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

[Hardy]

I understand what he means. He means they relentlessly hated us.

What I don't understand is its relevance to the subject at hand.

[Hound]

I understand what he means. He means they relentlessly hated us.

What I don't understand is its relevance to the subject at hand.

A fierce generalisation too there Hardy. I'm sure plenty of Louth men cheered Meath's All Ireland, even if only a significant minority. Sure I hate (or at least used to hate) Meath too, and I even cheered yis against Cork one year.

And its not as if Meath ever asked for outside support or cared if they werent popular.

[Hardy]

I wouldn't disagree with a word of that, Hound.

[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'.

Does he mean, Louth supporters were never particularly generous (in praise) to Meath when Meath were successful. So for this we were entitled not to offer a replay?

[meathie]

agree with you from the bunker, no relevance there.
Bud Can I just say not that it makes a difference anymore and I know Boylan made light of it, but I know one of his family and text them straight away that Sunday and he did get a slap and some of his kids were with him. awful stuff. anyway this is going on so so long now.....

[Lar Naparka]

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.

Yer on, lad!
See you outside the Bective House or the Balreask anytime you like!
I (literally) never walked away from a row in any of them-or from the Robinstown Inn either. That's because I always drove, or was driven, home and was able to keep the row going with those who shared the car with me.
Now, you may not have noticed that I have not said at any time that I either agreed or disagreed with your players' decision to hold on to the title. I certainly don't think that the onus should have been put on them to make the decision in the first place. Sin scéal eile.
I've no problem with O'Rourke giving his opinion on anything at any time but I would have expected him to avoid sweeping generalisations when he attempted to justify the Meath players' stance on the matter. At least I assume that was what he had in mind because, otherwise, it would have made no sense at all.
If Louth and the rest of civilisation relentlessly hate you, that's okay by me. You certainly earned this opprobrium the hard way. (Merely a case of IMO of course- but I damn well know I'm right!)
O'Rourke made no effort whatever to justify the players' stance based on the strict facts of the matter. "What if" and "how 'bout" is all we got from him and we got assloads of that.
Maybe your good self would care to oblige me?
What justification was there for the Meath players to reject a replay?

[Hardy]

What justification was there for the Meath players to reject a replay?

That's a very strange question, Lar. It's another "when did you stop beating your wife" one.

A fictitious example: What justification was there for Spike Milligan to refuse to pilot the Lunar Landing Module?

1. We don't know that he did, because he never said anything in public about it. All we have is statements and assumptions by third parties that he did. And plenty of speculation as to why he did. In fact, we don't even know whether he was asked.

2. Supposing he was asked, in what way was it a reasonable request? He had no competence whatever in the matter. It wasn't his decision, he wasn't qualified to make it and the very idea that he would be asked is ludicrous. For one thing, no comedian, before or since, has ever been asked to perform such a task.

3. Surely the real question is not "what justification was there for Spike to reject the request to be first man on the moon?", but "what justification was there for asking the Spike to be first man on the moon, at 24 hours' notice and with no training or competence in the matter?".

In the circumstances, if I were Spike, a two-word answer would be the most I would have offered.

[mylestheslasher]

I can't understand why anyone would even bother listen to O Rourke and his usual streams of crap. He talks it on the TV so I am sure he writes it in his columns equally as well. First off he is a totally biases Meath man - earlier this year he named the main competitors for Sam as Cork, Kerry, Tyrone and of course Meath!
Who can forget how he claimed Dooher was useless and if he played on a team that won the AI he'd eat his hat. Or what about his party-piece of claiming refs are too small!!

Louth were never nice to us???
If the boot was on the other foot???

All irrelevant bullshit. It was Meath who cheated, Meath who had the chance to do the right thing and Meath who didn't have the moral courage to do so.

On a related note, I heard that many of the older Meath players were in favour of offering a replay and the younger players against. Would that be why O Rourke is putting up these excuses and hypothetical nonsense. Following on the hypothetical argument, I wonder what he would think if his home county of Leitrim were done out of a long awaited Connaught title in similar circumstances?

Its all done and dusted now so pointless going on except to wish Louth good luck against the Dubs, I hope that gutting fiasco can be put behind them and they can play to their full potential.

Finally, if Boylan was hit in the crowd then the dirt bag that did it should be identified on TV cameras, prosecuted and never allowed into a GAA stadium again. There is no excuse for that sort of behavior and especially to man who gave so much to the GAA.

[Lar Naparka]

What justification was there for the Meath players to reject a replay?

That's a very strange question, Lar. It's another "when did you stop beating your wife" one.

A fictitious example: What justification was there for Spike Milligan to refuse to pilot the Lunar Landing Module?

1. We don't know that he did, because he never said anything in public about it. All we have is statements and assumptions by third parties that he did. And plenty of speculation as to why he did. In fact, we don't even know whether he was asked.

2. Supposing he was asked, in what way was it a reasonable request? He had no competence whatever in the matter. It wasn't his decision, he wasn't qualified to make it and the very idea that he would be asked is ludicrous. For one thing, no comedian, before or since, has ever been asked to perform such a task.

3. Surely the real question is not "what justification was there for Spike to reject the request to be first man on the moon?", but "what justification was there for asking the Spike to be first man on the moon, at 24 hours' notice and with no training or competence in the matter?".

