Cork players threaten strike over selectors issue

[Zulu]

I didnt answer the question as you made that figure up, it didnt merit comment.

I can't think of one person on this discussion board that agrees with the new system, in fact Waterford footballers are the only team in the country who use this system. So since it is safe to say that the vast majority of people don't agree with the new system maybe you can stop avoiding the question and simply answer it.

Now you made a point about questions not being answered, in a smug manner as if we couldnt answer them.

Once again I will ask, what questions do you want answered?

The old excuse of "I cant be bothered going back through them" wont wash when you come out with statements like that!

Jesue wept, 'smug manner' give me a break, now I've posted questions and made some points that weren't addressed if you want to answer them you find them.

[orangeman]

Zulu - so if the vote were to be taken again tonight would the clubs stand by their original vote or not ??

Why did Na Piarsaigh write to the county board distancing themselves from Sean Og's comments ?? 

[Zulu]

Why did Na Piarsaigh write to the county board distancing themselves from Sean Og's comments ??     

I'm not sure why they did that OM as Sean Og never even suggested his views represented those of his club.

Zulu - so if the vote were to be taken again tonight would the clubs stand by their original vote or not ??

IMO they probably would but the situation has got to the point that many aren't thinking straight anymore (on both sides). Everyone is dug in now and no-one is willing to budge. However i think if you asked clubs do they think that the CB should pick the county managers selectors then I'd say they would say no. It has got very strange down in Cork, only the resignation of Teddy Holland can save the situation now IMO.

[AZOffaly]

I didnt answer the question as you made that figure up, it didnt merit comment.

I can't think of one person on this discussion board that agrees with the new system, in fact Waterford footballers are the only team in the country who use this system. So since it is safe to say that the vast majority of people don't agree with the new system maybe you can stop avoiding the question and simply answer it.

Now you made a point about questions not being answered, in a smug manner as if we couldnt answer them.

Once again I will ask, what questions do you want answered?

The old excuse of "I cant be bothered going back through them" wont wash when you come out with statements like that!

Jesue wept, 'smug manner' give me a break, now I've posted questions and made some points that weren't addressed if you want to answer them you find them.

Also Zulu, the wiseness or otherwise of the decision is not at question here. If you were to poll the posters on here, you may not get your 99.9999 recurring % but I'm sure you'd have a comfortable majority. I'd certainly vote against it.

However, you are insinuating that somehow that means the decision in Cork was not democratic. We can't assume that, and I wouldn't presume to speak for anybody down there as to why they voted they way they did. There is obviously a major problem down there, and none of us know the various factors for sure. All we can ask is 'Did the clubs and delegates vote for this change in a correct manner.' I haven't heard anyone say, to my satisfaction, that procedures were not followed correctly.

Therefore, the CB has the mandate to make this change. If the players don't like it, they need to lobby and get it changed next year, and refuse to accept the call up if they can't play under this regime. They are perfectly entitled to do that.

They have, instead, created a militant, 'strike' atmosphere, demanding all sorts of people to resign, throwing other allegations in to muddy the waters, and are, in essence, operating outside of the democratic structures in place.

I will say this again, no matter how stupid a decision is, if the majority of people want it, for whatever reason, then the decision is carried and enforced. That's the price of democracy.

If the argument is that the CB in cork is NOT ruled by democracy, but by some sort of iron fisted character with bad hair, then stop dancing about the  issue and challenge him. Bring it out into the open so we can all poke at it, because at the moment, as far as we know, the players are totally in the wrong in the way they are carrying on, even if most people would agree with their opinion of the new rule.

[AZOffaly]

It has got very strange down in Cork, only the resignation of Teddy Holland can save the situation now IMO.

And that, mentioned by a good few people involved as well as your good self, is the reason why I think this has been a badly chosen battle by the players, over something which only touches on the periphery of the real issues and personality clashes down there.

How in the name of God can the players, who went 'on strike' over the CB regaining control over the appointment of selectors, now say that they will go back to play under that very self same system as long as the manager Teddy Holland resigns?

Effectively, they are now saying the strike is because Teddy Holland is manager? What sort of rámeis is that?

I agree that the only way this will be solved is if Holland resigns, because I think the GAA are afraid of facing down Cork and the Cork GAA are afraid of facing down the players. The players need an escape valve to save face, and Holland is it. I don't know the man from Adam, and I have no idea of his personality, but I feel a bit sorry for him on the face of it.

[Zulu]

Also Zulu, the wiseness or otherwise of the decision is not at question here. If you were to poll the posters on here, you may not get your 99.9999 recurring % but I'm sure you'd have a comfortable majority. I'd certainly vote against it.

I'd say it would be very close to that 99.9...% figure AZ and that has to raise questions as to validity of the vote IMO.

