James McCarthy will be chosen instead of Boyle in the backs.

I also fancy, 4 Dubs namely, Con O Call, Paul Mannion, Ciaran Kilkenny and Brian Howard will be selected in the forwards. 

To omit Kilkenny or Mannion after yesterday would be barmy. 
With Sean O Shea certain of another place in the forwards, that will leave the last position between Michael Murphy, McShane and Clifford.

Don't  be surprised if McShane does not make the cut, after all, he was on a team which won no silverware and he also buckled, missing some handy frees when that semi final was in the melting pot.

McShane is the top scorer in Championship this year and almost a one man band for a team that made the All Ireland semis. McNamee is the only other Tyrone player with a shout of one, I would say that Durcan will get one for Mayo and Murphy should get one for Donegal.

Other than that it will be Dublin and Kerry.

8
The second half more than balanced the first half though. You pulled the line that Paul Geaney was allowed too many steps in the Tyrone game for the goal - well for dublin’s 1-1 at the start of the second half they were both too many steps. There was a debatable penalty too .

Dublin were better team though and deserved to win but yesterday did more than balance out in the end.

That is such nonsense, all Lane did was tone it down in the second half, Kerry were still getting the rub of decisions in that half so you'd need to have some green and gold tinted spectacles to think that was a leveller.

He could have been pulled for steps, certainly but he had also been tugged back prior to the goal.

I take it the penalty you are referring to is the one that should have been given against Tom O'Sullivan at the end of the first half, much like the one that should have been given against O'Sullivan in the first game? I can't recall any penalty incident involving Kerry.

Given the amount of incessant fouling Kerry were committing on Mannion, O'Callaghan and Kilkenny, it's unbelievable that Dublin did not get a free inside the 45 yard line against Kerry in about 80 minutes of action.


9
Lane toned it down in the second half bit the first half yesterday was a scandal.

Dublin didn't get one free from scoring range yesterday despite all the fouling that was going on, particularly off the ball. The only point Rock got from a placed ball was a 45. When has that ever happened with Dublin before?

It baffles me how it took Stephen O'Brien until near the end of the game to get a yellow card. He must have committed 15 fouls by that stage.

A lot is made about Donor Buckley being a great coach and how he teaches his teams how to tackle. What he teaches his teams is how to tactically foul teams on a consistent basis. It was the same with Mayo when he was there but it's ramped up another level with Kerry. Fair enough if you can get away with it but it's not even subtle at this stage. O'Shea, O'Sullivan and O'Brien have spent over 200 minutes hanging off opponents for the past threegames in full view of the referee and it's been by and large ignored.

The favouritism Kerry receive from referees is beyond a joke at this point, it's being going on for years.

10
The usual suspects defending the indefensible as usual.

Sweep, sweep.

11
I had a feeling this was coming ;D

To be fair he has a point with this one

I've a point with all of them. To beat Kerry you have to be at least 6 points better than them.

12
I had a feeling this was coming ;D

You're watching it too.

Pretty disgraceful stuff from Lane.

13
Conor Lane - Kerry v Dublin 2019

14
Tyrone / Re: Tyrone County Football and Hurling
« on: September 11, 2019, 06:16:22 PM »
The usual idiots engaging in unsubstantiated innuendo.

Put up or shut up.

15
General discussion / Re: The Official Tennis Thread
« on: September 11, 2019, 06:14:44 PM »
If Medvedev can sustain or build up this year's summer hard court form then he will win a hard court slam next year for sure.

I think Djokovic might now struggle to reach 20, the next gen will all be taking confidence from Medvedev and they will have the belief that they are as good or better than them. The problem for Djokovic is that they are all at their best on hard courts, guys like Zverev, Tsitsipas, Rublev, Khachanov, FAA and Shapovalov all have a game made for hard courts and that's Djokovic's bread and butter.

I think the changing of guard is now going to come a lot sooner than people think and I think we'll have a next gen slam champion for sure next season.

I think Nadal will just do enough (injury permitting) to oust Federer in slam titles and rightfully take his place as the GOAT. He still has no peers on clay and I think if he gets the next two years of play without injuries or setbacks he will pick up one or two RG. I think last night might be his last non-clay slam though.

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Thats like saying Mick Lyons was a better footballer than Maurice Fitzgerald

There's no real question between Nadal and Federer. Nadal is miles ahead. The real debate is between Nadal and Djokovic.

Nadal has a superior head to head over Federer and Djokovic at slams.

