Author Topic: Joe Brolly  (Read 646031 times)

Black Card

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #420 on: March 27, 2014, 05:56:42 PM »
Even at school Joe sought and loved the attention, just now more people hear what he has to say.  Bet he looks in here and smiles!

CD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 953
  • Who's a bit of a moaning Michael tonight!
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #421 on: March 27, 2014, 06:51:45 PM »
Even at school Joe sought and loved the attention, just now more people hear what he has to say.  Bet he looks in here and smiles!
I can't believe there are people coming on here and suggesting that Joe Brolly is a self-obsessed, self-serving, egotistical self-publicist whose favourite words in the whole world are 'Joe Brolly.' I'm only saying!!
Who's a bit of a moaning Michael tonight!

Milltown Row2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19553
  • It was the Ref that did it!!
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #422 on: March 27, 2014, 08:03:00 PM »
As long as I get to choose the weapons i.e. an O'Neills size 5 at twenty paces.

Sure you have no problem sticking over a 65 in hurling. In ten 65's you'd not get one like wise a hurler knocking over a 45 in football, though I doubt you'd be able to knock over too many 45's ;)
Anything I post is not the view of the County Board!! Nobody died in the making of this post ;-)

didlyi

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 227
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #423 on: March 27, 2014, 10:40:52 PM »
In fairness Brolly is admitting that Hurling always was the more entertaining game and that the football was better than the hurling on Paddys day. I would agree with you on both counts Joe.

Farrandeelin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10191
  • Hey buckaroo! How are you?
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #424 on: March 27, 2014, 10:57:14 PM »
In fairness Brolly is admitting that Hurling always was the more entertaining game and that the football was better than the hurling on Paddys day. I would agree with you on both counts Joe.

It usually is for some reason.
The woman in red has the car parked on the slope.

maxpower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 823
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #425 on: March 28, 2014, 09:13:38 AM »
The club hurling semi finals have had some epics in recent years, De La Salle v Clarinbridge being one of the best games i've seen, but for some reason the finals haven't risen to near the same excitement.  Even the eagerly awaited game between Portumna and Ballyhale was quite mediocre.

Football final this year was excellent, but one swallow...
What happens next????

Zulu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7248
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #426 on: March 28, 2014, 09:43:55 AM »
One swallow? The club football final has invariably been excellent and many of the semi finals have been good too. The national football leagues, all divisions, are usually outstanding entertainment. The football championship has been, at least, as good as the hurling over the past 10-15 years yet we seem to be in a perpetual state of anxiety over football while any criticism of hurling is frowned upon. 

Football has it's issues but most of them are caused by the daftness of the championship structure. Hurling, due to it's small concentrated pool of teams, does pretty well out of the championship but football is destroyed by it.

time ticking away

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #427 on: March 28, 2014, 09:44:31 AM »
What Joe Brolly has said in the past
http://gaeliclife.com/2014/03/joe-brolly-a-lament-for-the-gooch/

Quote
There is a but about Colm. I said during 2012 he was, “The greatest first half footballer in the history of the game,” which drove the Kerry ones crazy. I meant he was not a natural warrior leader, in the mould of Canavan, or Trevor Giles or O’Rourke. A snapshot. In the 2005 final, Canavan saw Gooch taking off to join the attack near the end, grabbed him and held him to the ground in a judo hold. Had it been the other way round wee Pete would have hit him so hard Gooch would have imagined he was surrounded. It was the genius versus the warrior genius. Canavan’s personality meant that he refused to accept defeat, whereas Cooper often did. The difference between Federer and Nadal.

What Joe Brolly says today

Quote
"Diarmuid Connolly has spent his short career being pulled down, body checked and spoiled. But opponents can't do that anymore.

"So on St Patrick's Day, the boy finally showed us what he has. Turns out he has everything, and then some more. He augmented his 2-5 from play (both feet and the fist) by catching two kick-outs and setting up 1-3.

"Everything that was great about football was on show as both teams gave it their all and were free to show their skills.

So when did blatant cheating go from being the sign of a "warrior" to the antithesis of all that is "great about football" ?

dont like to agree with mike at all,but this is a perfect example of joe schizophrenic Brolly.
canavan is the man canavan is the man ee aye adi ooh.......

johnneycool

  • Guest
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #428 on: March 28, 2014, 10:19:56 AM »
One swallow? The club football final has invariably been excellent and many of the semi finals have been good too. The national football leagues, all divisions, are usually outstanding entertainment. The football championship has been, at least, as good as the hurling over the past 10-15 years yet we seem to be in a perpetual state of anxiety over football while any criticism of hurling is frowned upon. 

