Donegal on slippery slope?

Started by ck, April 08, 2013, 09:06:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

stephenite

Quote from: INDIANA on April 27, 2013, 12:03:08 AM
Quote from: stephenite on April 26, 2013, 11:58:41 PM
Quote from: INDIANA on April 26, 2013, 10:36:37 PM
Quote from: stephenite on April 26, 2013, 10:33:59 PM
I don't imagine for one second that someone has made up an allegation that they were bitten by a Dublin player. I cannot accept that.

That the process that followed turned into a shambles is not the fault of either county.

But I'm still pretty sure someone was bitten.

Conjecture.

Utterly zero evidence to support that

Do you believe in the Twilight Zone as a matter of interest? No evidence to support that either.

Hiding behind some basic legal principles will not change my opinion that there was a bite. It is only my opinion, but it's more likely an offence was committed than an allegation being made up in my view. I would say the same regardless of what teams were involved.

No you wouldn't you'd only say that if Dublin were involved and you know it.

Absolute rubbish

Zulu

Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

Does that not lay the blame for this fiasco at the feet of Donegal? Why would McBrearty not attend a disciplinary meeting if O'Brien bit him and received a 3 match ban, surely he'd be happy to see someone punished so it wouldn't happen again and the punishment isn't so severe that he should harbour any guilty about a fellow player?

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

RMDrive

Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

Does that not lay the blame for this fiasco at the feet of Donegal? Why would McBrearty not attend a disciplinary meeting if O'Brien bit him and received a 3 match ban, surely he'd be happy to see someone punished so it wouldn't happen again and the punishment isn't so severe that he should harbour any guilty about a fellow player?

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Ah Zulu in fairness .... if this article is correct, it suggests that the only reason KOB got away with it is because Paddy didn't turn up. An attempt to read this piece as something that blames Donegal is crazy.
"... the fact that the CCCC accepted the substantive charge of biting, and the CHC has had to quash the ban based on a technicality."

Why would he not turn up? Who knows. Maybe he felt that his part in it had been done already and didn't want to waste any more of his time on it? Maybe he couldn't be arsed travelling to Dublin on a Thursday evening? Maybe he had training? Maybe KOB or someone else from the Dublin setup contacted him and asked him not to attend?

heffo

Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Sorry Zulu it certainly does not.

The 'evidence' is exactly as I stated

Zulu

I'm certainly not trying to blame anyone RM but this whole thing seems very strange. Why would Dublin appeal if there was evidence of biting? It would seem a risky thing to do in an era where hundreds of phone cameras would have been at the game and it would mean Dublin GAA condoned this behaviour. It's not like this is Bernard brogan and he might miss an AI final. Risking dublin's GAA reputation over this seems unlikely to me.

I don't think any of the reasons you propose for McBrearty to miss the hearing hold much water either to be fair. He would surely have been told o'brien would get off if he didn't attend so I doubt Donegal GAA would accept him not turning up for such a high profile case.

IMO none of this makes sense and I'd doubt very much the truth is as simple as O'Brien biting McBrearty and McBrearty not going to the hearing due to to training or whatever.

RMDrive

Quote from: heffo on April 27, 2013, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Sorry Zulu it certainly does not.

The 'evidence' is exactly as I stated

In a surprise move, Heffo sticks to his story  ::)

Zulu

Quote from: heffo on April 27, 2013, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Sorry Zulu it certainly does not.

The 'evidence' is exactly as I stated

So the CCCC didn't accept there was a bite, is that what you're saying heffo?

heffo

Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 08:46:40 AM
Quote from: heffo on April 27, 2013, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Sorry Zulu it certainly does not.

The 'evidence' is exactly as I stated

So the CCCC didn't accept there was a bite, is that what you're saying heffo?

I've discussed their role already and speculated as to why they acted as they did

There was no evidence. Not a lack of evidence or anything else

RMDrive

Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 08:43:38 AM
I'm certainly not trying to blame anyone RM but this whole thing seems very strange. Why would Dublin appeal if there was evidence of biting? It would seem a risky thing to do in an era where hundreds of phone cameras would have been at the game and it would mean Dublin GAA condoned this behaviour. It's not like this is Bernard brogan and he might miss an AI final. Risking dublin's GAA reputation over this seems unlikely to me.

