Battle of the Boyne - Meath Vs Louth - Leinster Final 11/7/2010

[The Konica]

back to the scene of the crime.

Is it not a neutral venue?

[Mike Sheehy]

Mickey Harte sticks his oar in.

http://www.herald.ie/sport/gaelic-football/harte-ire-with-royal-replay-2261529.html

Mickey Harte preaching about sportsmanship ?? ha, ha...the auld bollix has a sense of humour I suppose. Sure he well knows that Tyrone are the biggest cheats in Gaelic football.

[zoyler]

Mayo - Godhelpus - not me!! Pure Armagh though in exile in the west!
BTW very good article by O'Rourke yesterday which confirmed that there was general disquiet in various county team circles about Sludden - I think I refered to this earlier about concerns in Armagh prior to the Monaghan game - even though in the event he had little influence on that result!

[sandwiches_in_the_boot]

Mickey Harte sticks his oar in.

http://www.herald.ie/sport/gaelic-football/harte-ire-with-royal-replay-2261529.html

Mickey Harte preaching about sportsmanship ?? ha, ha...the auld bollix has a sense of humour I suppose. Sure he well knows that Tyrone are the biggest cheats in Gaelic football.

[Lar Naparka]

Mayo - Godhelpus - not me!! Pure Armagh though in exile in the west!
BTW very good article by O'Rourke yesterday which confirmed that there was general disquiet in various county team circles about Sludden - I think I refered to this earlier about concerns in Armagh prior to the Monaghan game - even though in the event he had little influence on that result!

I read O'Rourke's piece also. I had hoped to reproduce it here if an online version was available but, unfortunately, there isn't. I like O'Rourke. I seldom if ever agree with all of what he has to say but I feel he is always worth a read.
Yesterday was no exception. In fact, I had been looking forward to finding out what his reaction to the goal/ no goal incident was going to be. For my money at any rate, he gave a very comprehensive and well-balanced overview of proceedings until close to the very end where he crossed the line between fact and conjecture. That's not to say that I disagree with him; rather it is a case of me looking for proof where he tries to get by on assumption.
Take this for instance:
If it happened the other way around, would there have been any call for a replay?
If it happened against Dublin in Croke Park, would there be a replay? If Limerick got a goal in a similar way against Kerry in the Munster final and won by a point, would anyone, least of all Kerry, have said anything? Where does that leave 'justice for all'?
He may well be right but, on the other hand, he could equally well be wrong.

I just don't know and neither does Colm O'Rourke.

[mayogodhelpus@gmail.com]

Mayo - Godhelpus - not me!! Pure Armagh though in exile in the west!
BTW very good article by O'Rourke yesterday which confirmed that there was general disquiet in various county team circles about Sludden - I think I refered to this earlier about concerns in Armagh prior to the Monaghan game - even though in the event he had little influence on that result!

What did I do! 

[demusicman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2654Qdk-qk

Before this topic slips away may I sum up my feelings by singing this song----------

[Hardy]

Lar - a column is just an opinion piece, the same as our ramblings here. I think you're setting the bar very high for all of us if we must prove every conjecture we make. However, my own conjecture is that it's as close to a fact as makes no difference that O'Rourke is right in the piece you quoted. Can you really, even deploying the imaginative powers of a Connacht mystic with a PhD in imagination, imagine a media campaign to award the match to Meath if the incident had happened at the other end? Go on. Really.

[Hardy]

Here's O'Rourke's column:

18 July 2010

Colm O'Rourke: Residue of bile and bitterness could easily have been avoided if our administrators did their jobs properly

The referee wasn't the only one who made bad decisions last week, writes Colm O'Rourke

If football brings out the best and worst in people, then last week would be a psychiatrist's dream in the study of human behaviour.

Bile, bitterness and recrimination were in abundance, much of it directed towards Meath, an easy target in the circumstances for those who don't go to football too often or who have no understanding of the process involved.