In the circumstances, if I were Spike, a two-word answer would be the most I would have offered.

Touché, Hardy; I accept what you say in its entirety.
I don't know why I used the word, 'justification,' when I put the question to you. I had intended using the word, 'reason,' instead.
I don't think the players are obliged to defend their reason for rejecting a replay.
It seems they were asked a straightforward yes/no question and delivered an answer.
Okay, they are not obliged to give their reason or reasons for coming up with a no; much less defend the stance they took.
But in the absence of fact, rumours will abound. It may well be in the players' best interests to explain their reasoning and leave it at that. That may not deflect all the criticism that's coming their way now and will come for the foreseeable future but it may help to put an end to some of them at any rate.
The first such rumour I heard was that some of the Meath players were incensed at the reaction of a number of Louth players when they went to shake hands with them after the game had finished.
I just cannot imagine any Meath player getting upset by a bit of hand bagging, can you?
Next off the rumour mill was the suggestion that the players decided to hold on to the title because the ref had indicated that he would have given them a penalty if he had decided to disallow the goal.
If that was the real reason, they deserve all the abuse they got and will continue to get. (IMO, of course!)
There is no absolute guarantee that the spot kick would have resulted in a goal for one thing and it wouldn't lessen the controversy one bit if a goal had been scored. After all, there would still be Sludden's admission of a "terrible mistake" to contend with and add to that the video evidence of what had happened in the goalmouth that led to the penalty being awarded.
The next rumour to do the rounds was that the assaults on the ref by some Louth fans plus the attack on Sean Boylan were the real reasons for the replay being refused.
I honestly feel that the Meath players would never use the actions of as few hotheads as a reason to damn the entire county of Louth or any other one for that matter.
The latest and daftest so far is the one O'Rourke suggested:
I think it is fair to say that Louth supporters were never particularly generous to Meath when Meath were successful.
Janey Mac, if that should turn out to be the real reason for the refusal; I can see Meath players being pelted with soothers and babies' bottles as long as the Boyne separates the counties—or until Meath players start to live up to their hard men image again.
In a nutshell, I feel that until the real reason(s) for the refusal come out, the taunting and jeering will continue.
The players were backed into a corner on this one and that should never have happened. But it did and they will have to live with the consequences. In fairness to them, there would have been trouble in store even if they agreed to a replay.
In the interests of damage limitation, I feel they should reveal their reason for taking the option they did and move on from there.
BTW; we can agree on one thing.
I'd give the same answer as you if I were in Spike's shoes.

[Zapatista]

BTW; we can agree on one thing.
I'd give the same answer as you if I were in Spike's shoes.

Does that mean to say that you would give the same answer as Hardy if you were in Hardy's shoes in Spike's shoes

[Hardy]

Lar, that's a very long way of saying the players should say why they didn't agree to a replay. I disagree. They weren't officially asked anything, so what are we discussing?

If they WERE asked, they shouldn't have been and should have answered "don't ask us - we have no function in GAA administration. We play the games, you administer the rules. We don't ask you to catch balls and score points. Don't ask us to adjudicate on match results or competition schedules. Give us a decision and we'll abide by it."

If they answered 'no', then in my opinion they gave the politically difficult and morally courageous answer. To have given any other answer would have been craven. What would you think of yourself if you gave the answer demanded of you just because a gun was put to your head?

The rumour mill is neither here nor there and I won't dignify it with comment other than to mention that if tradition is anything to go by, it ain't going to bother players or supporters but will work to our advantage. We're back where we're comfortable.

[Lar Naparka]

BTW; we can agree on one thing.
I'd give the same answer as you if I were in Spike's shoes.

Does that mean to say that you would give the same answer as Hardy if you were in Hardy's shoes in Spike's shoes

No. It means what I want it to mean.
in fact, it is the answer I 'd give to Spike if he came looking for his shoes.

[Pups]

Louth should NOT have gotten a replay. They won the game fair and square. End of. Joe Sheridan behaved so badly by claiming the goal was a legitimate goal.

[Bud Wiser]

agree with you from the bunker, no relevance there.
Bud Can I just say not that it makes a difference anymore and I know Boylan made light of it, but I know one of his family and text them straight away that Sunday and he did get a slap and some of his kids were with him. awful stuff. anyway this is going on so so long now.....

Bad scene all the same.  What age is Sean Boylan now?

EDIT: It's OK, I got his age. Jeez, born 1959, 23 years managing Meath before he retired and was manager going as far back as an O'Byrne Cup win in 1983.  The reason I was asking was because you said some of his kids were with him,  you know, Ah for Gods sake mind the childer and I was picturing them at three and four under his feet and them in danger of being walked on.  I hope that was not the case.  Some of these things can be blown out of proportion but I don't know what age his 'kids' are.  I was at a Leinster Final one day and in the Hogan stand he came in and sat down behind me and a witty Dub said, "good man Sean, welcome to your second last day in Croke Park this year" and I forget what he said but the reply was instant and twice as wiity and he added a great bit of craic to the occasion and then just sat down. A gentleman.

[Hardy]

Seán is 66. He was married in 1990 at the age of 46. His youngest kids are quite young. Not that the presence or absence of his kids has any bearing on whether some gouger should give him a thump (as reports have it) or engage in a bit of "nothin" (as Seán put it).