Federer made hay when the competition was weak. He won 12 of his 20 slams between 2003-07. That was before Nadal and Djokovic established themselves, he was up against the likes of Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian, Davydenko and Safin for slams. All these guys were busted flushes in their mid 20s, they struggled to compete with the likes of Murray, Wawrinka, Tsonga, Berdych, Del Potro, Cilic, Feeder etc nevermind Nadal and Djokovic and this was Federer's main competition then.

Look at the early finals Federer had - Philippoussis, Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, a mid 30s Agassi, a teenage Nadal, Gonzalez.

It's a bit like when Gooch would rip it up in an All Ireland final against poor Cork and Mayo teams but struggle in the big tests.

Federer's record is padded by having a 5 year head start on Nadal and Djokovic. There's no way he would have got to 20 had he came through at the same time. The question for no 1 remains between Nadal and Djokovic but Federer is no 3.

Thats all fine and well but he's still a bull in a China shop

Clearly you don't watch him much.

A bull in a china shop would not dominate clay court tennis, you actually need to be able to craft and create shots rather than bludgeon the ball past your opponents and serve heavy like hard and grass courts require.

You clearly don't know finesse when you see it. Fed is obviously more technically gifted and naturally talented than either he just doesnt have the same physical attributes.

Finesse is aesthetic. He doesn't have the same physical attributes but neither does he have the same craft and problem solving ability that Nadal has.

Problem solving?? Didnt think Maths ability came into it but each to their own. When you are having a GOAT of all time debate it is entirely subjective.

Anyway Nadal has 12 Roland Garros and you could also say they are of lesser value as clay only takes up a portion of the season this gives more incentive and time for clay specialists to adapt to hard court and grass and the reverse for the hard/grass court specialists.
It also means the most talented players will always concentrate on the harder surfaces leading to overall less competitive clay competitions. So its safe to say Nadal has had a less competitive run at Roland Garros than Federer had in the early part of his career.
Also when Nadal was injured Fed and Djoikvic duly picked up their Roland Garros titles so its save to say they can play clay.

It could also be said that Fed in the early part of his career blew away the opposition by raising the bar to a different level, he brought shots that no one had ever seen before. Its safe to say he blew the competition out of the water and they couldnt adapt I would say because their games were too entrenched to adapt and prob too psychologically damaged fro the trimmings he gave them. The new crop coming behind them had a target and example to aim at (Fed) thus their playing style could be adapted as it was less embedded and they didn't have the mental baggage as being at the top and being knocked off their perch.
I dont buy for a minute that the competition was overly weak back then, fair enough there was no one else compared to Nadal and Djokivic, and while Roddick was limited he remained competitive for a long time, Hewitt was decent, and Safin certainly I would put alongside any of the 2nd tier of this era esp on hard courts, tho he did have a dubious temperament.

You can ream off all the stats you want but you can say any of them are skewed: Nadals advantage on clay, Fed to old, Nadal injured, Djokvic too young.....
At the end of the day I do like Feds style more, he has a very natural style always makes things look easy like anyone could do it, the single handed backhand at that level is a joy to behold. Nadal and Djokvic always look like they are playing at the limits of their skill level and their physical prowess is taking over.

Problem solving was what got Nadal the slam on Sunday evening, he was in bother but he found a way out with an opponent who was playing the tennis of his life.

The stats aren't skewed, it's remarkable what Nadal has done because of everything, the injuries, the fact clay only takes up 1/4 of the slams, the era he came into. People like to use Nadal's dominance on clay as a stick to beat him with but it's even more remarkable if anything. There's twice as many hard slams as clay every year, the same amount of grass slams and Nadal has ended up on 19 despite being dismissed as a one dimensional clay player. He's untouchable on clay and over the years he has altered his game to not only be competitive outside clay but successful on it. He has 7 non-clay slam titles now, 4 at the US Open which is more than Djokovic has and one less than Federer. Djokovic and Federer have 2 clay court slams between them and only Djokovic has beaten Nadal at RG, once.

Greatness is not about style over substance, as gallsman said, Federer's backhand looks great aesthetically but is arguably his weakness as it it is not reliable enough, when opponents go after it they get success. Federer's biggest weapon is his serving, nothing too much in the aesthetics there. Nadal gets unfairly cast type as some sort of athletic freak who wouldn't know what to do with a racket. Nadal has probably the greatest forehand in the game (I don't think it's as lethal as it was pre 2014 though), he has by far the best overhead smash in the game, his drop shots are definitely up there (being a clay courter) and he has worked tirelessly on his backhand and slice over the years to make it a weapon. If you look across their games, there's not too many shots of Federer you'd choose over Nadal, the serve is the only one with notable gap between them.