In my mind, and of course with the benefit of hindsight, Meath made one mistake. On Sunday evening, they should have told the Leinster Council the matter was nothing to do with them and that the Meath board would not be meeting to discuss it. Leinster Council should also have been told that Meath would accept whatever ruling it came up with.

By not doing this, Meath came under moral pressure to offer a replay to Louth. It was a no-win situation and allowed others in the GAA to abdicate their responsibility.

That pressure was really was ramped up on Monday evening when the referee's report, saying the goal should not have been allowed, was leaked to the media even before the two counties had received it. This was all highly irregular. There was no mention in this selective leak of the fact that the referee also said he was going to give a penalty if the ball had not crossed the line.

The two bodies which should have dealt with this whole affair are the Central Referees Appointments Committee, who appointed the referee, and the Leinster Council, who had control of the fixture. But both washed their hands of it on the basis that they could do no more. If they were showing proper leadership, they would have immediately acted on a flawed referee's report and taken the matter out of everyone else's hands.

And if the GAA say their hands are tied why don't they change the rules so the governing body can step in when exceptional circumstances like this arises? After all, this is not the first such incident by any means.

If the referee says the goal should not have stood, then in effect he was saying that Louth had won the game. By also suggesting that he only realised this after watching a replay of the incident, he acted outside the referee's brief on writing reports as they are supposed to be free of any outside influence. So here was a clear case of where the Leinster Council had a report which was fundamentally flawed, yet they chose to adopt the report and award the game to Meath.

It must be the most stupid thing in the world to award the match to a team on the basis of a referee's report where he is saying that the score for the game was not really the right score at all. Taking the referee's word on the score as gospel means that a referee could enter a wrong score and the governing body must follow it blindly.

So if Leinster Council was willing to be brave enough and, let's face it, do its job, it should have stated that the report was so materially damaged that it could not be bound by it. They then would have had two options -- award the game to Louth or order a replay. Instead, they hoped Meath would buckle under the pressure knowing full well the accompanying opprobrium that would stick if they did not bow to Joe Public and the Liveline brigade. How many of them even go to football matches?

Then there is the aforementioned appointments committee. I didn't hear a peep out of them, yet they appointed an incompetent referee to a major fixture, so the controversy had plenty to do with them. In fact, it is fair to say that there was great disquiet in Meath among those close the team when this appointment was announced. This was on the basis of a League match earlier in the year between Meath and Donegal when Martin Sludden was in charge and his performance, it was felt in Meath, was not up to standard. I saw him referee Down and Armagh in the League too and thought he was out of his depth. Yet the CRAC persisted and handed him one of the biggest games of the year.

Sludden made plenty of mistakes throughout the game, including a blatantly wrong decision against Nigel Crawford in the second half, an error which he then compounded by showing the Meathman a yellow card. It is ironic that while many of the close calls in the game went Louth's way -- the biggest, most contentious and, of course, absolutely wrong decision went against them.

Yet for all that, the thuggery this man had to face after the game was shameful. Imagine the shock and horror his family must have felt if they were watching on TV.

Which brings us nicely to a third body which has also sat idly by this past week, the Central Competitions Control Committee, better known as the CCCC. Has this committee any useful purpose, or is it merely there to keep manners on Kerry? Did they deliberate on some of the acts of indiscipline during and after the game? Is it any wonder that Kerry are getting a bit paranoid recently.

And so a game where Louth were the better team and should have won ended with a miscarriage of justice. The aftermath has seen a huge amount of bitterness and anger directed at Meath but Louth, and others, should be looking somewhere else. In many respects, if the whistle was blown sooner it would have been better for Meath. They would have moved on quietly to the qualifiers and left the field of celebration to those who were more deserving on the day. Now there is no satisfaction from the whirlwind which has followed.

And so after the match it was all back to Meath. There was a lot of opinion in the county last week about offering a replay. Some were not impressed by a few incidents after the match where at least two players and a very well known Meathman were assaulted. These incidents just hardened opinion to some extent.