Football has it's issues but most of them are caused by the daftness of the championship structure. Hurling, due to it's small concentrated pool of teams, does pretty well out of the championship but football is destroyed by it.

Its the mindset of the respective pundits and commentators which creates this imo.

The hurling lads big up even the shittest game of hurling yet the football pundits seem to take great joy in deriding the new footballers with their, not as good as it was in my day mentality.

The business end of the last few football championships have been good, the hurling was a bit stagnated when it was Kilkenny vrs someone else and ended up putting 10 plus points on them. The Galway and Kilkenny games in 2012 were superb entertainment as was last years two finals. The earlish exit of Kilkenny added a bit of spice as well.


AZOffaly

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 25091
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #429 on: March 28, 2014, 10:41:05 AM »
I agree Johnny. Football has had some problems with teams struggling to adjust to *legal* defensive tactics, but that's a cyclical sort of thing, and I think even last year the we could see the genesis of the next level of attacking play. Even without the black card.

However, I think hurling and football pundits have different mindsets regarding the games they cover, and the games they view. As a coach, I want my team to play to the best of their ability, to display good decision making, and to exhibit good discipline and good technical skill levels.

As a fan, I want to see an exciting game, with a close finish, competitive and intense. Whether the technical abilities of the teams are at a high level or not is moot for me. An exciting Junior club game can give me as much enjoyment as an observer as an exciting inter county game at which I am a neutral.

I think the football pundits, taking their lead from the Eamon Dunphy/Johnny Giles school of analysis, view the games as coaches, and as coaches who have never had a bad team in their lives at that. Their criticism of the skills, the competence or the discipline of the teams is scathing because they feel that is what constitutes analysis.

The hurling pundits can get great joy out of a game between two poor teams, where the finish is close or the intensity and aggression is high. I've seen them laud games as great where lads take two or three touches to get the ball up in their hand, poor striking, bad wides. But it;s a great game because it's close, it's exciting and it's fast paced. They seem to believe that their analysis is primarily getting the message over that they love the game, and try to give reasons for other people to understand and love the game as well.

I can see both approaches being valid in a sense, but the hurling approach is certainly more upbeat and feel good, while the football is too much naval gazing and self loathing at times.

As I've said before, two great games that we should be proud of. That does not mean we can't improve or tweak certain aspects, but to listen to the football commentators you'd swear the football was caveman stuff that nobody should bother their hole even looking at.

Fuzzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4583
  • Aughabrack (Tyrone Not Cork)
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #430 on: March 28, 2014, 12:07:29 PM »
Well said AZ and in fairness Mickey Harte has been making that point for the last number of years that the pundits seem to continually bad mouth the game and see it through biased eyes of yesteryear

Whilst I have not enjoyed Donegal & Tyrone's style over the past 3 or 4 years or so I think Spillane & Co have really added to the negativity of it all.
I hope the openness of games so far this year continue into the championship but I fear they won't. I know teams like Donegal and Cavan continue to think defensively and I'd say looking at Tyrone's lack of good man markers we too will resort to playing sweepers etc.

imtommygunn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9027
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #431 on: March 28, 2014, 12:23:09 PM »
I agree Johnny. Football has had some problems with teams struggling to adjust to *legal* defensive tactics, but that's a cyclical sort of thing, and I think even last year the we could see the genesis of the next level of attacking play. Even without the black card.

However, I think hurling and football pundits have different mindsets regarding the games they cover, and the games they view. As a coach, I want my team to play to the best of their ability, to display good decision making, and to exhibit good discipline and good technical skill levels.

As a fan, I want to see an exciting game, with a close finish, competitive and intense. Whether the technical abilities of the teams are at a high level or not is moot for me. An exciting Junior club game can give me as much enjoyment as an observer as an exciting inter county game at which I am a neutral.

I think the football pundits, taking their lead from the Eamon Dunphy/Johnny Giles school of analysis, view the games as coaches, and as coaches who have never had a bad team in their lives at that. Their criticism of the skills, the competence or the discipline of the teams is scathing because they feel that is what constitutes analysis.

