Shamrock Rovers Ultras

[hoop]

... you seem to be taking 20 years of hurt out on Thomas Davis, which is totally unfair, they're not the ones who shafted you in the first place. 

No, of course not. But Thomas Davis are well aware of our situation and have no problem whatsoever with dragging this out for as long as possible. Last December for example, before a decision had been reached on whether a Judicial Review should take place or not, Thomas Davis raised a side issue in order to try to get the decision about holding a Judicial Review put off for another 12 months. The judge told them where to go.

Bizarrely though, they have repeatedly claimed that the Minister is to blame for holding things up. From that I take it that they expect him to roll over and give them what they want just because they scream loud enough.

[supersarsfields]

Don't really want to get involved in this discussion either as I wouldn't know all the in's and outs of either side.
But as mentioned above if the problem is over the stadium size rather than pitch size? CAn I just ask what is the spectator capacity if SR get their way?

[hoop]

There you go. That's where you lose everyone here.  Since you see nothing wrong with the banner, that puts you on the same level as the scum who raised it and beyond being worthy of the normal courtesies extended to contributors here.

Perhaps you could go through the first two pages of this thread - for a start - and read the endless list of derogatory terms applied to ALL Shamrock Rovers fans (me included) and then come back and talk to me about courtesy.

[tayto]

Well the minister has let it go to court, once in court everything is fair game, even stalling till there is a new minister! 

The most recent judge said Thomas Davis had a "significant case" when granting the judicial review, so there we go, one can only imagine he looked at the cold hard facts and came to this conclusion.

[hoop]

Don't really want to get involved in this discussion either as I wouldn't know all the in's and outs of either side.
But as mentioned above if the problem is over the stadium size rather than pitch size? CAn I just ask what is the spectator capacity if SR get their way?

10,000 at least eventually, though the foundations laid for the stands were deliberately planned for a second tier in each stand should this eventually prove viable - so it could be maybe 14,000.

[supersarsfields]

And being realistic and allowing for conserative increase, Do SR need a 10K stadium if their average crowd has been offically recorded as being in the region of just over 1000? Even allowing the 2-3000 that some here have quoted.
If people are talking about atmosphere suffering regarding having the extra pitch size, It will suffer pretty bad from being 3/4's empty on match days aswell. 
Or have I missed something( As I said i'm not too up to date with this) that would require that extra seating?

[tayto]

Well big cup games or important league matches, derbys etc. would bring in a good crowd which eircom league clubs depend on to bring their average gate up and bringin extra revenue, a bit like GAA league vs Championship attendances.

Still 14k would seem to be over the top. Could one side not be developed to have two tiers with the GAA pitch in place?

[dublinfella]

Well big cup games or important league matches, derbys etc. would bring in a good crowd which eircom league clubs depend on to bring their average gate up and bringin extra revenue, a bit like GAA league vs Championship attendances.

Still 14k would seem to be over the top. Could one side not be developed to have two tiers with the GAA pitch in place?

no, because the foundations will have to come up.

[Croí na hÉireann]

Rovers have a big support but also a substantial sc**bag element following them.

Correction - VERY SMALL sc**bag element.

It would appear that two or three morons gave the abuse and very few in the ground actually heard it.

You'd think that the "two or three morons" would have been shouted down by the other 2,997 esteemed citizens and the player concerned wouldn't have heard such vile.

Your comment about "nothing wrong with the banner" leaves you open to ridicule and really beggars belief (particularily coming from someone who protests to have the best interests of the club at heart).

[supersarsfields]

And seriously how many 5000+ games would there be a season?

[tayto]

dunno, a handful probably, again a bt like most county grounds!

[his holiness nb]

Do you ever attempt to "play the ball", or do you only ever "go for the man"?
I am generally interested in this topic, but confined myself to merely reading through it, since I have no particular knowledge of the circumstances, nor do matters in the Republic involve me.
However, after 29 pages, I concluded that the thread had veered off topic to what seemed to me to be the extraneous issue of pitch size, rather than stadium size (i.e. spectator capacity).
Therefore, in order to prevent another 29 pages, I raised a point of information which, if it is not immodest to point out, seems to have been accepted by all sides to the debate as having been useful in getting us back on track.
So unless you have something useful to contribute to the debate, why don't you just f**k off!  

OK EG, you lectured and insulted someone else earlier for not getting your "humour"
Thats twice today you have snapped at me for joking with you, did you notice the winking face beside my post???

I wont go down the line of insults as per your "remedial readers" comments as I presume you genuinely took me up wrong as we have argued before.
I dont have a problem with your points here at all, I was merely suggesting that this could go on for a while given your and Sammys previous doggedness when pursueing an argument.

As I said last time, theres a lot of narkiness on here today 

Apologies, if sent, will be accepted 

[Evil Genius]

Do you ever attempt to "play the ball", or do you only ever "go for the man"?
I am generally interested in this topic, but confined myself to merely reading through it, since I have no particular knowledge of the circumstances, nor do matters in the Republic involve me.
However, after 29 pages, I concluded that the thread had veered off topic to what seemed to me to be the extraneous issue of pitch size, rather than stadium size (i.e. spectator capacity).
Therefore, in order to prevent another 29 pages, I raised a point of information which, if it is not immodest to point out, seems to have been accepted by all sides to the debate as having been useful in getting us back on track.
So unless you have something useful to contribute to the debate, why don't you just f**k off!  

OK EG, you lectured and insulted someone else earlier for not getting your "humour"
Thats twice today you have snapped at me for joking with you, did you notice the winking face beside my post???

I wont go down the line of insults as per your "remedial readers" comments as I presume you genuinely took me up wrong as we have argued before.
I dont have a problem with your points here at all, I was merely suggesting that this could go on for a while given your and Sammys previous doggedness when pursueing an argument.

As I said last time, theres a lot of narkiness on here today 

Apologies, if sent, will be accepted 

Normally when I post, I try to keep to the topic under discussion. I don't expect many/any other posters to agree with my opinions, but so long as they stay on topic, I try to respect their views. However, there are a small number of posters who, when they see my posts (and those of posters of like opinion) more often than not go to "play the man, not the ball".
In my experience, you are one of those. If in the particular instance above, I failed to spot the good humour, then I apologise. Perhaps this was because my previous post to which you were responding was a genuine and, as it turns out, effective effort to get the thread back on topic.
Otherwise, I have avoided involvement in this particular topic, for reasons outlined elsewhere.

Occasionally, however, I attempt (whether successfully or otherwise) to take a humourous approach to certain topics - for example, my exchanges with Ziggysego over the Football Play. Again, the vast majority of posters appear to recognise this and take it as intended.
Unfortunately, there remain one or two irritating individuals who cannot resist the temptation to play the man in such instances.
One such example was "Billy's Boots" with his post on my response to Fearon's original rant over the Play. Billy chose completely to ignore the serious points I made about play and playwrite, and instead picked me up literally on one throwaway line which was clearly meant as a joke. It seemed to me to be a puerile effort to show how clever he was - "Look at me - I've caught you out - nah nah..."

Now maybe it is just Monday morning tetchiness, but that sort of juvenile response got on my tits.

P.S. That's as close as you're going to get to an apology from me today. Or any day...

[hoop]

It seemed to me to be a puerile effort to show how clever he was - "Look at me - I've caught you out - nah nah..."

Been there.

[his holiness nb]

If in the particular instance above, I failed to spot the good humour, then I apologise

Apology accepted, Evil Genius.
As I said earlier, its all about the love 

p.s. it was genuinely a joke.