Many, like myself, thought a replay was fair and equitable, while there were mixed views from players and management. They didn't cause the problem and everyone understands fully their position and the emotional turmoil they were experiencing. In many respects, the players on both sides were the victims.

If the same incident happened 24 years ago when I won my first Leinster medal, I probably would not have the same opinion as now. It is easy at this remove, and several Leinster titles later, to make a judgement on a replay. If it happened the other way around, would there have been any call for a replay? If it happened against Dublin in Croke Park, would there be a replay? If Limerick got a goal in a similar way against Kerry in the Munster final and won by a point, would anyone, least of all Kerry, have said anything? Where does that leave 'justice for all'?

In the end my views were based on the bigger picture. I think it is fair to say that Louth supporters were never particularly generous to Meath when Meath were successful. So there are other considerations, not just a Leinster final. There are things like personal friendships, club football, business, schools and a thousand other social contacts with neighbouring counties.

There are enough small-minded, petty, bitter people in this world without giving any more some perceived injustice to hang onto for decades to come. Football at this level is about serious competition, but also about harmony and co-operation when the games are over.

Now both teams must move on. They both have big games to look forward to. Players, management and officials from both sides have had to endure a great deal of stress in the last week and are maybe fed up with football. There is no enjoyment in what took place for anyone. The only certainty now is that the events of last week will benefit neither county for the rest of this championship.

- Colm O'Rourke
Sunday Independent

[AZOffaly]

Colm is confused. He's all over the map. Louth were done, but Meath were done as well. He'd like to offer Louth a replay, but sure how could you when they've been less than generous to Meath over the years? And anyway, we shouldn't be asked. Would Limerick be asked?

[Bud Wiser]

I read that article on Sunday, twice, and still could not understand it. There is one thing that stands out in that article and it is this statement:  "Some were not impressed by a few incidents after the match where at least two players and a very well known Meathman were assaulted".

Let us call a spade a spade here now. O'Rourke is referring to reports that Sean Boylan was struck in the stand, I am not saying he was or he wasn't on this board because I do not know, I only heard reports. I also heard reports and conspiricy theories that man did not land on the moon so, as a journalist O'Rourke should be ashamed of himself for making such a sweeping statement without naming the well know Meathman.

My spin on this all along has been what hapened on the pitch was handbags stuff, nobody died.  Did O'Rourke or his journo pals ask the Gardai what Sludden was supposed to have said to them when they offered to escort him off the pitch?  They should because it is unfair to Sludden if this is a rumour doing the rounds in the same way as it is unfair to every decent GAA man in Louth if the rumour about Sean Boylan is so strong a rumour that O'Rourke, his own mate, can not say his name or qualify what he is talking about.

Whatever about what happened on the pitch, if Sean Boylan was struck in the stand I would be absolutely disgusted because of what he has given to the GAA and whoever struck him would not do it when he was a younger man. But did it happen?  All I am hearing and reading is articles like O'Rourkes that are all over the place that read like a mixture of Paudi O Se and Pat Spilane after being on the piss giving their views on the effects on local communities and the local business and schools and everything including how locals can not get to their pubs but fail to offer one ounce of balls by either naming those referred to or leaving it out.

[Lar Naparka]

Lar - a column is just an opinion piece, the same as our ramblings here. I think you're setting the bar very high for all of us if we must prove every conjecture we make. However, my own conjecture is that it's as close to a fact as makes no difference that O'Rourke is right in the piece you quoted. Can you really, even deploying the imaginative powers of a Connacht mystic with a PhD in imagination, imagine a media campaign to award the match to Meath if the incident had happened at the other end? Go on. Really.