However, you are insinuating that somehow that means the decision in Cork was not democratic. We can't assume that, and I wouldn't presume to speak for anybody down there as to why they voted they way they did. There is obviously a major problem down there, and none of us know the various factors for sure. All we can ask is 'Did the clubs and delegates vote for this change in a correct manner.' I haven't heard anyone say, to my satisfaction, that procedures were not followed correctly.

Democracy has to be conducted in a proper manner for it to hold any relevance. The first vote certainly wasn't democratic, the second is debateable in my mind. I've been told that some clubs never debated the issue at all, if it was debated, was it debated properly, were both sides put to club members? I don't believe they were.

I will say this again, no matter how stupid a decision is, if the majority of people want it, for whatever reason, then the decision is carried and enforced. That's the price of democracy.

Maybe so AZ but players also have the right to walk away from set up that they believe to be flawed. And if I were a player and the CB ignited this figght and got support from the clubs I'd walk away too. The players are not preventing anypne from playing for Cork, they just won't do it themselves.

How in the name of God can the players, who went 'on strike' over the CB regaining control over the appointment of selectors, now say that they will go back to play under that very self same system as long as the manager Teddy Holland resigns

Because Teddy took the job and accepted his backroom staff after the players asked no-one to do so until the issues between themselves and the CB were sorted. He wasn't caught in the cross fire, he went out of his way to walk into the middle of it and is now willing to stay there.

[AZOffaly]

This is going to get messy with all the quotes

Quote
Also Zulu, the wiseness or otherwise of the decision is not at question here. If you were to poll the posters on here, you may not get your 99.9999 recurring % but I'm sure you'd have a comfortable majority. I'd certainly vote against it.

I'd say it would be very close to that 99.9...% figure AZ and that has to raise questions as to validity of the vote IMO.

I disagree. It raises questions as to *why* the vote went that way, not at all as to the process of the vote. That's a different matter entirely.

Quote
However, you are insinuating that somehow that means the decision in Cork was not democratic. We can't assume that, and I wouldn't presume to speak for anybody down there as to why they voted they way they did. There is obviously a major problem down there, and none of us know the various factors for sure. All we can ask is 'Did the clubs and delegates vote for this change in a correct manner.' I haven't heard anyone say, to my satisfaction, that procedures were not followed correctly.

Democracy has to be conducted in a proper manner for it to hold any relevance. The first vote certainly wasn't democratic, the second is debateable in my mind. I've been told that some clubs never debated the issue at all, if it was debated, was it debated properly, were both sides put to club members? I don't believe they were.

I agree democracy has to be seen to be obeyed. In what way was democracy not followed? If there was a process not followed, then that's a different issue entirely, and I would be willing to say that the county board is wrong. If however, all rules and regulations were followed, then I stand by my original point. So what rules were broken? (Not trying to be argumentative here, just want to be clear about what happened or didn't happen.

Quote
I will say this again, no matter how stupid a decision is, if the majority of people want it, for whatever reason, then the decision is carried and enforced. That's the price of democracy.

Maybe so AZ but players also have the right to walk away from set up that they believe to be flawed. And if I were a player and the CB ignited this figght and got support from the clubs I'd walk away too. The players are not preventing anypne from playing for Cork, they just won't do it themselves.

Agree entirely, and that's why i posted this..

If the players don't like it, they need to lobby and get it changed next year, and refuse to accept the call up if they can't play under this regime. They are perfectly entitled to do that.

But that's not quite what they've done, is it? They've done this..

They have, instead, created a militant, 'strike' atmosphere, demanding all sorts of people to resign, throwing other allegations in to muddy the waters, and are, in essence, operating outside of the democratic structures in place.

All these quotes are killing me

Quote
How in the name of God can the players, who went 'on strike' over the CB regaining control over the appointment of selectors, now say that they will go back to play under that very self same system as long as the manager Teddy Holland resigns

Because Teddy took the job and accepted his backroom staff after the players asked no-one to do so until the issues between themselves and the CB were sorted. He wasn't caught in the cross fire, he went out of his way to walk into the middle of it and is now willing to stay there.

Fair enough, Teddy may have jumped the gun, and they see him as the enemy. I still think it's a get out clause, after all they will still be playing under the system they protested initially.