The hurling pundits can get great joy out of a game between two poor teams, where the finish is close or the intensity and aggression is high. I've seen them laud games as great where lads take two or three touches to get the ball up in their hand, poor striking, bad wides. But it;s a great game because it's close, it's exciting and it's fast paced. They seem to believe that their analysis is primarily getting the message over that they love the game, and try to give reasons for other people to understand and love the game as well.

I can see both approaches being valid in a sense, but the hurling approach is certainly more upbeat and feel good, while the football is too much naval gazing and self loathing at times.

As I've said before, two great games that we should be proud of. That does not mean we can't improve or tweak certain aspects, but to listen to the football commentators you'd swear the football was caveman stuff that nobody should bother their hole even looking at.

The standard of the football punditry is pretty bad these days. It's all about Brolly point scoring or bigging up what he likes now or Spillane losing the plot with him etc etc. Brolly was reasonaby amusing for a while but not any more.

Hurling you have the likes of Mulcahy, Cusack etc etc who are very insightful and you can't but admire the passion the likes of Farrel has. Football you could barely have any respect for any pundit to be honest.

As you say they are both different games - the two best games about so don't see the need for people who like one better to chastise the other one!

clootfromthe21

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #432 on: March 28, 2014, 01:05:24 PM »
I agree Johnny. Football has had some problems with teams struggling to adjust to *legal* defensive tactics, but that's a cyclical sort of thing, and I think even last year the we could see the genesis of the next level of attacking play. Even without the black card.

However, I think hurling and football pundits have different mindsets regarding the games they cover, and the games they view. As a coach, I want my team to play to the best of their ability, to display good decision making, and to exhibit good discipline and good technical skill levels.

As a fan, I want to see an exciting game, with a close finish, competitive and intense. Whether the technical abilities of the teams are at a high level or not is moot for me. An exciting Junior club game can give me as much enjoyment as an observer as an exciting inter county game at which I am a neutral.

I think the football pundits, taking their lead from the Eamon Dunphy/Johnny Giles school of analysis, view the games as coaches, and as coaches who have never had a bad team in their lives at that. Their criticism of the skills, the competence or the discipline of the teams is scathing because they feel that is what constitutes analysis.

The hurling pundits can get great joy out of a game between two poor teams, where the finish is close or the intensity and aggression is high. I've seen them laud games as great where lads take two or three touches to get the ball up in their hand, poor striking, bad wides. But it;s a great game because it's close, it's exciting and it's fast paced. They seem to believe that their analysis is primarily getting the message over that they love the game, and try to give reasons for other people to understand and love the game as well.

I can see both approaches being valid in a sense, but the hurling approach is certainly more upbeat and feel good, while the football is too much naval gazing and self loathing at times.

As I've said before, two great games that we should be proud of. That does not mean we can't improve or tweak certain aspects, but to listen to the football commentators you'd swear the football was caveman stuff that nobody should bother their hole even looking at.

The standard of the football punditry is pretty bad these days. It's all about Brolly point scoring or bigging up what he likes now or Spillane losing the plot with him etc etc. Brolly was reasonaby amusing for a while but not any more.

Hurling you have the likes of Mulcahy, Cusack etc etc who are very insightful and you can't but admire the passion the likes of Farrel has. Football you could barely have any respect for any pundit to be honest.

As you say they are both different games - the two best games about so don't see the need for people who like one better to chastise the other one!

To be honest, I quite like Brolly as a commentator. At least, he offers an insight other than either a.) some sort of eulogy about passion or wanting it more or b.) effectively a commentary on a piece of action replay that I can see for myself thanks very much. If anything, I think the hurling pundits are the worst for the latter ("Well, Michael, he put his hand up there and he caught it, and then he turned there Michael and he hit it very hard and it went into the net. And that's a goal in any man's language")

It might be unmitigated bollocks, but at least its something. Same with Neil Francis in the rugby (helmet on). Now there's a game I don't understand at all tactically, but Francis will usually come up with some take on it. It might be complete nonsense but it at least it is not stating the obvious that any idiot (i.e. me) can see for themselves.

Of course, with Brolly, in addition to the insight, you have the cheese eating grin, being the smartest boy in the room, the winding up of Pat etc etc

imtommygunn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9027
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #433 on: March 28, 2014, 01:36:09 PM »
Yeah but you can't help but feel there's always an agenda against someone. Comnments about Cavanagh last year, Mayo the year before etc etc.

Black Card

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #434 on: March 28, 2014, 01:44:01 PM »
His agenda is Joe Brolly, in fairness he's a master at promoting it. :)