I think Nadal is probably the one who is furthest off his peak years at the minute now out of the big 3. The injuries have taken a toll on his body and he has had to change the way he plays his game. The game with Medvedev was the only game he played over 4 hours this year, his longest one up until last night had been 3 hrs 15 minutes against Kyrgios at Wimbledon. He made 3 finals and a SF this year, he has moved away what he did in his peak because his knees won't sustain it. Where Nadal has evolved and adapted Federer and Djokovic haven't really had to as the scales are already tipped in their favour with the slam calendar.

There is no slam of lesser value, you might have bought a little too much into an anglo-centric viewpoint that Wimbledon is the be all and end all. They're all worth the same.

If no slam is of lesser value then when are you trying to devalue Feds to make your point? Nadal just won a Grand slam without playing Fed or Djokivic surely according to your criteria youd have this as an undervalued one?

He wins the Roland Garros and is so dominant there because it is his preferred surface and the other top players dont like it and dont have the same time on clay to adjust their game to make themselves competitive. There is no question that it is less competitive that the other surfaces

Fed backhand a weakness :D :D. Opponents dont go after it.... they just dont want his forehand. By the way I would say the strongest part of his game is his footwork/balance. His biggest weakness is probably his speed around the court.

If Nadal is further off his peak years because of the strain on his body it is demonstration that he is using more physical effort to win.

Context, Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are all courters. It's not as if Federer and Djokovic are like Pete Sampras, in that they are one dimensional players, unlike Sampras they have a lot more to their game than a big serve and only for the were around the same time as the greatest clay courter to ever play the game by a country mile they'd have 4 or 5 French Opens each. So every slam is worth the same US, Australian, French and Wimbledon.

The currency of the open in terms of competition is completely different. If you can't see that Federer's main rivals in that 03-07 era were powderpuff then you are an ostrich.

Roddick
Hewitt
Nalbandian
Safin
Davydenko

All washed up by their mid 20s.

Phillippoussis, Gonzalez, Bagdathis and an over the hill Agassi in slam finals at that time?

It's about context and there's no way you can say those slams are anywhere near as impressive as what Djokovic and Nadal accomplished in the subsequent years.

12 slams in 5 years (11 of those in a 4 year period) pre Nadal and Djokovic breakout against 8 in 12 years during the post breakout of Nadal and Djokovic. Unfortunately there are the kind of stats which the Fedheads try to run away from but they can't, all the smokescreens in the world won't diminish them which is why they usually have to lower the tone with completely unsubstantiated allegations against Nadal and Djokovic.

Speaking of Ostrichs Fed rose the bar to a new level in those years, the current crop had the opportunity to rise to meet it, his peers not so much. Nadal and Djokovic are exceptions obviously but your not gonna tell me that outside of the top 3 the top players were ALL just naturally better than the crop from 5 years previously. There was a reason they performed better and that reason was Fed had raised the bar and the next crop had more of an opportunity to hit that his peers did.

Grass and Hard court players have always struggled on clay sure Fed often flopped there in his early years. Clay courters have more of an opportunity and incentive to adapt their game. Whats more the nature of the methodical nature of the clay game means its very difficult for a lesser opponent to get one over a better player.  You only have to look at the results to say that Nadal has had nothing but an easy time there, and how many does he have then? 12 and counting is it?

Anyway are certain Slams worth more than others or not? Your saying they are and they arent, you cant have it both ways

Your own criteria for GOAT is letting your argument down Im afraid. Its Fairly irrelevant to my own opinion for GOAT but Ive a feeling that is the same for you to, you prob just like Nadal's big muscles and funky head bands ;) thats ok Im cool with that.

You can only rise to the upper limit of your capabilities. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Nalbandian and Davydenko were all decent players but quite limited. The generation that came after them were far superior. Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all raised the level themselves but I don't think the current generation are in their league and I think Federer is a notch below Nadal and Djokovic.

It's a weak argument you're putting forward for Federer and it's one that does not hold up when you put it under the lens. Safin, Roddick, Hewitt, Davydenko and Nalbandian all fell off a cliff in their mid 20s after being top 4 players during Federer's golden patch (03-07). There's no dodging that at all. All these guys fell of a cliff in what should have been their prime years when a new era emerged, what does that say for the abilities of those guys? What does it say for the currency of grand slams 03-07.

I'm saying context matters a lot and you're sticking your fingers in your ears when it comes to looking at the context of Federer's slams in the 03-07 era, that dominance never continued when Nadal and Djokovic truly emerged. You should be analysing why that was but maybe the answer makes uncomfortable reading.

It's all laid out for you there but it looks like you are intent on choosing the ignorant path.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41