[umgolaarmagh]

The GAA should just throw cork out of all competitions this year


Same old bullshit with them every year, striking and threatening to strike

OTF

[Zulu]

Ok AZ you asked in what way was democracy not followed, well the first vote was sprung on delegates without any prior warning or discussion. Delegates voted on this one without any mandate from their clubs, so this vote was hardly democratic, was it? The second vote was held against the backdrop of the players statement and hardened delegates position which was already anti-IC to a large degree. In fairness much of what went on in each club with respect to the second vote is pure speculation but I have been told (I know I know!) that a number of clubs didn't debate this issue, also whether delegates voted as mandated has to be questioned, it wouldn't be the first time a delegate didn't.
                             Your probably right AZ the democratic process was followed to a large degree for the second vote but not to the level where the votes of delegates can be taken to represent the views of all Cork GAA members IMO. As such I don't believe that we can call the votes truly democratic.
                              I'm not sure the players ever called a strike as such but you have to ask questions of the CB when they behave in a manner that results in not only the current IC squads not playing but also many others unwilling to take their place.
                               To sum up AZ, it is my position that CB's and club delegates are in a position of power and with that comes a responsibility to do right by the GAA in Cork. They have failed in this regard, and while you won't be able to pick apart FM when it comes to GAA procedure, for me following the GAA rule book isn't a decisive argument if you go against the core values of the association. Gross abuse of power gives people justification to work outside those structures. I'm on the side of those who want the best for the GAA in Cork not those who might defend the rule book.

[Real Talk]

Its a pity the Cork players didn't  strike before last years championship .... then we might have had a descent All=Ireland Football Final !!!!!

[Barney]

I know Teddy Holland must be a proud man, but surely as somebody involved in the Cork scene he is not so beholden to the County Board that he wouldn't resign. Nobody will play for him so just take the first step. You can only imagine what kind of turmoil he is living with at the moment between pressure from all sides, and probalby personal abuse of himself and his family.

[AZOffaly]

To sum up AZ, it is my position that CB's and club delegates are in a position of power and with that comes a responsibility to do right by the GAA in Cork. They have failed in this regard, and while you won't be able to pick apart FM when it comes to GAA procedure, for me following the GAA rule book isn't a decisive argument if you go against the core values of the association. Gross abuse of power gives people justification to work outside those structures. I'm on the side of those who want the best for the GAA in Cork not those who might defend the rule book.

So, to sum it up even more succinctly, you believe that the Cork County Board is actively trying to harm the GAA in Cork. (i.e. Not want the best for the GAA in Cork)?

That's a fairly serious allegation, and if that is the players' position, then let them come out and say that, and stop arseboxing (copyright T. Lyons) around the issue.

[Hardy]

Zulu, you have fought a good campaign here for your point of view and respect for that. But I wouldn't be choosing "the core values of the association" as a battleground, if I were you and comparing the performance of the players versus the county board delegates, the executive or the clubs on that score. The players come a poor fourth in that one.

Also, of course there are doubts about the democratic purity of the two votes on the issue. When was a democratic exercise ever perfectly executed, in any sphere? But this process is the best we have to be going on with. I don't think the players can win the debate with a moral argument that goes "the democratic system was flawed, so we've decided to go unilateral, abandon democracy and force our own agenda through".

Surely the proper procedure is to lobby the issue onto the CB agenda again and have another vote, with proper debate and mandating at club level. I wonder why they don't try that. How do you think it would go?

[brokencrossbar1]

I don't have time to read through what has been said on here but will give you my understanding of what has happened.  It may have been state already so forgive me.  As Zulu said the first vote was basically sprung on the delegates to the county board without much time for them to debate it at club level.  My own club down here did not debate the mtion but instead the chairman sent out a text to all the relevant commitee members as he was not able to get a meeting convened in time.  he voted as per the replies.

Anecdotal evidence suggests similar things happened at other clubs.  There are also stories of club delegates standing up and backing Frank Murphy against the wihes of their club commitee and I know of at least two club delegates who openly voted contrary to their clubs wishes. I wouldn't go as far to say the delegates are trying to harm the GAA in Cork but I would say that many of thm refuse to go in opposition to Frank Murphy and their motivation is not necessarily for the beneft of the organisation.  Nests and feathers!

it is split pretty badly, but the players have a lot of support.  People may not agree with the threat of strike action, but they agree that the county board, and Frank Murphy in particular, have too much power.  The one thing that really strikes me about the whole thing is that what started out as a dispute over Billy Morgan being sacked essentially Holland being shuffled in through the back alley hasbeen taken on as a cause celebre by hurling men and i have not heard much from footballers in recent weeks.  Draw your own conclusions to that.

[AZOffaly]

In fairness to Zulu Hardy, he seems to indicate (correct me if I'm wrong Zulu) that the Cork County Board are basically flouting democracy and acting in their own self interests rather than in order to benefit Cork.

If he truly believes that, and if the players believe that, then there wouldn't be much point in pursuing the democratic agenda.

Of course, if that *is* the case, then that is the issue that the players should be on strike about, not this red herring.

I respect Zulu's opinion, and he articulates it well, but I cannot countenance that a whole county board would actively be trying to sabotage their success on the playing field because of a power trip. I have to believe that the county board at least believes it is acting in the greater good.

If they aren't, then lets get Sean Óg, Donal Óg, Frank Murphy and others into a debate about that. That would be shocking.