Hiya, Hardy, nice to see diplomatic relations have been restored again.
(I better get this in fast before they break down once more.)
As an unapologetic, unabashed and generally uninformed Mayo man, I never let facts get in the way of prejudice when I want to get involved in a row about anything.
At the same time, I'd like to think that I qualify whatever I say when I go on a solo run.
I don't think I'm setting the bar too high when I say I won't (always) accept conjecture as fact.
I like Colm O'Rourke as a GAA analyst. I don't necessarily agree with him on everything he has to say but I do think he usually presents a solid argument for anything he chooses to comment on.
I had no problem with anything he had to say until close to the very end.
In essence, he was saying if other counties had been involved, the result would have been different. In other words, poor Meath were hard done by.
If it happened the other way around, would there have been any call for a replay? If it happened against Dublin in Croke Park, would there be a replay?

Bullshit! Okay; he is merely asking questions but it's obvious that he is looking for a negative answer. He gives no evidence whatever to support his view.

In the end my views were based on the bigger picture. I think it is fair to say that Louth supporters were never particularly generous to Meath when Meath were successful. So there are other considerations, not just a Leinster final.
Double bullshit! IMO, there are no other considerations. If the roles were reversed and Meath were on the receiving end, I'd feel the same way as I do now.
I have no doubt that you sincerely think "that it's as close to a fact as makes no difference that O'Rourke is right in the piece you quoted."
But, in the same way as you can't dig half a hole, you can't pass off conjecture as fact.
Having said that, you could very well be right-who knows?
Now, you and I could spend the rest of our youth arguing quite happily on a low-traffic board but O'Rourke's rant was published in the premier Sunday paper in the land.
He has a duty to separate fact from personal opinion and to indicate clearly when he is conjecturing. He failed to do so last Sunday.
Can you really, even deploying the imaginative powers of a Connacht mystic with a PhD in imagination, imagine a media campaign to award the match to Meath if the incident had happened at the other end? Go on. Really.
I certainly could and if there wasn't such a campaign, I would want to know why.

[Armamike]

I'd disagree with Colm on where the onus on a reply lies. The GAA was in no position to order a replay - no sporting body could ever go down this road once the goal was awarded in open play and the final whistle was blown. The onus has and always will lie with the winning team, and Meath should have done the right thing and offered it.  I don't know how many counties in the same position would have offered a replay, probably very few, but it has happened before and was still the right thing to do.

[Hardy]

Lar, I wasn't aware diplomatic relations had been severed. The ambassador never even mentioned he'd been called in, never mind sent home.

I see our discussion along the lines of a John Wayne-type saloon fight where the only harm intended is a black eye or a busted lip and where the odd whiskey bottle broken over the even odder skull won't stop us buying each other pints when it's over, no matter who won.

Anyway, I wasn't asking you to accept conjecture as fact. What I didn't succeed in saying properly was that conjecture is speculation is opinion and I don't think even the omniscient O'Rourke expects anyone to take his opinion as fact.

I'm not here to defend his opinion (and I don't know what relevance he attaches to his remarks about historical relations between Wee people and Us people). I only wanted to say that I agree 100% with his conjecture that an illegal Louth goal at the other end of the field would have passed with barely a mention in the media and on the looneyphones. I accept your declaration that it would have outraged you; O'Rourke and I were merely speculating on how it would have played (or not) on Pat Kenny and Livewhine, not on where it would have ranked on the Lar Naparka scale of great sporting injustices.

Likewise, I have no doubt that the scale of public and media-assisted outrage at Results-We-Do-Not-Like is calibrated using the How-Long-Since-The-Victims-Won-Anything meter. As another example, I refer you to the widespread disgust at the temerity of Meath in winning the 1996 AIF.

No doubt you believe different. If you persist in such wrong-headed nonsense I have no alternative but to invite you to settle it like men. Bare skulls and whiskey bottles at dusk.

[From the Bunker]

Here's O'Rourke's column:

In the end my views were based on the bigger picture. I think it is fair to say that Louth supporters were never particularly generous to Meath when Meath were successful. So there are other considerations, not just a Leinster final. There are things like personal friendships, club football, business, schools and a thousand other social contacts with neighbouring counties.

- Colm O'Rourke
Sunday Independent

Don't understand what he means by above in 'bold'.