Tyrone v Kerry NFL Round 2

Started by Kerry Mike, February 01, 2009, 04:11:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: ddc1990 on February 24, 2009, 09:46:34 PM
Also, the word around Tralee (and this is complete heresay) is that McMenamin had Galvin's Girlfriends number on his hand and kept showing it to him through the match.
>:(

Do you want to be banned from the board, with that unfounded allegation?
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

Tyrone Dreamer

Quote from: Mike Sheehy on February 24, 2009, 10:10:02 PM
Quote from: Lamh Dhearg Alba on February 24, 2009, 09:06:33 PM
Quote from: pedro on February 24, 2009, 06:24:45 PM

While I have the highest of respect for MH, where does he get off with this sort of statement?? He is quite happy to speak out and be the ambassador on how football should be played, on the internation rules, grants etc. but when something unsavoury he does what a lot of Tyrone posters do here, turn a blind eye. No one can persuade me to believe that McMenamin doesn't deserve a ban. He was acting like a tr**p from the start of the game to the finish and rightfully deserved it. The thing is, he doesn't have to do those sort of thiings. he is a good enough player to be at that


"We all agree that it wasn't the proper thing to do and didn't look good. Ryan has acknowledged and recognised that......That is, in no way, to condone what he did because it wasn't good enough and Ryan has agreed with that, and he has regrets for what he has done."

My own feeling was that Ricey embarrased himself and the Tyrone team and should have just taken the punishment (unless it was something ridiculous like 6 months which some halfwits on this thread had called for). This latest abuse on the thread for Mickey Harte is just a joke though, he says clearly in the article posted why the appeal is going in. But the comments about Harte, just like the fact this thread is 60+ pages, just show that some people love to stick the boot into Tyrone.  Any old excuse. Far more serious events took place on GAA fields (in National League games) the same weekend and yet there dont seem to be 60 page threads or calls for lengthy bans. The usual suspects, and some others who should know better, have lost all perspective. 

As for this idea that what McMenamin did to Galvin, or the trash talking, is worse than striking a player thats just pathetic. The kind of macho talk people pinned (rightly) on the Aussie fans who came on here after some of the worst Mixed Rules games and slagged off Irish players.


No point quoting what Harte says to the papers. The actions of his players say a lot more than his soundbites. Its clear he is encouraging this very unchristian behavior

Jack cant even leave it to his players. He tried to get involved in a fight with McCullagh (a player not known to get involved) and your coming out with this crap about Harte who had no involvement in the incident at all.

tyronefan

are you seriously saying that it is mickey hartes fault that ricey grabbed galvin

Mickeys beard

I know that I am his beard and all but you have to hand it to Mickey, he'll back his team to the hilt within reason, a true Tyrone man, without having to run onto the field and making a dungbag out of himself.   
Boil the Drawers!

Gabriel_Hurl

Quote from: Mike Sheehy on February 24, 2009, 07:07:45 PMas well as the eyeing of the hill type gestures by Mulligan


Oh noes!!!!!!!!!!!! Mugsy was "eyeing" the Hill - won't someone think of the children?  ::)

omagh_gael

Quote from: Gabriel_Hurl on February 24, 2009, 11:32:50 PM
Quote from: Mike Sheehy on February 24, 2009, 07:07:45 PMas well as the eyeing of the hill type gestures by Mulligan


Oh noes!!!!!!!!!!!! Mugsy was "eyeing" the Hill - won't someone think of the children?  ::)

Sure you would never get a Kerry man being provocative to the crowd 'cough' Donaghy 'cough' mc hale park

Zapatista

Quote from: tyronefan on February 24, 2009, 09:42:12 PM
read it what ever way it suits you but the fact remains that galvin missed 3 matchs and ricey will miss 4  oh and by the way galvin didnt accept his either  ::)

I thought it was funny :D

rrhf

Thats right Sheehy.  You're going down! 

ludermor

Quote from: Lamh Dhearg Alba on February 24, 2009, 09:06:33 PM
As for this idea that what McMenamin did to Galvin, or the trash talking, is worse than striking a player thats just pathetic.

Would you accept that McMenamin squeezed/tapped/assaulted Galvin with the sole purpose of getting Galvin to strike him? If you can give me any other reason for his action please do. So if he done it purely for provocation then surely it is just as bad or worse

heffo

Quote from: Puckoon on February 24, 2009, 09:52:26 PM
Quote from: ddc1990 on February 24, 2009, 09:46:34 PM
Quote from: tyronefan on February 24, 2009, 09:30:32 PM
the suspension is completely unfair when you compare it to what galvin done last year.
Galvin only missed 3 match's while ricey will miss 4

this is what makes the suspension look ridiculous

what he done was wrong and deserves a suspension but in order for it to be acceptable it must be in line with other suspensions given out for the same offense and the punishment should be related to the crime not to how people perceive the offender

Yes but Galvin missed 3 championship matches, big difference to 4 league games.
Also, the word around Tralee (and this is complete heresay) is that McMenamin had Galvin's Girlfriends number on his hand and kept showing it to him through the match.
>:(

Is this the same rumour HEFFO came up with, except then it was player x  and player y?


I shouldn't have named the player involved but it wasn't a rumour.

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: heffo on February 25, 2009, 09:19:15 AM
I shouldn't have named the player involved but it wasn't a rumour.

That's right heffo, it was gospel. Still crap though.
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

heffo

Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 25, 2009, 09:44:57 AM
Quote from: heffo on February 25, 2009, 09:19:15 AM
I shouldn't have named the player involved but it wasn't a rumour.

That's right heffo, it was gospel. Still crap though.

Know that for a fact do you?

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: heffo on February 25, 2009, 09:54:27 AM
Know that for a fact do you?

Yep, and don't you think there are enough unfounded allegations on this thread for one thread already?
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...

heffo

Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on February 25, 2009, 09:57:00 AM
Quote from: heffo on February 25, 2009, 09:54:27 AM
Know that for a fact do you?

Yep, and don't you think there are enough unfounded allegations on this thread for one thread already?

I'm not naming any names and was quite content to let it go until I was brought back into it. So he told you it was bullshit did he?

Fear ón Srath Bán

Quote from: heffo on February 25, 2009, 09:59:58 AM
I'm not naming any names and was quite content to let it go until I was brought back into it. So he told you it was bullshit did he?

A quick trawl would retrieve the names very easily. You couldn't prove it then, and you won't prove it now -- unfounded.
Carlsberg don't do Gombeenocracies, but by jaysus if they did...