I don't think any of the reasons you propose for McBrearty to miss the hearing hold much water either to be fair. He would surely have been told o'brien would get off if he didn't attend so I doubt Donegal GAA would accept him not turning up for such a high profile case.

IMO none of this makes sense and I'd doubt very much the truth is as simple as O'Brien biting McBrearty and McBrearty not going to the hearing due to to training or whatever.

Yeah, I suppose it's strange all right. But would he have been sure that O'Brien would have gotten off if he didn't go? Paddy is a young lad and is probably not enjoying the spotlight being on the event. Maybe he felt that he had done his part and from there it was up to the GAA to do what they would with it. I agree with you that the truth of the matter is probably not simple, but this report (if true) certainly doesn't diminish my belief that there was bite.

orangeman

Forgive my ignorance but why did Paddy mc Brearty need to turn up ?

RMDrive

Quote from: orangeman on April 27, 2013, 09:01:09 AM
Forgive my ignorance but why did Paddy mc Brearty need to turn up ?

I looks like his evidence was at the heart of things and without it, it couldn't be proved that the bite was caused by O'Brien.

Zulu

Quote from: heffo on April 27, 2013, 08:49:48 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 08:46:40 AM
Quote from: heffo on April 27, 2013, 08:33:23 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html



While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Sorry Zulu it certainly does not.

The 'evidence' is exactly as I stated

So the CCCC didn't accept there was a bite, is that what you're saying heffo?

I've discussed their role already and speculated as to why they acted as they did


There was no evidence. Not a lack of evidence or anything else


That's a bit of double talk there heffo to be fair. Now I don't want to come on all Jeremy paxman on you but did the CCCC have evidence of a bite or not?

INDIANA

Quote from: orangeman on April 27, 2013, 09:01:09 AM
Forgive my ignorance but why did Paddy mc Brearty need to turn up ?

Because the allegation concerned him.

It was evident from early on he didn't want to appear.

And from that point onwards we all knew why.

I don't blame Mc Brearty -its very very obvious who is to blame for this in Donegal.


RMDrive

Quote from: INDIANA on April 27, 2013, 10:25:43 AM
Quote from: orangeman on April 27, 2013, 09:01:09 AM
Forgive my ignorance but why did Paddy mc Brearty need to turn up ?

Because the allegation concerned him.

It was evident from early on he didn't want to appear.

And from that point onwards we all knew why.

I don't blame Mc Brearty -its very very obvious who is to blame for this in Donegal.

;D Good man yourself.

Donnellys Hollow

Quote from: RMDrive on April 27, 2013, 08:16:42 AM
Quote from: Zulu on April 27, 2013, 07:25:07 AM
Quote from: J70 on April 27, 2013, 03:42:43 AM
According to the Examiner, the case couldn't be pursued because McBrearty wouldn't testify.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/gaa/officials-fume-as-obrien-escapes-three-game-ban-229675.html

Does that not lay the blame for this fiasco at the feet of Donegal? Why would McBrearty not attend a disciplinary meeting if O'Brien bit him and received a 3 match ban, surely he'd be happy to see someone punished so it wouldn't happen again and the punishment isn't so severe that he should harbour any guilty about a fellow player?

While that article contradicts the previous line that there was no evidence it doesn't make the case any less strange or explain Donegal's role in this fiasco.

Ah Zulu in fairness .... if this article is correct, it suggests that the only reason KOB got away with it is because Paddy didn't turn up. An attempt to read this piece as something that blames Donegal is crazy.
"... the fact that the CCCC accepted the substantive charge of biting, and the CHC has had to quash the ban based on a technicality."

Why would he not turn up? Who knows. Maybe he felt that his part in it had been done already and didn't want to waste any more of his time on it? Maybe he couldn't be arsed travelling to Dublin on a Thursday evening? Maybe he had training? Maybe KOB or someone else from the Dublin setup contacted him and asked him not to attend?

He is in college in Maynooth as far as I know.
There's Seán Brady going in, what dya think Seán?